The Last Place You'd Look

by Carole Moore

  “No Amber Alert was ever issued as law enforcement authorities told me it was too late for that. They were already gone,” Stephen observes.

  Because Stephen suspected Edyta might flee with the children, he prepared in advance by completing the paperwork required to file under the Hague Convention, an international treaty that, among other things, governs the return of children illegally abducted by a parent and taken to another country. He says so far the convention has not been much help.

  Although Stephen had the paperwork ready, the Polish authorities did not accept it because it was written in English. They required that it be translated into Polish. “By that time we had lost two to three months [due to paperwork delays],” Stephen says.

  Stephen has hired a private investigator to look for the kids and says he does not have any leads. Although he has not yet traveled to Poland to look for his children, Interpol—the International Criminal Police Organization—has become involved in the case.

  Stephen has done everything he can think of to keep his case in front of the public, including building a Web site devoted to the boys’ abduction, creating videos in multiple languages, and staying in touch with the news media. Most of his coverage, he says, has been local. While he doesn’t disparage the local Toronto coverage, he also points out that it isn’t terribly beneficial since his case involves international child abduction.

  “The kids’ pictures are at every single airport here and in the United States and also at border crossings, because when I go [to the United States] I can see them on the wall,” he says.

  “But the kids aren’t here. We know where they are—they’re in Europe.”

  Photographs of Christopher and Alexander stare out at shoppers in Canadian Walmarts, and they’ve been featured in bank statements and cable bills—in total, twenty-one million envelopes mailed out in Canada. Again, says Stephen, while all publicity is good, he is having a more difficult time getting coverage where he needs it: internationally.

  “My story tends to get lost in the mix,” he says.

  Stephen’s professional background is in computers, so he’s savvy about getting his kids’ names out in front in search engines. “If you type my kids’ name in, they’re pretty much going to be on page number one,” he says. Stephen spends much of his spare time maintaining the Web site devoted to recovering the boys, www.Watkins-Missing-Children.com.

  Searching for the boys isn’t cheap, either. So far he has committed both a massive amount of time and money to finding them. He says it has cost him and his family about $200,000 thus far, and he knows there will be more expenses ahead.

  “We’re going at a snail’s pace,” he says, summing up his frustration.

  When Stephen looks back at what has happened, he says he has one piece of advice for other parents facing similar situations: don’t let it happen to you.

  “Don’t lose your kids. Don’t have them abducted in the first place. Make sure you have everything in order. There were so many times the court system, the police, the borders, the passports . . . so many times this could have been stopped. We fell through the cracks and the judicial system failed here,” he says.

  R

  Since 2004, New Jersey resident David Goldman nourished a single-minded goal: to bring his little boy back home. His son, Sean, had been taken to Brazil by his mother, David’s former wife. Once there, she remarried—this time to a Brazilian attorney—but she died giving birth to another child. Despite the fact that David is Sean’s birth father and his mother’s family had no legal claim to Sean in U.S. courts, the family members managed to block his return to his father for five years. During those five years, David spent thousands of dollars and worked around the clock for his son’s return, using a dedicated network of friends and strangers who recognized the injustice of Sean remaining in Brazil with his maternal grandparents rather than being returned to his New Jersey home.

  David kept up the publicity, appearing on news shows, building a Web site, and fighting for his son through the Brazilian court system. On Christmas Eve 2009, due in large part to the support he received from his publicity campaign, which attracted the sympathy of many Brazilian people as well as the personal intervention of U.S. Congressman Christopher Smith (R–NJ), David was allowed to take his son home. Since then, he and his supporters have continued to tackle the issue of parental abductions to other countries. They also have supported Smith’s bill, HR 3240. If enacted, the bill would improve the chances of victims of international child abductions being repatriated and reunited with their U.S. parents both in countries that are signatories of the Hague Convention, as well as countries that are not signatories to Hague.

  The Bring Sean Home Foundation (www.bringseanhome.org), which advocated for Sean’s return, says, “Sean Goldman was the first child ever to be returned from Brazil, [and] not one child has ever been returned from Japan, not in fifty years.”

  Japan has proved one of the most difficult countries with which to deal in matters of parental abduction. Under present Japanese law, the noncustodial parent has no rights—not even for visitation. Furthermore, the Japanese legal system allows the parents of biracial children brought into Japan to retain custody because to do otherwise would, as Japanese courts have stated in the past, remove the child from a stable home environment, even when the parent who kidnapped the child did so in violation of a U.S. court order.

  Recently the United States urged Japan to sign a treaty that would allow for more equitable treatment of both parties in cases involving the children of Japanese citizens and foreign spouses. Joining with France, Canada, and Great Britain to urge Japanese cooperation in connection with these abductions, the United States cited a report that charged Japan with the seventh-highest rate of international parental abductions involving U.S. children. Mexico ranks first on that list. Countries that have also proved uncooperative in returning abducted children to their U.S. parents include India, Slovakia, Honduras, Russia, and Switzerland.

  Parents of children who are the victims of international parental kidnappings often don’t know where to turn or even how to begin the process of locating and recovering their kids.

  Stephen Watkins recognized the signs that his former wife might flee and take their boys, so he attacked the problem before it grew. Although his efforts proved ineffective in preventing their abduction, they gave Stephen many of the tools he needed to launch a thorough search for the children.

  Since Stephen is Canadian, he worked within the framework of Canadian law in preparing for the anticipated abduction of his sons. In the United States, when there is a possibility of an international abduction, experts say it is important to retain an attorney to ensure that custody and visitation rights are spelled out in any court documents. It is also essential that a court order contain a “statement of the basis of the court’s jurisdiction and the manner in which notice and opportunity to be heard were given,” according to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). That provision helps clarify jurisdictional issues that will arise down the road.

  The OJJDP also suggests asking the U.S. State Department to flag the child’s passport (although, in Stephen Watkins’s case, his children were transported over the Canadian border into the United States and allowed to travel to Europe even though the kids’ passports were no longer valid). The OJJDP’s publication, A Family Resource Guide on International Parental Kidnapping, is a free government publication that offers information and advice to parents who believe their children may become victims or whose children have already been abducted. Much of the advice offered also applies to any parental abduction, including the steps one should take if a parental abduction attempt is anticipated. Much of it is good, old-fashioned common sense and contains steps parents should implement anyway, even if they do not suspect their child could be targeted for kidnapping. The OJJDP, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and other experts say these include the following preventative measures:
<
br />   • Have current, high-quality color photos of your child. Take both front and profile views.

  • Make a video of your child. Keep both the video and photos current.

  • Determine that the child knows his or her name, address, and telephone number.

  • Record your child’s description: in addition to the obvious traits like height, weight, and coloring, also record other identifying data, such as whether the child uses corrective lenses, and any birthmarks he or she may have. Remember: missing persons can sometimes be located because of quirks or habits they have. When describing your children, also record favorites, including music, television shows, and toys they may favor; any medical conditions they may have or medications they may take; allergies; food preferences or dislikes—anything that might make a child stand out in someone’s mind.

  • Fingerprint your child and keep both the fingerprints and the child’s Social Security number in a safe, accessible place.

  • Teach your child how to call you. Have him or her memorize phone numbers where you can be reached, if the child is old enough. Explain collect calls and let the child know how to make one.

  • Make sure your child’s dentist maintains up-to-date dental records and keep track of where his or her medical records are located.

  • Make certain all schools, day care centers, babysitters, and anyone else who might have care and control of the child are aware of outstanding custody orders. If you have reason to believe abduction is a possibility, put the other caretakers on alert. Provide them with a photograph of the noncustodial parent so they can better identify him or her, and give orders to be notified if the noncustodial parent shows up unscheduled or if the child fails to arrive when expected.

  • Establish rules about where your children can go, including whose car they can ride in and whose homes they can enter. Make sure your children understand these rules.

  • Listen to what your child says. Sometimes there are clues that a noncustodial parent may be planning a kidnapping and they may not seem significant until viewed in hindsight.

  • Keep a DNA sample. One way to do this is to take a swab of the inside of your child’s mouth with a clean, dry cotton swab or a used toothbrush kept in a brown paper envelope stored in a cool, dry place.

  • Reinforce with anyone who has possession or control of your child—even a friend’s mom or the soccer coach—that the child is not allowed to leave or deviate from a preapproved schedule without your permission.

  • Assess possible abduction factors and ask the court to consider ordering supervised visitation and other provisions that will help circumvent kidnapping attempts.

  • Retain three certified copies of the court order granting you custody.

  • Keep records on the other parent, including address, phone number, physical description, photograph, any identifying numbers (like a driver’s license), birth date, background information including prior places of residence, relatives, friends, hobbies, habits, vehicles, and access to other resources such as bank accounts and cash.

  • Talk to your lawyer about flagging airlines and speaking with police or the prosecutor’s office if the threat seems imminent.

  • Know the proper authorities and resources available to you if an abduction attempt occurs or is successful.

  The Hague Convention, mentioned earlier, is an important component for remedying international parental abductions. The convention was put in place in part to reduce the harmful effects of international abductions and to promote the rapid and lawful return of children kidnapped and taken abroad. It doesn’t always work that way, though: not all countries have signed the convention and of those that have signed not every one is always in compliance.

  The Philippines is not a Hague Convention signatory, nor does the United States have a treaty governing child abduction with that nation. A child who falls victim to a parental kidnapping and is taken from the United States to the Philippines, therefore, would be subject to Philippine laws and the way their courts interpret them.

  Furthermore, parental abduction is not a crime in the Philippines, as it is in the United States; instead, it is considered a civil matter. It is traditional in that country for children under the age of seven to be placed with their mothers unless authorities deem them unfit. And, although the United States and the Philippines have a standing extradition treaty, parental abduction is not extraditable. Laws that vary so much from nation to nation make an already-difficult situation even more frustrating, especially when a parental kidnapping involves multiple foreign countries.

  A nation that is a signatory of the Hague Convention, like the United Kingdom, would in theory offer more assistance to the aggrieved parent than one that is not. However, even convention signatories are not always cooperative, resulting in what can turn into years of haggling in court over the return of a child. In all fairness, other countries have complained that the United States is also slow in righting wrongs in cases of parental abduction when a child has been removed to the United States. When viewed under the lens of world opinion, Americans don’t always practice what they preach.

  According to KlaasKids Foundation (www.klaaskids.org, established in honor of twelve-year-old Polly Klaas, who was abducted by a stranger from the bedroom of her California home and slain), “family kidnapping is committed primarily by parents, involves a larger percentage of female perpetrators than other types of kidnapping offenses, occurs more frequently to children under six, equally victimizes juveniles of both sexes, and most often originates in the home.”

  Some believe because the kidnapped child is with a parent, he or she is safe; however, these abductions deprive the remaining parent of the child’s company and can lead to a much more sinister conclusion.

  According to the OJJDP, parental kidnappings have the potential for many negative effects on the targeted child. Abducted children can be

  • exposed to psychological harm;

  • forced to live a fugitive existence;

  • subjected to having their names and appearances altered;

  • prevented from attending school;

  • coerced into believing their left-behind parent does not love them, was abusive, or is deceased;

  • coached to fear authority figures such as police;

  • neglected or mistreated; and

  • killed.

  Parents run with their kids for a variety of reasons, but the most common motivators are power, control, and revenge: they want to hurt the other parent, deprive him or her of the child’s companionship, and show that parent “who is boss.” And every so often, the parental abductor does the unthinkable, as in the case of Lindsey and Sam Porter, ages eight and seven, whose father, Daniel, picked them up for a weekend visit on June 5, 2004.

  At the time, Daniel and his wife, Tina, both of Independence, Missouri, were going through an acrimonious divorce. Tina Porter later told investigators that the kids were excited about spending time with their dad. A judge had granted Daniel weekend visitations with his children despite his history of substance abuse and threats toward Tina. When her husband collected the kids, Tina reminded him to have them back by six o’clock on Sunday night. Later that day, Tina told investigators, Daniel began to send her a series of strange, menacing messages.

  Tina said the text messages led her on a bizarre search for her children, a kind of macabre scavenger hunt in which Daniel would direct Tina to different places where he claimed to have hidden either clues to Lindsey and Sam’s location or had stashed the children themselves. He also called with repeated suicide threats. Tina later told reporters she appealed to police, who pointed out that because the couple was still married, Daniel had as much right to the kids as she did—the equivalent of an official shoulder shrug.

  The time to return the kids came and went. A frantic Tina again contacted police and begged for help. She said she was told to give Daniel a little more time. The next morning officers launched a search. Monday night, Daniel was
arrested and charged with driving under the influence of an impairing substance in a nearby jurisdiction, but because there was no hold put on him, he bonded out of jail. Two days later, authorities located Daniel again, and after a bizarre confrontation in which they shot out the tires on his truck, he was apprehended and questioned as to the whereabouts of his children.

  Daniel told anyone who would listen that the kids were “in a better place.” Charged with both parental abduction and kidnapping, he was tried and sentenced to eight years imprisonment because the children had not yet been found.

  Three years after their father picked them up for a weekend outing, the skeletal remains of Lindsey and Sam were found in a wooded area near Independence, a place where Daniel once liked to hunt. Daniel murdered them a few hours after he picked them up from their mother.

  “Daniel had actually taken them, put them face down, shot them in the back of the head, and buried them in a grave that was less than three feet deep,” says one individual involved in the case who asked not to be named. “It was horrible.”

  Authorities say Daniel told them that after taking his kids to a fast-food restaurant for breakfast, he drove them to the wooded area, where he spread out a blanket, blindfolded them, and had them lie on the blanket. He then shot them both at the same time, a gun in each hand.

  R

  Not every case of parental abduction ends in such a terrible way. Jake Schmidt, a private investigator who works out of Beverly Hills, California, takes on a few pro bono parental abduction cases each year. He once heard of a situation involving a little boy believed to have been abducted by his noncustodial father and taken to Mexico.