A warning to parental abductor defenders
If you write me from my site to defend these people, I will not listen to you. If you come here and defend the parent, I will probably mock you. If you make stuff up or lie about your location, I will call you on it. I feel no need to be nice to you.
Someone Who Cares said,
March 9, 2009 @ 12:17 am
And I feel no need to be nice to you and will mock you in return, for you do not know what you are looking for except to replicate missing ads for children from other sites.
forthelost said,
March 9, 2009 @ 8:39 am
Uh, you do understand all the links in the anniversary posts I provide are to my site with individual write-ups for the cases, correct?
ananddad said,
August 14, 2009 @ 5:22 am
First, I don’t agree that the good folks at For The Lost are acting as consolidating agent for missing kids’ details from other sites. Even if your perception of them was true, that is more than what you and I are doing, isn’t it?
I am one of those Left Behind Parents. Some one at For The Lost contacted me on their own. Not only have they published my abducted son’s details, they also pointed me to other Missing Persons Organizations and encouraged me to contact them to gain more visibility.
At times, it is better not to do anything good than trying to find fault with others who are doing what they can.
Kaly said,
August 26, 2009 @ 6:45 am
Hello,
I’m posting my comments here because this is currently the most recent topic.
I read your post about an “abductor” wanting to file papers against you. If you’re legitimate and honest in who YOU claim to be, i.e. someone who has never had a child or been personally involved in a custody case (and therefore implying you are an unbiased observer not posting out of spite or vengeance) then what are you afraid of and hiding from? If you’re demanding honesty, presuming guilt and passing judgment what gives you immunity from the same?
I am very suspicious about sites like this because I’ve noticed a trend about “non-custodial” abductions. In many of these cases I’ve researched the parent only became “non-custodial” in the old jurisdiction after they ignored a court order in the old jurisdiction, because they relocated and had legal custody in a new jurisdiction. Like living in the US with legal custody and ignoring a Russian court saying you no longer have custody of your child in Russia. I used to think when I heard these cases that the accused parent had somehow been found unfit in court and that’s why they left and the child was in danger. But it turns out in the majority of these cases these parents were never accused of being a risk to their child, and only lost custody in one jurisdiction because of legal technicalities when they were already living in another jurisdiction. This new fact put these cases in a new light. It’s very misleading to only tell one side of the story and call only one parent “non-custodial” when in fact BOTH parents have custody and are legally considered non-custodial in a jurisdiction.
By the way, in the example I mentioned above, above living in the US and ignoring a Russian court, it’s in reference to the Larry Whyte case. He was wanted by Interpol and Russia for kidnapping his daughter from her mother in Russia, after he said the mother kidnapped her first. They argued in court for 3 years and he did not see the child from age 3-6 and filed charges against the mother in Texas, which was ignored in Russia where the mother had custody and Larry was “non-custodial”. Then he kidnapped her at age 6 and has not allowed the mother to see her even through her teen years. As he was listed on Interpol’s most wanted, do you sympathize with him or do you consider him a kidnapper? You stated you believe non-custodial parental abduction is child abuse. How do you stand with your principles on this case? Will we be seeing this case of Russia to the US child abduction on your site anytime soon?
It’s clear that no matter who blogs or writes or complains or resorts to ugly name calling, when a mother is determined to be with her child, being “banned” or “wanted” in one jurisdiction is a small price to pay for her child. Frankly, if you’ve never had a child you couldn’t possibly understand that (you may think you do, but you don’t).
ananddad said,
September 8, 2009 @ 1:23 am
Kaly,
What about fathers who are determined to be with their children. By your own logic, what the Texas father did should not be a crime. He was determined to be with his daughter. He went to Russia and ‘kidnapped’ her (I am not being sarcastic….but I don’t know the details). What is stopping the mother from coming to Texas? Looks like the father can never enter Russia (or leave US) because of Interpol notice. Looks like the mother can not enter US because of outstanding charges in Texas. Father is with the daughter. He feels ‘possession is power’….ironically, this is how the mother felt when she kept the girl away from her father between ages 3-6.
For the Lost, for your information, does not put any cae on their website unless they can verify that a crime has been committed in the US. They check with local/federal law enforcement before adding a child to their website. I know this because before they put my son’s photo on their site, I had to give them NCIC numbers for my son and his mother.
Kaly said,
August 26, 2009 @ 7:12 am
Now to respond to the actual topic of this post.
It doesn’t take a “child abductor defender” (so ridiculous in the name calling) to understand that there are always at least two sides in parental abduction cases and that the flyers only represent one side. No-one has to prove anything to you or explain why they’ve moved with their child. If you were a parent you would understand that, (you seem to have such an inflated view of the value of your own opinion). That said, a court of law with the best interests of the child as a priority is the best place for any proof in these parental abduction cases. But as I’ve already pointed out, courts in different jurisdictions come to the exact opposite rulings. With the law on the the side of both parents, I guess it’s just up to the individual poster or blogger to pick a side, which is interesting since it’s usually only one side posting online.
PS If you’re wondering, no I’m not related to any “child abductor” and I find it laughable that you think anyone would care that you may not believe them on the net or can track an ip address. FYI, I don’t even believe the things you’ve posted about yourself, but I don’t presume you would care enough to prove them to me or to anyone else who comes across this blog.
if you want your blog to do good, then keep your personal drama out it and just stick to the cases. Many of the people who have followed up on these cases with no personal involvement, are independent thinkers like myself, who only want the facts, and not the endless insulting drama from bloggers who aren’t associated with the case only have “mocking comments” to contribute. This is the net and nobody cares if you don’t want to be nice, but perhaps you care about keeping your blog on-topic and tactful enough to keep people outside the bickering checking in on the cases. You should delete this thread and the others involving your personal drama, and consider responding in an email next time.
forthelost said,
August 28, 2009 @ 4:08 pm
I am also now curious as to who you think I truly am and what my hidden agenda is here.
forthelost said,
August 26, 2009 @ 8:32 am
No, you’ll never see that case, because I only post abductions from the United States, and not Russia.
Regardless of the validity of such a case, the fact is I have little money and thus would have a difficult time in court.
I’ve never said that all parents who abduct have been found unfit. Many simply want to deprive the other parent of a chance to be with the child, to get back at them. And as for mothers wanting to be with their children, it needs to be weighed against the possibility of harm to the child. Take Robert Manwill. If his visitation with his mother had been supervised, he might be alive today. (I also notice you don’t mention fathers, so I wonder if you have bought into the myth that women who abduct just are taking kids from their evil abusive fathers.) You are acting like the parent just decides to move and gets slapped with a warrant. If the custody agreement says you can’t move without permission, you need to get it before moving. If you shoplift food and you defend it with “I was really hungry” does that make you less of a law breaker?
“Independent thinker” does not mean I think it’s okay to act outside the law. See shoplifting example above. If you don’t like what the courts say it’s your job to fight in them, and not to become a vigilante and take matters into your own hands. You can’t go forum shopping and say that you like the rules better somewhere else.
The only personal things I have here are being against kidnappers, and that’s what the law considers them even if you don’t think of them as such.
forthelost said,
August 26, 2009 @ 8:37 am
Oh, and while I may not be a mother, there are plenty of left-behind moms that share my opinions on parental kidnapping.
Carlos said,
September 15, 2009 @ 1:43 pm
Personally I wouldn’t bother publishing “Kaly’s” sophistric, convoluted tripe. She is clearly not an “independent thinker” and her marked unwillingness to clearly state her bias calls into question *her* agenda. It is noteworthy that even as she calls into question this site and its administrators “agenda” she hides behind the anonymity of the Internet and the claim that her interest in parental abductions is merely intellectual curiosity and even chooses an asexual moniker. EVERYONE has a bias which influences the way they view everything, though that does not necessarily render their opinions invalid — rather the most biased people also tend to have the deepest understanding of the subject matter, having seen it first hand or lived through it themselves. Such persons should be afforded special credibility if, and only if, they are willing to clearly state what that bias is and it how it has shaped their opinions. Anything more than a casual perusal of the very site on which she is commenting would demonstrate that the “agenda” here is finding missing persons which naturally encompasses a consideration of how they go missing, how they are found and some measure of condemnation for those that make them go missing in the first place. It would take a special sort of stupid for me to go to a pro-life site and cast aspersions about the possible anti-reproductive rights agenda of the site admins. When someone builds a site and/or organization that is dedicated to a cause it is redundant to ask what their agenda is or hold them to the standards that might otherwise apply to the seemingly random postings of “Independent Thinkers”… and doing so speaks to the agenda of the persons asking.
forthelost said,
September 15, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
Most of the time when I see someone call themselves an “independent thinker” it means they have their mind already made up and nothing will convince them otherwise.
I approved the comment because I approve all non-spam comments that do not attack the families of the missing that have not been proven to be involved in their disappearance.
Mary Collins said,
October 7, 2009 @ 11:15 am
For the person who is suspicious of cases that claim to be parental abductions, I would suggest you familiarize with child custody law before you post any further defenses on this website. Spedifically look up the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act. This act states that the home state of the child is the court with jurisdiction to determine where and with whom the child should live. Just because one parent picks up and moves the child to another state does not give the new state the legal authority to decide custody. In my experience as the stepmother of Brianna and Becca Collins who were taken by their non-custodial mother and hidden in homeless shelters for two years before being found, parents take the children in an attempt to deprive the other parent of visitation or simply out of spite. In the majority of cases where one parent has lost custody, no other state has the right overturn the home court’s decision. There cannot be two ongoing court cases in two different states at the same time. So if one parent takes the children and moves to another state and obtains custody in the new state, they did so illegally. What Bri’s and Becca’s mother did to them was reprehensible and there is no defense for stealing children from another parent.
forthelost said,
October 7, 2009 @ 11:16 am
I couldn’t have said it better myself.
I hope Brianna and Becca are doing well now.
sue said,
November 2, 2009 @ 11:40 am
I agree, that was very well said. I also agree with Carlos, this person has an “agenda” whether they want to admit it or not. To come here and attack this site for helping Left Behind Parents is horrible.