Maltese Hague Order of Return

It’s been a while since I’ve posted anything, and that’s mainly because I needed to not only focus on my advocacy for other parents who are desperately trying to protect their children from IPCA, but also on my family and my own case.

I have my first hearing back on home-ground on April 12, 2018. Since just because you get an enforced Hague Order of Return, that in no way means that the battle is over.

I’ve put my own case on the back burner, and it’s time that I work on that. I have a lot of lies to refute and rebuttal. It’s repeated, unnecessary deceptions that were heard in our trial in Malta, but as usual, You-Know-Who is grasping at straws.

He confidently boasted to my Mom that I would lose; that my son would go back to Malta when he asked for him.

When I get worried as time passes on that he may still retain his joint custody rights, I simply read the Hague Order of Return where You-Know-Who was lambasted on at least 3 occasions. 

iStand Parent Network Inc. publicized the Order of Return several months ago, but I personally understand that this Order is lengthy and difficult to read in one go, especially for busy folks.

This is why I’m going to take my favorite parts and share them with you all.

“On the 18th of December 2016 at 11:21 A.M, nine days after the defendant had initiated judicial proceedings here in Malta, the defendant sent an email to Barbara Hise reading as follows: – *This email basically is You-Know-Who asking me to sign papers to allow Zander to live in Malta for one year despite the fact he filed for sole physical and legal custody of Zander in Malta* – He fails to mention in his email of the 18th December 2016 that a few days before he had instituted judicial proceedings in Malta in order to retain the minor here in Malta.”

So at least the Court recognized his devious tactics here.

“It transpires from the proceedings that on the 30th of January 2017 the defendant [*You-Know-Who*] had sent the following email to the mother of the minor advising her that he was unilaterally extending the minor’s visit here in Malta til the 3rd of March 2017 – For another time, the defendant does not make any mention to the mother as regards the judicial proceedings he had instituted here in Malta in order to stop the minor from returning back to the United States. On the contrary, the date of the return ticket was changed to the 3rd of March 2017 and he sent a copy of such amendment to the mother.”

Again, the Court recognizes his tactics for what they are.

“It was only on the 19th of February 2017, meaning that only a bit less than two weeks before the minor had to return to his mother in the United States that the defendant informed the mother of his intention to request the Maltese Courts to detain the minor here in Malta on a permanent basis.”

Let’s pay attention to the “permanent basis”. He felt that he had every right to revoke my primary joint custody rights based off a disagreement he had with me, yet he feels that his nefarious actions fail to meet the need to revoke his overseas parenting rights.

“The Court has examined all the evidence presented and it finds that it has been satisfactorily proven that the father had already planned well before the minor’s visit to Malta between November 2016 and January 2017 that he would institute proceedings before the Maltese Courts to try to prevent the minor from returning to the United States. With this thought in mind, before the minor arrived in Malta, the father instructed a psychologist to examine the minor upon his arrival in Malta.”

It has been proven by means of a trial that my son’s international kidnapping was PREMEDITATED.

“The Court notes that the decree issued by another section of the Family Court was pendente lite (provisional until the proceedings before the Courts are concluded) handed during a mediation process; when the minor’s mother was not even aware that the father had initiated proceedings before the Maltese Courts; when the deputy curators appointed by the Courts to represent the mother, who was absent from these islands, had not only not communicated with the mother but had not even themselves been notified of the father’s application requesting provisional care and custody; when a chronological examination of the facts results that the father had not even informed the mother that he did not intend to send the minor back to the United States.”

Again, this is very clearly explained how manipulative this man is…

“The respondent argues that he cannot be found guilty of wrongful retention for not returning the minor after the expiry of the period agreed with the mother, because in the meantime he had obtained a decree issued by another section of the Family Court that authorized the minor to reside in Malta with his father. This Court, however, considers this reasoning as legally unfounded.”

“The decree that the defendant succeeded to obtain during the mediation process cannot be considered as exonerating the defendant from his premeditated conduct not to return the child minor back to his mother in the United States.”

Again…premeditated…the Court’s language, not mine.

“The Court examined the defendants plea [*of psychological harm*] thoroughly but finds that the defendant has failed to substantiate his claims. The defendant has practically embarked on a crusade because the minor undertook home schooling for a year instead of a traditional school. In the opinion of the Court, “physical or psychological harm’ in terms of the Convention does not extend to issues whether a minor attend a traditional school or else is enrolled in supervised ‘home schooling’ education, structured according to the rules of the Educational authorities in the United States. The defendant has presented no evidence that the mother is unable to raise the minor or that she is cruel towards him or otherwise will subject him to physical or psychological harm, if the minor is returned.”

Yet…he is still claiming the same accusations in the American court systems to defend that what he did was in the “best interests of Zander”. Honestly, it shouldn’t fly with this judge. She’s a no-nonsense type of Judge.

“On the contrary, this Court feels that the minor suffered a truly unjust action at the hands of his father because he was denied from being with his siblings who reside with their mother in the United States for a period longer than agreed originally between the parties for the minor to spend time with his father.”

I would gander a thought that what this “father” did was straight up psychological harm. 

“It is also noted that ‘home schooling’ was a temporary measure that ran for one academic year and it was only because the father decided to bring the minor to Malta at the beginning of the academic year 2016-2017 that the minor did not return to school in the United States. It is evident that if the minor did come to Malta in November 2016 he would have been admitted to the school. This did not take place only because of his visit to Malta. It must also be said that according to correspondence exchanged between the two parents, the father had agreed that for the duration that the minor is in Malta he will continue with his education so that eventually the work performed by the minor would be recorded and reported so that upon his return he would be able to return to school.”

I’m glad that this was obvious. It means that his continued home schooling arguments should be thrown out the window.

“The father would have been far more responsible if instead of acting in the manner which led to the wrongful retention, he informed the Courts of the United States of his concerns, as he has successfully done in the past.”

Yes, and honestly, he had a better chance if he had complained to the courts in America. He had lied so much to them while I was advised not to defend it, that the Judge in WV didn’t like me a whole lot. But now You-Know-Who is bringing up issues all the way back from 2009, and finally giving me an opportunity to rectify his false accusations and continuous slandering.

“The things that the minor told the Children’s Advocate contrast sharply with what results from these proceedings. During the course of these proceedings the mother obtained court authorization to hold regular Skype calls with the minor. The Director exhibited in the Acts of these proceedings the recordings and also the transcripts of telephone conversations between the minor Zander and his mother and his half brother Killian that took place in April and May of this year. The Court listened to the playbacks of these conversations and finds that there is absolutely nothing in common between these conversations and what the minor said to the Children’s Advocate. In one of these conversations Zander says “I want you to know I’ll be coming there soon. Because the year’s almost over, it’s already been like 100 something days. So, I’ll be there in like 200 something days. Okay?””

Yes, let us never forget the fact that not only did You-Know-Who lie and deceive me and the Courts, he also lied and deceived Zander.

“The content of the conversations between Zander, his mother and brother makes it very clear that there is a very good relationship between and it certainly cannot be said that there is some resistance on the minor’s part to return to the United States. On the contrary, the minor expresses the desire to return soon.”

“The Court does not want to speculate about the divergence between what the child said to the Children’s Advocate a few weeks after he arrived in Malta, and the content of the conversation between the minor and his mother after he had already been in Malta for several months.”

Despite the fact that this Judge clearly called out the lies that Zander was pushed into speaking to these individuals, You-Know-Who is still pushing these already called out lies onto the American court system. On Zander’s 10th birthday, this past March 15, he revealed to me that You-Know-Who encouraged Zander to tell these people everything that I have ever done wrong. And this, also, after a week of him telling Zander horrible things about me as well, only for Zander, who is and always has been a mocker, to tell the psychologist and CA.

“The Court will not speculate why it is that in January 2017 the minor spoke to the Children’s Advocate so negatively against his mother while in May 2017 he tells his mother that he wants to go back. There is no doubt that the minor Zander is missing his mother’s absence as well as that of his brothers, and it is evident that as time goes by, the minor is feeling their absence even more.”

When in doubt, simply read this beautiful, strongly written Order of Return.

Thank you Honorable Judge Robert Mangion.

One Reply to “Maltese Hague Order of Return”

  1. Excellent post. I used to be checking continuously this blog and I’m impressed! Very helpful info specially the final part 🙂 I deal with such information a lot. I was seeking this certain information for a long time. Thank you and best of luck.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *