Abductors free daughter, 10, of Bulgaria ‘drug lord’


April 29, 2013

Source: Krmagazine.com

Police said Monday that the kidnapped 10-year-old daughter of one of Bulgaria’s alleged cocaine-trafficking lords, Evelin “Brendo” Banev has been released after 47 days in captivity

Kidnap_Bulgaria

Abductors free daughter, 10, of Bulgaria ‘drug lord’

The kidnapped 10-year-old daughter of one of Bulgaria’s alleged cocaine-trafficking lords, Evelin “Brendo” Banev has been released after 47 days in captivity, police said Monday.

Lara Baneva was left at a parking lot in the capital around 10:00 pm (1900 GMT) Sunday and walked to a nearby police station, the interior ministry said. The girl was in good physical condition and was put under psychological care, it added.

State BNR radio reported that a ransom of 500,000 euros ($653,000) was paid for her release, but the information was not officially confirmed. According to private bTV television the kidnappers had initially demanded 2.0 million leva (1.0 million euros, $1.3 million) from the Banev family.

Lara Baneva was kidnapped on March 5 in the posh Boyana neighbourhood on Sofia’s outskirts while being driven to school. Witness reports said three masked men had opened fire on the car, wounding the driver and abducting her. The case was the first high-profile kidnapping of such a young child in Bulgaria.

The girl’s father, a 48-year-old former wrestler, was sentenced by a Sofia court on February 15 to seven and a half years in jail for laundering drug-dealing profits worth almost two million euros ($2.6 million).

The police operation against him and his accomplices was called “Cocaine Kingpins.”

Eastern_European_Mafia_Police

Banev was subsequently extradited to Italy, where he is now standing trial for allegedly trafficking 40 tonnes of cocaine from Latin America to Europe for the ‘Ndrangheta mafia between 2004 and 2007.

Lara Baneva’s kidnapping was the first in Bulgaria since 2009, when police broke up a nine-member gang nicknamed “The Bold” that carried out over a dozen abductions for ransom in 2008 and 2009.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

profile pic.jpg

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

(646) 502-7443 United States

069 2547 2471 Germany

020 3239 0013 United Kingdom

01 442 9322 Ireland

031-753 83 77 Sweden

– Betal, ellers dreper vi familien din!


Kilde: VG Nett

Familier truet på livet i Follo

To menn i Follo og deres familier har blitt truet på livet om de ikke punger ut med 1,5 millioner kroner.

– De har fått brev om å betale et visst beløp en spesiell tid. Hvis ikke, blir de drept, sier politioverbetjent Frank Opdahl i Seksjon for etterforskning ved Follo politistasjon tilØstlandets Blad.

I slutten av mai ble utpressingsbrevene uten konvolutt puttet i postkassen der de to mennene bor med sine familier i Ski og i Ås. Der fikk de beskjed om å punge ut 1,5 millioner innen 25.mai.

– Dersom du ikke gir oss dette, vil du og din familie være døde før seks dager er gått. Dersom du prøver å ta kontakt med politiet eller andre, vil de være døde innen tre dager, står det på dårlig engelsk i brevet, ifølge avisen.

Begge mennene er velformuende personer i Ski og Ås. Politiet i Follo, som til nå har fått inn to meldinger om slike utpressingsbrev i distriktet, ser alvorlig på saken.
Politiet mener det er snakk om organisert kriminalitet.

Nå ber politiet i Follo ber andre som kan ha fått lignende brev, eller som har betalt, om å ta kontakt.

– Håndter brevet minst mulig, slik at vi får sjansen til å innhente eventuell DNA eller fingeravtrykk. Vi venter på resultatene av de to brevene som er sendt inn til undersøkelse. Vi ser alvorlig på utpressingene, selv om vi ikke har så mye å gå på ennå, sier Opdahl.

Opdahl forteller til Østlandets Blad at de ikke har hørt om konsekvenser av ikke å betale.

Politiet mener det er grunn til å tro at utpresserne har gått etter skattelisten. I fjor var det et par lignende forsøk i Oslo, bortsett fra det kjenner ikke politiet til lignende saker.

Publisert av ABP World Group Ltd.

Følg oss på Twitter og Facebook

A Father’s Day story


By David Story, Special to The Villager
Alabama June 17, 2011 

[PHOTO]

Contributed Auburn Villager

Luis Gallardo-Rivera and his daughter, Amaia

Last Father’s Day, Opelika city employee Luis Gallardo-Rivera didn’t know if he’d ever see his daughter Amaia again as he embarked on a desperate odyssey. His search ended up spanning two states, crossing the Atlantic Ocean, and including a trek across Bulgaria from Sofia to Burgas on the Black Sea.

A single man with visitation rights to see his 6-year-old daughter Amaia, Gallardo-Rivera says the disappearance of his daughter was unexpected. In the prior year, his relationship with her mother Beatriz had “settled down.”

“Things were rocky with Beatriz after Amaia’s birth, with visitation disagreements,” admits Gallardo-Rivera, a Columbus native. “I’d travel to Florida from Puerto Rico, where I was living and I’d first met Beatriz, and later to Florida from Columbus.”

Then Beatriz announced she had a real-estate job offer in Spain.

“Beatriz said she’d take Amaia for nine months,” says Gallardo-Rivera, who had joint custody. “It was temporary, and though I wouldn’t see Amaia for nine months, I could have her every summer per our new visitation arrangement.”

Bulgarian connection

The only hitch, adds Gallardo-Rivera, was that Amaia’s mother was engaged to a Bulgarian national.

“The day before they left for Spain, Beatriz called and said they were making a pit stop in Bulgaria to meet the fiancé’s family and get married,” he says.

Gallardo-Rivera admits resenting the fact that Beatriz’s fiancé was a father figure to Amaia. But he appreciated that Amaia got along with the man who might become her stepfather. He says he was glad his daughter had a chance to travel, and he understood the fiancé’s wanting to see his home and family.

But weeks passed and then a couple of months went by with only email and webcam communications between Gallardo-Rivera and his daughter. Beatriz explained that there were visa problems delaying their departure for Spain. Because he has a friend who’s an immigration lawyer, Gallardo-Rivera says this didn’t sound improbable.

The first warning bell rang when Beatriz said Amaia couldn’t come back to visit her father, adding that it wasn’t feasible for the child to leave Bulgaria and try to get back in. She said Gallardo-Rivera could come and visit, however.

“I was frustrated, but not entirely suspicious,” he says. “Now, I look back and think, how could I have been so stupid!”

By February, Gallardo-Rivera was planning a visit. Shortly afterwards, his story took an alarming turn.

Arrest warrant

“On March 16 of last year, I found an arrest warrant online for Beatriz on federal charges of mortgage fraud,” he says. “A 50-plus-page document from the federal Department of Justice initiated by the FBI, which had first interviewed Beatriz the day before she called me with the Spain story.”

Gallardo-Rivera says he didn’t care so much about the bank’s allegations of mortgage fraud as he did about what Beatriz had done to him and his daughter.

“Everything fell into place, so, I called the FBI,” he says. “They had no news of her whereabouts—she and Amaia had boarded a flight from Atlanta to Amsterdam—so I gave the Bureau an address.”

Gallardo-Rivera immediately tried to obtain emergency full custody, filing in Florida.

“It was denied for lack of jurisdiction, and their court ruling said I could file in Alabama or Puerto Rico,” he says. “My lawyer said not to file in Alabama, so I filed in Puerto Rico, and the request was denied.”

Months pass

Months passed and Gallardo-Rivera still communicated with Amaia via webcam, watching what he said to avoid giving away anything. Then, things began to turn in his favor.

“The FBI had to go through the State Department to work with the Bulgarian embassy in Sofia” he says. “I had called the embassy repeatedly, having written to the U.S. ambassador to Bulgaria, Nancy McEldowney.”

Gallardo-Rivera finally got in touch with a female official, Kimberly Atkinson of the embassy’s American Citizens Services, who became his contact. The search for Amaia evolved from a federal case to an Interpol case.

“Atkinson was very proactive,” says Gallardo-Rivera, who had been assured that once Beatriz was apprehended the American embassy would hold his daughter.

“I was sitting tight, and in mid-October I received a call from Atkinson,” he says. “The embassy had just finished a legal consultation and said they couldn’t hold Amaia overnight if they found her. ‘Are you going to get her soon?’ I asked, and Atkinson said she couldn’t answer that.”

Atkinson said she could pass Amaia on to an American missionary couple, the Ridgways, pending Gallardo-Rivera’s arrival.

“‘Should I come?’ I asked,” recalls Gallardo-Rivera, “and Atkinson couldn’t give me a definitive answer. So I slept on it, decided to go, and bought a ticket for Bulgaria.”

Gallardo-Rivera flew into Letishte Sofia-Vrazhdebna airport in Sofia, arriving on a Friday. He checked into the Kempinski Hotel Zografski in the Lozenets neighborhood near downtown Sofia. As Gallardo-Rivera strolled past the hotel’s lake, he contemplated his situation.

“The Kempinski Hotel was next to the embassy,” he explains, “and by Monday I was frustrated when Atkinson informed me Beatriz still wasn’t in custody. I didn’t know what to do, so I went back to the hotel and tried to contact the Bulgarian police. Then my sister told me about a private investigation agency she’d found online,”

A private detective

Korona AIK Detective Agency at 14 Budapeshta St. is known for tracking hiding or missing persons, and the agency had a 10-year for reputation working with foreign clients.

“I gave Korona’s Alexandra Karmanska my daughter’s last address in Bulgaria, plus the name of the Drita School,” says Gallardo-Rivera, “She arranged surveillance of the school and learned Amaia was abruptly checked out by her mother’s fiancé on the same day I’d gotten the call from the U.S. Embassy about the American couple, the Ridgways.”

Gallardo-Rivera moved to a less expensive hotel, the Hotel Maxim, close to downtown Sofia and the Vitosha Street commercial district. He stayed till the end of the second week but was on leave without pay.

“I was trying to email Beatriz because the webcam communication had suddenly stopped,” he explains, “but there were no email responses.”

Gallardo-Rivera decided to return home. Once he was back in Alabama, the emails started again and were forwarded by him to the FBI, which forwarded them to Bulgaria. There, authorities traced the IP address to the seaside town of Burgas.

Gallardo-Rivera was still trying to arrange a trip without letting Beatriz know he knew where she was. He said he was going to visit his brother in Ibiza, Spain, and wanted to make side trip to Bulgaria.

“No, don’t come,” Beatriz said. “Amaia is going to winter camp with her school.”

The Hague Treaty

The emails slacked off, and when they came again, Beatriz was elusive about her address. Gallardo-Rivera tried to get Amaia on the Missing Children’s List, a process that only local authorities can initiate. The Florida police wouldn’t follow through, however, so Gallardo-Rivera turned to the International Missing Children’s List and made a petition through the Hague Treaty.

The Hague’s Office of Children’s Issues provides direction to foreign service posts on international parental child abduction and fulfills U.S. treaty obligations relating to the abduction of children.

The Hague Treaty, a multilateral treaty protecting children from abduction and retention across international boundaries, provides guidelines for an application process to have a child returned under the treaty.

“In the week or two leading up to finally getting Amaia back in November, I made calls and wrote letters to my congressmen, the State Department, Bulgarian Minister of Interior Tsvetan Tsvetanov, the International Missing Children’s List and Interpol’s Bulgarian office,” says Gallardo-Rivera. “I got flooded with calls in response.”

Then Atkinson called from Sofia, saying the embassy had Amaia. She and Beatriz had been in the home of a friend of the fiancé’s in Burgas. Gallardo-Rivera drove straight to the Atlanta airport, thinking his daughter was en route to the Ridgways. There were complications, however.

“It was alleged that Beatriz said I’d given up custody rights or they’d been revoked,” according to Gallardo-Rivera. “But I had my documents when an embassy car with a translator picked me up at the airport.”

Gallardo-Rivera’s documents showed he had never relinquished joint custody, and he immediately became custodial parent as soon as Beatriz was incarcerated.

The embassy got Gallardo-Rivera to the Social Assistance Office, but Amaia wasn’t with the Ridgways; she was at the Dragalevtsi Shelter for Children because Beatriz claimed Gallardo-Rivera had relinquished custody.

When Gallardo-Rivera saw Amaia there she hugged him. The embassy staff drove them to the airport, and they were out of the country three hours after his arrival.

Home at last

Amaia’s aunt and paternal grandfather were waiting when they landed in Atlanta.

“I am grateful I’d always tried to communicate with Amaia, because she was comfortable with me,” says here dad. “Amaia took it all like a champ.”

Amaia started school at Jeter Primary in Opelika the following Wednesday.

“Amaia was smiling and acting like a little girl,” recalls Sandra Gallardo, Amaia’s aunt, of their airport reunion. “She’d say little things in reference to her time in Bulgaria, and it caught us off guard and was hard to respond to. Amaia has a strong sense of leadership and a deep need to understand things but is as silly as any young girl.”

Her aunt adds that Amaia has always been extremely social, makes friends quickly and never forgets names.

“Folks stop me and tell me they can’t believe Amaia’s only been with me for a few months,” says Gallardo-Rivera. “She’s resilient and integrated into school. She’s gotten used to new rules; it’s like we’ve always lived together.”

Be careful with whom you have children, sums up Gallardo-Rivera.

“It’s a challenge—going from bachelor to full-time single Dad with the ‘technical’ aspects of health plans,” he says. “Nothing can prepare you for day-to-day parenthood. It’s not like when you could eat a bowl of cereal for dinner or skip a meal; you have another mouth to feed.”

The ‘big picture’

His sleep was the first thing affected. He wakes up an hour early and stays up at night to make dinner and help with homework.

“All of these things are peanuts compared to the big picture, so it’s worth it,” he muses.

Amaia and her dad even make it down to Florida so she can see her maternal grandparents, who knew nothing about Beatriz’a legal troubles.

“I’ve learned so many things about Amaia,” says her dad. “She is into art. Her drawings are very detailed. I signed her up with 4-H club at school, and we visit different parks and go to Opelika’s Sportsplex to swim.”

The one thing he hasn’t figured out yet is how to fix a little girl’s hair, confesses Gallardo-Rivera.

“I try to convince her to go with a short haircut, but with the movie Tangled, that hasn’t been successful,” he says. “You can tell when my sister or a female co-worker has helped with my Amaia’s hair and when ‘Daddy’ did it.”

This is the first Father’s Day Amaia will spend with Gallardo-Rivera, his father and all his siblings.

“My family has showered her with so much love,” he says. “She adores them, and they love her. They’ve grown so close so fast; she calls my dad ‘abuelo.'”

Gallardo-Rivera’s father Orlando—Amaia’s grandfather, says she is totally different from when she first arrived.

“When we are together, she is very affectionate and talks of things she does with her Dad; she loves being with him,” he says. “My son has a unique way with her. He’s always there for Amaia.”

Note: Gallardo-Rivera said Amaia’s mom Beatriz was extradited and is awaiting trial in Florida. Gallardo-Rivera now has full legal and physical custody, and Beatriz will have to request visitation in court. So far, she has not. The facility she is in does not allow visitors, so Amaia has only seen her mom via webcam since leaving Bulgaria. Beatriz’s fiancé is still in Bulgaria, and since he didn’t formally sign anything or directly commit any mortgage fraud, he is not facing charges.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Bermuda on Congressman’s hit list over child abduction treaty


July 9, 2011 – Source: The Royal Gazette

Bermuda is among the countries that need to be punished for harbouring children kidnapped from the US, according to Congressman Chris Smith.

The Republican has named and shamed the Island as one of about 20 countries failing to abide by an international child abduction treaty.

Mr Smith, who represents New Jersey, said more than 2,400 American children were wrongly being held overseas, calling it a “deeply troubling and growing problem.”

He told the US Congress that Bermuda had carried out a “serious human rights violation” by failing to quickly return abducted children who had been unlawfully removed by one parent. The international treaty states that abducted children should be returned within six weeks for custody hearings as the courts in the country where the child was living have better access to the appropriate evidence and witnesses.

In light of this, Mr Smith is pushing to pass the International Child Abduction Prevention Act bill through Congress to secure the return of abducted children and penalise non-cooperating countries by withholding US financial aid and other assets.

Mr Smith said “the return rates of American children are still devastatingly low” even though more than 80 countries had signed The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

In 2010, 978 children were abducted to Hague Convention signatory countries with only 350 children or 38 percent returned.

Mr Smith, chairman of the House congressional panel that oversees international human rights, said the US would not tolerate child abduction or have patience with countries “that hide abductors behind The Hague Convention.”

The report states that: “Bermuda demonstrated patterns of noncompliance in the areas of central authority performance and judicial performance.”

It questions Bermuda’s application of the Convention when the taking party is not a parent, the challenges in bringing a Convention case to court when the Central Authority is also responsible for representing the state in court for child abuse cases and some courts’ failure to prohibit consideration of the merits of custody in domestic proceedings while a Hague application is pending.

The report details a June 2010 case when the Bermudian Central Authority wrongly said that because the taking person was an aunt and not a parent, the Convention would not apply. The family court then proceeded with a custody hearing and granted the aunt “full care, control and custody” of the child despite the pending Hague application.

The report states: “In November 2010, Bermuda appointed a new Attorney General (Michael Scott) who has expressed his commitment to ensuring that Bermuda is compliant with the Convention.

“At his urging, the court in the above case scheduled a hearing on The Hague application, but the left-behind parent (LBP) withdrew the application just days before the hearing, citing a lack of legal representation and a voluntary agreement with the taking aunt.”

The emotional federal hearing debate, which took place on May 24, included speeches from the parents of children abducted from America.

Mr Smith said international abduction was “a global human rights abuse” that harms children and inflicts emotional pain and suffering on the left-behind parents and families.

He said: “International child abduction rips children from their homes and lives, taking them to a foreign land and alienating them from a left- behind parent who loves them and who they have a right to know.

“Their childhood is disrupted, in limbo, or sometimes in hiding as the taking parent seeks to avoid the law or to conjure legal cover for their immoral actions.

“Abducted children often lose their relationship with their mom or their dad, half of their identity and half of their culture.”

Attorney General Michael Scott and Youth Affairs and Families Minister Glenn Blakeney did not respond to requests for comment.

The US State Department’s 2010 Hague Convention compliance report highlights Argentina, Australia, Austria, Costa Rica, France, Germany, Honduras, Hungary, Israel, Mexico, Romania, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland and Turkey for failing to enforce return orders.

It also states that Bermuda, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Honduras, Mexico, the Bahamas and Saint Kitts are among countries failing to abide by The Hague Convention, by not ensuring swift enforcement of convention orders.

He said: “The convention creates a civil framework for the quick return of children who have been abducted and for rights of access to both parents.

“Under the convention, courts are not supposed to open or reopen custody determinations, but rather decide the child’s country of habitual residence, usually where a child was living for a year before the abduction.

“Absent extenuating circumstances, the child is to be returned within six weeks to their habitual residence, for the courts there to decide on custody or to reverse any previous custody determinations.”

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Norsk Politi på jumboplass i Europa


“Når det gjelder politidekning, kjennetegnes både Norge og Sverige av at de er blant de landene i den vestlige verden som har lavest politidekning per innbygger, med henholdsvis 1,6 og 1,9 politi per 1 000 innbyggere i 2007, mot 2,3 i USA (Eurostat 2009 og Federal Bureau of Investigation 2009)”.

Schengen-avtalen åpnet for fri flyt av varer, personer, tjenester – og kriminelle.
 I dag omfatter Schengen 25 land med rundt 400 millioner innbyggere. Det er blitt et «supermarked» for kriminelle, der Norge er blant landene på øverste hylle. I Norge og Norden gjorde den mobile vinningskriminaliteten et nytt byks oppover da nye EU-land i Sentral-Europa og Baltikum ble med i Schengen. Det er land som har bidratt flittig til å fylle opp norske fengsler, av enkelte kalt «hotell fengsler». (Kilde: Politiforum)

Kilde: Nettavisen

Bemanningssituasjonen gjør at lensmannskontorer må holde sommerstengt. Nedleggelser kan tvinge seg fram, sier tillitsvalgt.

I Meråker i Nord-Trøndelag vil innbyggere bli møtt av stengte dører på lensmannskontoret til sommeren. Det samme kan skje på Nærøy.

– Har aldri skjedd før
– Dette er følgene av stramme driftsbudsjetter. Politiet vil ikke klare å løse alt, og det går nå mot sommerstengte lensmannskontor. Det har aldri tidligere skjedd, sier leder for Politiets Fellesforbund i Nord-Trøndelag, Rune Arstein, til Politiforum.no.

Til Nettavisen sier Arstein at politiet er milevis unna å nå målet om to politi per 1000 innbyggere, som er nedfelt i rapporten «Politi mot 2020».

– I Nord-Trøndelag mangler vi vel 60 stillinger for å kunne nå det målet, sier han.

Han sier mange politidistrikter er inne i et vanskelig år der det skal spares, omorganiseres, flyttes på ansatte og innføres «kreative» løsninger på vaktlistene for å få beredskapen til å gå rundt.

– Udramatisk
– Udramatisk, sier politimester Trond Prytz til Nettavisen.

Han understreker at polititilbudet ikke forsvinner selv om lensmannskontoret lukkes i en periode. Meråker vil bli betjent fra Stjørdal lensmannskontor, som forresten er landets største med rundt 40 ansatte.

Politimesteren håper på en bedring i 2013. Da skal et stort kull med nyutdannede politifolk ut i arbeid.

Men også Prytz innrømmer at budsjettsituasjonen er krevende og sier de har vært nødt til å snu alle steiner.

Flyplass krever mer av politiet
I Nord-Trøndelag har politiet en spesiell utfordring knyttet til trafikken på Trondheim lufthavn Værnes. Flyplassen opplever en eventyrlig økning i trafikken. De siste to, tre årene har økningen vært like stor som de siste 15 årene. Politioppgavene knyttet til flyplassen er økende og legger beslag på store ressurser.

PF-leder Rune Arstein sier budsjettsituasjonen i politiet nå fører til en nedbemanning. Vikariater som går ut blir ikke forlenget. Folk som går ledige blir ikke hentet inn.

– Kommer det ikke mer penger, er man nødt til å se på strukturen, sier han.

Det kan ikke bare sommerstengning, men nedleggelse av lensmannskontorer bli en nødvendighet, ifølge Arstein.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Services

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Wo ist Marvin?


By:ZDF

Vater verschwindet mit sechsjährigem Sohn

Die 43-jährige Sabine Engl ist verzweifelt. Ihr Sohn Marvin ist seit fünf Monaten verschwunden. Ihr Ex-Mann hat Marvin nach einer gemeinsamen Ferienwoche mit seinem Sohn nicht nach Hause zurückgebracht.

Vier Jahre war Sabine Engl mit ihrem Mann verheiratet, 2007 kam die Trennung. Das gemeinsame Sorgerecht für ihren damals vierjährigen Sohn regelten beide mit einem rechtsverbindlichen Vertrag. Darin wurde festgelegt, dass Marvin bei seiner Mutter wohnt. Der Vater sollte den Jungen am Wochenende von Freitag bis Samstag bei sich haben. In den Ferien lebte Marvin die Hälfte der Zeit bei der Mutter, die andere Hälfte beim Vater. Doch nach den letzten Herbstferien bringt der Vater Marvin einfach nicht zurück. Er schickt nur eine SMS mit den zwei Worten: “Wird später.”

Sabine Engl. Quelle: ZDF 

ZDF
SMS an Marvins Mutter

Vater und Sohn in Norwegen?

Sabine Engl versucht immer wieder, ihren Ex-Mann zu erreichen. Sie alarmiert die Polizei, meldet ihren Sohn als vermisst. Und sie stellt Strafanzeige. Schließlich beauftragt sie eine Privatdetektei, die Vater und Sohn tatsächlich in Norwegen aufspürt. “Die sind in Norwegen unterwegs gewesen und haben dann ein Foto geschossen, worauf ich den Marvin und meinen Ex-Mann erkennen kann”, sagt Sabine Engl. Doch die Spur verliert sich.

Die Polizei vernimmt unterdessen Verwandte und Freunde des Mannes. Dabei finden die Beamten heraus, dass die neue Lebensgefährtin Vater und Sohn am 16. Oktober 2009 zum Düsseldorfer Flughafen gebracht hat. Auch die Flugtickets im Wert von rund 1.600 Euro sind von ihrer Kreditkarte abgebucht worden. Doch die Lebensgefährtin besteht darauf, nicht zu wissen, wohin beide geflogen sind und nicht mehr mit ihnen in Kontakt zu stehen.

Marvin. Quelle: ZDF 

ZDF
Foto der Detektei

Europaweite Fahndung ausgeschrieben

Nun bleibt Sabine Engl als letzte Hoffnung die deutsche Justiz. Das alleinige Sorgerecht hat sie bereits erwirkt. Im Januar, drei Monate nach dem Verschwinden Marvins, gibt die Staatsanwaltschaft Kaiserslautern eine europaweite Fahndung nach dem Vater raus. Doch das bedeutet nicht, dass eine Verhaftung vorgenommen werden soll. Christian Schröder, Staatsanwalt in Kaiserslautern, erklärt: “Es ist eine Fahndung, die sich darauf richtet, den Aufenthalt des Beschuldigten festzustellen. Es ist keine Fahndung, die auch dem Ziel dient, ihn festzunehmen.”

Sabine Engl. Quelle: ZDF 

ZDF
Sabine Engl vermisst ihren Sohn

Denn eine Festnahme mit Haftbefehl setzt voraus, dass Marvins Vater für seine Straftat eine Freiheitsstrafe erwartet. Aber das ist hier nicht der Fall. Ihm drohe lediglich eine Geldstrafe, so Schröder.

Zitat

„Ich träume jede Nacht irgendwelche schlimmen Sachen, manchmal auch gute, dass ich ihn wiederhabe. “

Sabine Engl

Mutter hat schlaflose Nächte

Sabine Engl bemüht sich mit ihrer Tochter Jennifer aus erster Ehe, den Alltag zu meistern. Doch seit dem Verschwinden ihres Sohnes fehlt ihr die Kraft. “Ich träume jede Nacht irgendwelche schlimmen Sachen, manchmal auch gute, dass ich ihn wiederhabe. Ich hab einfach auch schlaflose Nächte, unzählige.” Zurzeit bleiben ihr nur die Erinnerungen an glückliche Zeiten. Doch Sabine gibt die Hoffnung nicht auf, Marvin bald wieder bei sich zu haben.

Wo ist Marvin?

Wenn Sie Informationen zu dem Fall haben oder Marvin und seinen Vater gesehen haben, wenden Sie sich bitte an die Staatsanwaltschaft Kaiserslautern unter der Telefonnummer 0631-3721200 (ortsüblicher Tarif). Weitere Kontaktinformationen finden Sie auf der Website(Externer Link – Öffnet in neuem Fenster) der Staatsanwaltschaft.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

Parental Abduction – Lesson 1


By: Jake Morphonios

Imagine…

You wait for your former spouse to return your son following a schedule weekend visit. When your child isn’t returned, you go to the other parent’s home only to discover that the apartment has been vacated.

The physiological response in each of these situations is the same. Your heart begins to pound and your adrenaline starts to surge through your veins as the realization dawns that your children are gone. In an instant your brain considers possible explanations, but they each defy logic. Your brain already knows what your heart is desperately trying to deny. Your children have been kidnapped.

There are few horrors that can rival the experience of having one’s child kidnapped. Movies and television shows sensationalize child abduction. The nightly news further distorts correct understanding of child abduction by only reporting on the most dramatic of cases, for example, the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart. There exists, however, a less-glamorous form of child abduction which is perpetrated by the child’s own parent.

Parental Kidnappings

Each year there are more than 350,000 child abductions in America. The vast majority of these kidnappings are perpetrated by one of the child’s parents. The official term for this type of crime is “parental child abduction”, but it is also referred to as a “child kidnapping” or “child snatching”. Regardless of the terminology, the fact that the child is taken by the other parent does not diminish or negate the raw emotional trauma inflicted upon the other parent.

Parental kidnapping is the unlawful abduction of a child by one parent which deprives the other parent of their lawful custody of the child.  In divorce situations, the abductor may be the custodial or the non-custodial parent. This means that even if the abductor is the custodial parent or primary caregiver, if the abduction deprives the other parent of his or her court ordered visitation time then the custodial parent is guilty of parental child abduction.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention conducted an intensive and thorough research study on child abduction in America. The project is called the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children (NISMART). The section that focused specifically on children abducted by family members is called NISMART-2. This article extensively references the NISMART-2. The original study may be found at: http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org

Defining Parental Child Abduction

“For the purposes of NISMART-2, family abduction was defined as the taking or keeping of a child by a family member in violation of a custody order, a decree, or other legitimate custodial rights, where the taking or keeping involved some element of concealment, flight, or intent to deprive a lawful custodian indefinitely of custodial privileges.”

The NISMART-2 elaborates on the definition above by further defining the following terms:

  • Taking: Child was taken by a family member in violation of a custody order or decree or other legitimate custodial right.
  • Keeping: Child was not returned or given over by a family member in violation of a custody order or decree or other legitimate custodial right.
  • Concealment: Family member attempted to conceal the taking or whereabouts of the child with the intent to prevent return, contact or visitation.
  • Flight: Family member transported or had the intent to transport the child from the State for the purpose of making recovery more difficult.
  • Intent to deprive indefinitely: Family member indicated intent to prevent contact with the child on an indefinite basis or to affect custodial privileges indefinitely.

Conceptualizing the Problem

Of the 203,900 parental child abduction cases studied, 57% were labeled as “caretaker missing”, meaning that the victimized parent did not know where the child was for at least 1 hour, became alarmed and searched for the missing child. However, the NISMART-2 reveals:

“It is possible for a child to have been unlawfully removed from custody by a family member, but for that child’s whereabouts to be fully known. Thus, a child can be abducted but not necessarily missing.”

In fact, the study found that 43% of the children kidnapped were not thought of as “missing” by the victimized parent because the child’s whereabouts were known to the victim parent.

“Although the family abductions described in this study typically had certain disturbing elements such as attempts to prevent contact or alter custodial arrangements permanently, they did not generally involve the most serious sorts of features associated with the types of family abductions likely to be reported in the news. Actual concealment of the child occurred in a minority of episodes. Use of force, threats to harm the child and flight from the State were uncommon. In contrast to the image created by the word ‘abduction,’ most of the children abducted by a family member were already in the lawful custody of the perpetrator when the episode started. In addition, nearly half of the family abducted children were returned in 1 week or less.”

Even if the child is not considered missing, the abduction is still considered child abuse because of the damage that it inflicts upon the child. The NISMART-1 found that, “family abduction can result in psychological harm to the child” and the NISMART-2 states that “family abductions constitute an important peril in the lives of children it is important to remember that the potential harm to family abducted children exists whether or not they are classified as missing”.

Characteristics of Parental Abductions

Location and Season. 73% of parental abductions took place in the child’s own home or yard, or in the home or yard of a relative or friend. Children were removed from schools or day care centers in only 7% of the cases. In 63% of the cases, the children were already with the abductor in lawful circumstances immediately prior to the abduction.

Police Contact. In 40% of all cases, the aggrieved parent did not contact the police to report the abduction. The study found a number of reasons for this, but the majority of responses indicated that the parent did not believe that the police would intervene in the matter because the child’s whereabouts were known, they were in the care of a legal guardian, and it did not appear that the child was being harmed. The highest percentage of abductions took place during the summer.

Ages. 45% of abductors were in their 30’s. 44% of abducted children were younger than age 6.

Indicators of serious episodes. “The use of threats, physical force, or weapons was relatively uncommon in family abductions.” 17% were moved out of State with the intent to make recovery more difficult. 44% were concealed, at least temporarily, from the victimized parent-+. 76% included attempts to prevent contact. 82% included intent to permanently affect the custodial privileges of the aggrieved parent.

Conclusion

Parental child abduction is the unlawful kidnapping of a child by one parent which deprives the other parent of his or her lawful custodial rights. This kind of child snatching not only victimizes the other parent, but it is also a serious form of child abuse.

When the abducting parent chooses to go underground or flees the state or country, recovery of the child becomes exceptionally difficult – and sometimes impossible. Because of this, if you suspect that your child is at risk of abduction you must act now. There are steps you can take to reduce the risk of abduction, as well as actions designed to make the recovery of your child far more likely.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

New Definition of Parental Alienation Syndrome


What is the Difference Between Parental Alienation (PA) and Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)?

by Douglas Darnall

In Dr. Richard Gardner’s second edit of parental alienation syndrome, he defined PAS as “a disorder that arises primarily in the context of child-custody disputes. Its primary manifestation is the child’s campaign of denigration against a parent, a campaign that has no justification. It results from the combination of a programming (brainwashing) parent’s indoctrination and the child’s own contributions to the vilification of the targeted parent.” He went on to emphasize the point that if “true parental abuse and / or neglect is present” and the child’s animosity is justified, PAS would not be an appropriate explanation for the children’s feelings.

Gardner describes what the severely alienated child will look like. To better understand PAS and help prevent the damage its causes children and families, I am suggesting that parents and the courts must understand the process that leads to PAS. Therefore I am defining parental alienation (PA), rather than PAS, as any constellation of behaviors, whether conscious or unconscious, that could evoke a disturbance in the relationship between a child and the other parent.


My definition of Parental Alienation is different from Dr. Gardner’s original definition of PAS in 1987: “a disturbance in which children are preoccupied with deprecation and criticism of a parent-denigration that is unjustified and/or exaggerated.” I am placing the emphasis on the brainwashing process while Dr. Gardner’s definition goes a step further to explain that the term is similar in meaning to brainwashing except that he adds the additional component of the child becoming active participant in the denigrating the targeted parent. In effect, the child has been successfully brainwashed.

With either definition, the motivation for the alienating parent has both a conscious as well as “a subconscious or unconscious” component.

The children themselves may have motivations that will make the alienation worse. Their hedonistic outlook for immediate gratification or their desire to avoid discomfort makes them vulnerable allies for siding with the alienating parent. The children become an advocate for the alienating parent by becoming the spokesperson for their parent’s hatred. They become the soldiers while the alienating parent is the general directing the action in the background against the targeted parent. The children are frequently unaware of how they are being used. It is most important to understand that if the child is angry and refuses to visit the targeted parent because of actual abuse or neglect, the child’s behavior is not a manifestation of PAS. This is why the issue of false allegations is so important.

Another difference in what I am outlining in my book (“Divorce Casualties: Protecting Your Children From Parental Alienating“) is my emphasis on the alienating parents rather then on the severity of symptoms. I believe this is important because parents (both mothers and fathers) must be able to honestly look at their behavior, identify the symptoms of alienation (not just the symptoms of PAS), and learn strategies for preventing PA regardless of whether the parent is the alienator or the targeted parent. I believe that alienation is a reciprocal process where both parents get caught up in alienation.

Dr. Gardner’s most controversial solution for dealing with severe alienation was to remove the children from the alienator’s home and place the child with the targeted parent. Later, however, he recanted his recommendation, saying that the children “are likely to run away and do everything possible to return to [the alienating parent’s] home (Gardner, 1992).”  Dr. Gardner then recommended “transitional sites” such as friend or family member’s house, a community shelter, or hospital. Each site would have a different level of supervision and resources to help the children and targeted parent. Hospitalization would be used only as a last resort.

Dr. Gardner’s definition emphasized the point that the child must be an active participant with the alienating parent in degrading the targeted parent.  My definition of Parental Alienation (PA) focuses more on the parent’s behavior and less on the child’s role in degrading the victimized parent, because alienation can occur well before the parent’s hatred for the other parent permeates the child’s beliefs about the victimized parent. This definition is necessary if parents are going to recognize the risk they have for unconsciously falling into a pattern of alienation if they don’t take corrective action. By the time the children have come to agree with the alienating parent’s propaganda, it can too late to prevent the significant damaging effects of the alienation. *(See Note at the end of this article for an important new finding.)
Also, Dr. Gardner’s definition states that the criticism of the other parent must be unjustified and/or exaggerated. I do not believe this is necessary. One parent can alienate the children against the other parent simply by harping on faults that are real and provable. Divorced parents need to understand that their children need to love both parents if at all possible, even if they themselves have years ago ceased to love their ex-spouse or ex-partner. They should help the children to dwell on the other parent’s good points rather than the faults.

It is important to keep in mind that that alienation is not about the horrible parent or “bad guy,” versus the targeted parent or “good guy.” The “bad guy-good guy” roles rotate. The same parent can be both the alienator and the victim, depending on how he or she is behaving. It is not uncommon for a targeted parent to retaliate with alienating behavior against the other parent. At this point, the parents have reversed their roles. This process can occur well before PAS manifest itself. The problem now is that the alienation escalates back and forth, each parent retaliating against the other. What does this do to your children? It is this vicious cycle that must be prevented or stopped.

You can’t assume that the targeted parent is without fault. Targeted parents can become alienators when they retaliate because of their hurt. Now they are in the role of the alienator and the other parent becomes the victim. The roles become blurred because it’s now difficult to know who is the alienator and who is the victim or targeted parent. Often both parents feel victimized. Alienation is a process, not a person.

Understanding parental alienation is paramount for a child’s welfare and a parent’s own peace of mind. Divorced parents, grandparents, judges, mediators, attorneys, and mental health workers all need to understand the dynamics of parental alienation, recognize the symptomatic behavior, and execute tactics for combating the malady.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

What Does a Severely Alienated Child look like?


  • The child has a relentless hatred for towards the targeted parent.
  • The child parrots the Obsessed Alienator, and makes statements against the targeted parent.
  • The child does not want to visit or spend any time with the targeted parent.
  • Many of the child’s beliefs are enmeshed with the alienator.
  • The child’s stated beliefs are delusional and frequently irrational.
  • The child is not intimidated by the court.
  • Frequently, the child’s reasons are not based on personal experiences with the targeted parent.  Instead, the reasons reflect what the child is told by the Obsessed Alienator. The child has difficulty making any differentiation between the two.
  • The child has no ambivalence in his feelings; it’s all hatred, with no ability to see the good.  (Black and White thinking)
  • The child has no capacity to feel guilty about how he or she behaves toward the targeted parent; The child cannot forgive any past indiscretions or parenting mistakes.
  • The child shares the Obsessed Alienator’s cause. Together, they are in lockstep to denigrate the hated parent.
  • The child’s obsessional hatred extends to the targeted parent’s extended family without any guilt or remorse.
  • The child can appear like any other normal and healthy child — until asked about the targeted parent, which then triggers the child’s hatred.

by Douglas Darnall, Ph.D.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

Symptoms of Parental Alienation


by Douglas Darnall, Ph.D.

To prevent the devastating effects of Parental Alienation, you must begin by recognizing the symptoms of PA. You will notice that many of the symptoms or behaviors focus on the parent. When the child exhibits hatred and vilifies the targeted parent, then the condition becomes parental alienation syndrome. After reading the list, don’t get discouraged when you notice that some of your own behaviors have been alienating. This is normal in even the best of parents. Instead, let the list help sensitize you to how you are behaving and what you are saying to your children.

1. Giving children choices when they have no choice about visits. Allowing the child to decide for themselves to visit when the court order says there is no choice sets up the child for conflict. The child will usually blame the non-residential parent for not being able to decide to choose whether or not to visit. The parent is now victimized regardless of what happens; not being able to see his children or if he sees them, the children are angry.

2. Telling the child “everything” about the marital relationship or reasons for the divorce is alienating. The parent usually argues that they are “just wanting to be honest” with their children. This practice is destructive and painful for the child. The alienating parent’s motive is for the child to think less of the other parent.

3. Refusing to acknowledge that children have property and may want to transport their possessions between residences.

4. Resisting or refusing to cooperate by not allowing the other parent access to school or medical records and schedules of extracurricular activities.

5. A parent blaming the other parent for financial problems, breaking up the family, changes in lifestyle, or having a girlfriend/boyfriend, etc.

6. Refusing to be flexible with the visitation schedule in order to respond to the child’s needs. The alienating parent may also schedule the children in so many activities that the other parent is never given the time to visit. Of course, when the targeted parent protests, they are described as not caring and selfish.

7. Assuming that if a parent had been physically abusive with the other parent, it follows that the parent will assault the child. This assumption is not always true.

8. Asking the child to choose one parent over another parent causes the child considerable distress. Typically, they do not want to reject a parent, but instead want to avoid the issue. The child, not the parent, should initiate any suggestion for change of residence.

9. Children will become angry with a parent. This is normal, particularly if the parent disciplines or has to say “no”. If for any reason the anger is not allowed to heal, you can suspect parental alienation. Trust your own experience as a parent. Children will forgive and want to be forgiven if given a chance. Be very suspicious when the child calmly says they cannot remember any happy times with you or say anything they like about you.

10. Be suspicious when a parent or stepparent raises the question about changing the child’s name or suggests an adoption.

11. When children cannot give reasons for being angry towards a parent or their reasons are very vague without any details.

12. A parent having secrets, special signals, a private rendezvous, or words with special meanings are very destructive and reinforce an on-going alienation.

13. When a parent uses a child to spy or covertly gather information for the parent’s own use, the child receives a damaging message that demeans the victimized parent.

14. Parents setting up temptations that interfere with the child’s visitation.

15. A parent suggesting or reacting with hurt or sadness to their child having a good time with the other parent will cause the child to withdraw and not communicate. They will frequently feel guilty or conflicted not knowing that it’s “okay” to have fun with their other parent.

16. The parent asking the child about his/her other parent’s personal life causes the child considerable tension and conflict. Children who are not alienated want to be loyal to both parents.

17. When parents physically or psychologically rescue the children when there is no threat to their safety. This practice reinforces in the child’s mind the illusion of threat or danger, thereby reinforcing alienation.

18. Making demands on the other parent that is contrary to court orders.

19. Listening in on the children’s phone conversation they are having with the other parent.

20. One way to cause your own alienation is making a habit of breaking promises to your children. In time, your ex-spouse will get tired of having to make excuses for you.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com