Wednesday, December 29, 2010

December 23, 2010 A.M. Costa Rica Newspaper

Defensoría moved to halt return of U.S. child
By the A.M. Costa Rica staff

The Defensoría de los Habitantes said Wednesday that it has filed a habeas corpus action to prevent a U.S. child from being returned to her father in Missouri.

The Defensoría said that it wants the Sala IV constitutional court to declare that during the long legal process the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was interpreted incorrectly. A judge ordered the return earlier this year.

The father, Roy Koyama, has been waging a legal battle to recover his young daughter who came to Costa Rica with her mother.  The Defensoría states without attribution that he has been guilty of domestic violence, something he has denied.

Koyama said earlier this month that he is the first person to receive a judicial decree here based on the Hague Convention. He raised money to bring home the child accompanied by a Costa Rican child welfare escort.

The Defensoría also went to bat this month to win a pardon for a woman who had admitted she helped kill a family member in a dispute over witchcraft. The woman claimed she could not understand the legal process where she admitted her guilt because she is a member of a native group and does not speak Spanish. Instead of having the courts order a new trial with an interpreter, the Consejo de Gobierno issued a pardon. Three men also sentenced in the case, including the woman's husband, remain in prison. The Defensoría praised the pardon.

The independent Defensoría also supported Chere Lyn Tomayko in her effort to avoid U.S. justice for child abduction. In that case, then-security minister Janina del Vecchio awarded the woman refugee status based on her claim of domestic
violence. The U.S. judge involved in the Texas case then told the daily La Nación that he was unaware of any domestic violence claim.

The Hague convention basically says that child custody cases should be handled in the country and by the judge that became involved initially.  The aim is to prevent a parent from shopping for a jurisdiction and to burden unfairly a parent who might be forced to present a case in a distant land.

In Koyama's case, a Green County, Missouri, court judge granted Koyama sole custody, but the mother claims she never was served and was unaware of the suit. She was in Costa Rica at the time.

On a Facebook page the woman, Trina Atwell
McCall, accuses Koyama of drug use, all kinds of abuse, including sexual, and violence. She had a sister in Costa Rica, which is why she came here. She and Koyama were not married, but the
Defensoría notes that the child, Emily Alina, carries his last name. The mother also is called  Trina Atwell Chavarria.

The woman fled Feb. 9, 2009, to come to Costa Rica. The child was seven months old at the time.

The Defensoría said that the Hague Convention was interpreted incorrectly because the court decision to return the child is a violation of the rights of women and children.

Among other arguments, the Defensoría said that the child has lived longer in Costa Rica than in the United States and that the mother fears that the child will be a victim of violence.

The agency said it expected a court decision shortly. Although the Sala IV is in recess for the Christmas vacation, there are magistrates on duty who can issue a temporary order. The action probably will delay any return of the child until the full court can hear the case in January.



2 comments:

  1. This was a message sent from a friend on Facebook and he wanted me to post it:

    W. Mills JR December 30 at 2:53am
    That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time.
    The fact she kidnapped Emily and vacated the United States is against the law. Emily would not have been living in Costa Rica this whole time; if the mother had not committed a crime in the first place.
    Just because the mother is living in Costa Rica now; doesn’t make the crime of kidnapping any less of a crime and hiding out in Costa Rica under false pretenses.
    The mother chose to move to Costa Rica; so it should not be on the father to have to fight in Costa Rica to get his daughter back under “The Hague convention basically says that child custody cases should be handled in the country and by the judge that became involved initially. The aim is to prevent a parent from shopping for a jurisdiction and to burden unfairly a parent who might be forced to present a case in a distant land.”
    This to me spells out what the mother is trying to do. Emily is an American and the father went to a local court in the state where Emily lived and filed for custody and charges of kidnapping were placed against the mother.
    Roy got custody per The Hague convention and Trina the mother seems to continue to fight it in another land making it a hardship on the father. This sounds like Trina and not Roy is blowing smoke.
    If Roy the Father was an abusive individual why are there no police charges filed.
    If he’s an addict as stated by the mother; he’d continue to show signs of his drug problems. He wouldn’t be able to continue to hide his drug problem; more and more people would know and it seems to me only Trina and her mother are aware of the problem.
    A violent abusive individual is not selective in their abuse; he would or she would abuse others in their past and present. There would be more people speaking out against Roy’s violence; if he was an abusive person. Like I said above it seems only Trina and her mother know about his abuse and that’s not possible.
    It’s so easy for the mother to make claims and no one seems to want to investigate her allegations and instead they believe it must be true; because she’s a woman. I hate to break the news; but women lie as much as men and they can be vindictive.
    This is one of those sad stories you read about and wonder what goes through peoples minds when they make up stuff to hurt others. They make accusation without proof and people like lambs just reiterate her words like a cow upchucks his dinner and defend her crime of kidnapping as if she really had no other options.
    I understand the United States has some crazy laws out there; but one thing’s for sure, if someone’s truly abusive to the point you need to move to another country; you didn’t try hard enough to convict him.
    I know there are crazy men and women on this planet and our laws make it tough to convict and abusive and that’s why there’s abused women shelters; but those women have proof they’ve been abused. Charges were filed and dropped and filed and dropped out of fear and that cycle goes on for years before the women has the strength to leave. In Roy’s case no files were charged and she vanished without contacting any abused centers about her abuser. The puzzle pieces just don’t seem to come together; they don’t make since. I could come to understand her side; if she had filed police reports of the abuse and attempted to show there was reason to escape this man that she claims is so evil; but nothing. I’m not there; because I know Roy and I support him. No, I’m here; because I support Emily and I feel by removing her from her father under false pretenses is abuse and Emily should be removed from her mother and strict visitations should be given if any visitations are awarded.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So very true! Trina, please bring Emily home so she can have the love of her father. You are only compounding problems for yourself and causing further harm to Emily.
    Also, Trina, I read on BSH that you were willing to fly Emily home to Missouri in December. Why have you not done that? Make good on your word and maybe The State of Missouri will drop some charges.
    Stop hurting Emily, whether you realize it or not, you are hurting her tremendously.
    Come back to the states and deal with the process. Then you and Roy can both build a loving relationship with Emily.

    ReplyDelete