Respondent failed to establish grave
risk of harm defense. Respondent presented no evidence that the Children are
aware of any incidents of abuse or Petitioner's prior alleged drug use. Respondent
did not allege that Petitioner ever abused (either physically or verbally) the
Children themselves or ever used drugs in their presence. The facts that
Respondent never filed a police report, received medical care, sought social
services, or took other action to document the alleged abuse weighs against a
finding that any abuse exceeded the Arelatively minor@ category set forth in Simcox.
Respondent failed to meet her burden in proving that Michoacán, Mexico was a
zone of war, famine, or disease. The discrete examples of violence to which
Respondent testified were insufficient to prove that the country of Mexico or
the state of Michoacán pose a grave risk of harm to the Children upon their
return. Respondent did not provide any evidence comparing the crime rates in Michoacán
to those in Columbus, Ohio, or explain why the Children faced a greater risk of
violence in Mexico than they face in the United States. The fact that the
United States has issued a travel warning to citizens traveling to Michoacán,
Mexico is insufficient to establish that Michoacán, Mexico is a war zone.
In our International Child Abduction Blog we report Hague Convention Child Abduction Cases decided by the US Supreme Court, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Circuit Courts of Appeals, district courts and New York State Courts. We also provide information to help legal practitioners understand the basic issues, discover what questions to ask and learn where to look for more information when there is a child abduction that crosses country boarders.
Search This Blog
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment