Jump to content

Awk

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    732
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

314 Excellent

1 Follower

About Awk

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

8,648 profile views
  1. Sounds like the mother is spinning a fairy tale. I think the information reported by the media, about the father not allowing her to travel abroad with the child (which may or may not have been warranted), but the mother still taking the child abroad without permission, and then not giving the father any way to contact the child or knowing how his son is, sounds more plausible. Had the father thought the mother would return with his son soon, he may not have taken the action he did. As it was, it seems he had no way of knowing if that woman would ever come back with his son, and thus acted how he did. In hindsight, the shit really hit the fan for him and this other fella helping him and I'm sure they would have done things differently. I'm not sure exactly what charges are holding the father and the other gentleman in prison, but I think it's a sure thing that the charges are brought on by the mother, as afaik, she's the only one who can claim there was anything illegal in what the father did. I think it's also a good bet that the reason they are still in prison is that the mother is refusing to drop the charges.
  2. Pardon me, but I do not think that leaving one's 18 month old daughter with an "alcoholic and drug addict" for 10 years is a good example of "doing the right thing". It may be an example many other things, but I can't think of anything that would have the slightest positive conation. Unfortunately I'm nowhere near the prison these gentlemen are staying, but if I were, and from what I've read of the story, I'd feel inclined to drop by and see if there was anything I could do to make their stay a little easier on a day to day basis. I think it would be good if some TV members in the area could do so.
  3. No, they could not. It is not illegal to travel abroad with a child you have shared custody over. It only becomes illegal if another guardian, also with shared custody, reports to the police that she does not consent to you traveling abroad with your child.
  4. And pray tell, who in this world do you think can accuse Mr. Smith of "criminal abduction" of his own child, if not the child's other custodian, the mother?
  5. BBC is wrong. The other parts I believe are more or less correct. Like some others I think there must be a bit more to this than just the father trying to leave Thailand with his son as normal, then being caught in a random spot check during passport control. I don't feel the need to insinuate anything bad about the guy who apparently tried to help the father though, as some here do (not you). Also because there are simpler explanations Were the father to simply lack permission from the mother upon departure, which Thailand immigration does spot checks on, by all accounts I've read he would simply have been turned away together with his son, with nothing more happening. "Get the permission paper and come back next day, thank you." I at one time tried to get a qualified answer for how long it would take from the time one parent tried to report the other parent without permission leaving Thailand with a child the departing parent had shared custody over, till the departing parent would face trouble at the border. I did not get any reliable answer, but from what I guess happened here, the Thai authorities move fast in cases like this. And the mother must have know what to do and who to call too. My sympathies to the father. With better luck, this all might have gone very different for him and his son. While his, as I understand it, verdict for full custody in the UK will not mean much in Thailand (because Thailand has not signed the Hague convention of 1996, only the one of 1980 regulating child abduction), possibly a good lawyer could use it as mitigating evidence of some sort. I can recommend one for cases like this.
  6. According to who? This article from 2012 references Thailand as a signatory to the convention: http://www.thailawforum.com/blog/girl-returned-to-mother-after-thailand-abduction This says Thailand signed in 2002: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Convention_on_the_Civil_Aspects_of_International_Child_Abduction
  7. Nonsense. Here is a list of the countries who have signed the Hague convention regarding child abduction: https://www.ag.gov.au/FamiliesAndMarriage/Families/InternationalFamilyLaw/Pages/HagueConventionOnTheCivilAspectsOfInternationalChildAbduction.aspx Yes. Thailand is on the list.
  8. There is no reason to wonder about that for those who read the article linked: "As soon as Joleon saw his dad he asked to go home as he didn’t want to stay there. So they entered the house just to get Joleon’s passport."
  9. I believe the only rights you would have to get your child back would be those rights you could enforce under what is called the Hague convention regarding child abduction. This would involve you contacting the British authorities documenting to them that the child was domiciled in the UK until mother without permission took them to Thailand and is now refusing to return them home (the place they were domiciled). The British authorities would then contact the Thai authorities, requesting the Thai authorities do what is necessary to return the children. The Thai authorities would then be required to make sure the children are returned, if the Thai authorities can find the mother and child, and if the mother does not successfully fight the request in the Thai courts. I'm not sure how much effort the Thai authorities would put into tracking down the mother and child, and then returning the child by force. Sounds complicated and risky, does it not? As the first reply indicated: keep your child's passport safe and do whatever you need to do to prevent the child from leaving the UK.
  10. I believe you. The way your post is worded it is obvious it is not an everyday occurrence for you, so the suggestions of dropping into some random bar is boring. You will not find these women there. There certainly are people in the world with enough "game" to compensate for some considerable difference in age or looks, and who can and do approach women they find attractive at the supermarket or in the queue at 7-11. With the age gap closing in on 30+ years, it's gonna be harder of course, but if you in addition have a lot of money ... This not for everyone though, and most of us would probably just give out a "horny weird/creppy guy" vibe if we tried. Practice makes perfect though, if you do not get arrested first. My best guess: from the high-end "gentleman's clubs" in Bangkok. I unfortunately have to say I've never even been in one (not interested in paying for company, though I'd go if a rich Thai friend invited me on his dime ;-), but have read enough and seen enough pictures to get what I /think/ is a fairly correct impression. At these clubs, you and your mates are having a fun evening out, with good music, good food, and drinks. You also pay good money for good looking girls to party with you and your friends. They stand with you and your mates at your table, laugh at your jokes, and keep a decent conversation going. These girls are mostly students or recently graduated students, from decent middle-class families, not hookers, and not going to go home with you that night. They are hired because they look very pretty, are educated, and can entertain their customers by ways other than taking of their own or your clothes. They are not hookers, do not look like hookers, and do not talk like hookers. None of the girls you find in the CM bars would ever get hired at any of these clubs. To frequent these clubs you need to have some money. As each night will be expensive (think prices per night closer to the bill you get at the karaoke scam places, except that at these "gentleman's clubs" the bill is not a scam of course), any girl there will naturally assume you have at least some money, even if not necessarily rich. While you cannot usually pay these girls directly to be your girlfriend, you will get to meet and talk with very pretty and educated girls for an extended amount of time in relaxed settings. So basically it's a way to hang out with girls more pretty and sophisticated than you will normally meet as a low-life farang here in Thailand. Then captivate them with your impressive charm in order to meet privately at some other time, and from then on, progress as on a normal date. From what I've gathered , you will not have much fun going to such a place alone, and you, or at least someone in your group, needs to speak Thai well. Most of the men will be well to do businessmen having a boys night out with some pretty company before they go home to their family.
  11. child abduction

    You were not wrong. See the pinned thread in this forum for more information:
  12. Advice about wedding

    That is a good idea, but unfortunately Thailand is not a signatory to the Hague convention that governs agreements regarding child custody and recognition of foreign court orders regarding this (that is the Hague convention of 1996). Thailand has only signed off on the Hague convention regarding child abduction (Hague convention of 1981), which would not help the op. A court order from the op's country regarding this would thus not have any legal power in Thailand.
  13. child abduction

    Unless the mother willingly agrees to sign over full custody to you, I believe you have no chance with even the best lawyer. Without full custody you cannot relocate the child outside of Thailand against the mother's wish, and it is normally not reasonable or fair for the court to grant you full custody against the mother's wishes so you can putter off to farangland, where the mother may never see her child again. Unless there's something special about mother (drug addict, violent, child abuser, etc.) I think starting a process with a thai lawyer at this point is a waste of money and time. Thailand is a signature to the Hague convention of 1981 regarding child abduction and this is the only judicial avenue I think can help, but as you say, this may take some time (several months at a minimum probably) and the end result is uncertain. Thailand should return the child to the country it was domiciled, but if the mother refuses to co-operate, how much manpower will the Thai authorities use to track the child down and return it by force from it's Thai mother? Regardless of that, if perusing this avenue one must obviously start the process as soon as possible, and this you must do in your home country where the child was domiciled. The longer the child stays away from it's domiciled home, the more the odds will be in favour for letting the child stay where it is now. A bad situation, but unless the mother cooperates I think your only option for returning the the situation to normal in a reasonable amount of time is to return home with the child alone, assuming you can get through passport control. That you do not have the passport the child entered Thailand might be a big issue in this situation, where you want as few raised eyebrows as possible when your are exiting Thailand alone with your child. Even with that passport, you need to be prepared to be asked some questions about where the mother is when you exit Thailand. Especially since it sounds like you and your child's date of entry to Thailand will be different, a competent officer will probably wonder more than a little about the reason for that.
  14. It hardly means that. At any point in the process of making those 6-7 phone calls, the guy might call it quits and pay for an extra night if that is what the hotel staff demand on the phone there and then. If you are staying at an expensive hotel, up to 6,000 as the op indicated, spending a few minutes on the phone for a fairly good chance to save up to 6,000 would be worth it for many. So worst case scenario is that the op ends up doing what seems to be your fairly worthless suggestion to this thread: pay for an extra night. Best case: saves the price of the extra night. And that is by the way, at least one phone call, not at least 6-7 phone calls. Obviously the guy can get lucky on the first call.
×