BartSimpson wrote:Again, in this case, the passport is symbolic. There is no emergency, and there is no need to secure the passport to prevent the child from being taken to London.
The mother is bound by a Court Order. That is sufficient.
BartSimpson wrote:Upon the report and review of the Court Order, the Law Enforcement Agency with jurisdiction, either Sheriff or Police, would initiate a call to the mother to verify she has the child and establish the circumstances why she is interfering with the father's custody.
Any sane person would understand from this courtesy call to return the child to the US immediately.
If not, the local Jurisdiction gets a warrant from the Court, notifies the local FBI office, which contacts the FBI London office, who pays a visit to the mother and (since she is a US Citizen) places her under arrest. The consulate would take custody of the child, and it would be best if the father flew to London to pick up the child.
The mother would be repatriated and returned to Texas for prosecution courtesy of the US Marshals Office.
BartSimpson wrote:There is no emergency - the parenting plan has anticipated this circumstance and applied a geographical restriction. You cannot seek a Court Order in anticipation that something bad might happen.
The passport remains symbolic, and chasing it a useless waste of legal fees when the real fight will be over the long-distance parenting plan. Even if the child remains with the father, the mother will be allowed to have parenting time in London. The child will be going to London, the question is how often and how long.
Users browsing this forum: TeamAwesome and 10 guests