Child Abduction Issue Explodes

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

I'm all for campaigning against Japan's fight with North Korea regarding the abduction of its nationals until it stops sanctioning its own citizens to do the same to citizens of other countries.
At least the North Koreans conduct their state-sanctioned abductions covertly, suggesting they do feel a modicum of shame about it.

[Guest]

Here is another "Christmas Miracle" story. Dr. Garcia is a true hero.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/12/christmas-miracle-for-dad-locked-in-custody-battle/?fb_ref=.TvpMOqPo3Og.like&fb_source=profile_oneline

Here is another story that takes alot of hope out of the above one....; ;(

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20111229f1.html#.TvuyKDlrF2k.facebook

Congressman Smith is another American Hero.

[gaijinpunch]

Few options for left-behind parents even if Hague OK'd
Without retroactive effect, treaty will leave past abductions in limbo

By MASAMI ITO
Staff writer
In July 2003, Paul Toland arrived to an empty home at the U.S. Navy's family housing facility in Yokosuka, Kanagawa Prefecture. Gone were his Japanese wife and baby daughter. What was left was a note: "Contact my lawyers."

Since then, Toland, a navy commander, has been fighting to get his daughter back — and he's not alone. Hundreds of other fathers from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France and other countries are also fighting the same battle.

"Hundreds of children have been abducted and none have ever been returned (from Japan)," Toland, now based in Maryland, said in a phone interview earlier this year. "It's frustrating — you know that you are in a losing battle."

Source

[IparryU]

not liking this... but i cant say that i didn't know about this before... same song, just another remix

[Samurai_Jerk]

If Japan does sign the Hague Convention, would it be possible for courts overseas to issue new orders as a way of getting around the retroactive enforcement problem?

[IparryU]

If Japan does sign the Hague Convention, would it be possible for courts overseas to issue new orders as a way of getting around the retroactive enforcement problem?

Japan would probably say that the original order was issued before x date, so no "we" wont hand them over.

I would love to see America pull a bold move like, we won't do x, y and z if you dont hand people over.

Like when Noda tries to do the whole base moving gig or when NK launches another bomb/missile in Japanese waters, or when China starts doing some Naval exercise near Japanese waters... nice force move

[Samurai_Jerk]

I would love to see America pull a bold move like, we won't do x, y and z if you dont hand people over.

It would be nice but I'm sure that in the grand scheme of foreign affairs, getting a few dozen kids returned to their American fathers is pretty low priority for Uncle Sam.

[Greji]

If Japan does sign the Hague Convention, would it be possible for courts overseas to issue new orders as a way of getting around the retroactive enforcement problem?

There would be nothing to preclude them from the issuance of new instructions if the plaintiffs approach the court; however, the Japanese courts and their interpretations of domestic laws remain the problem. It could be that the latest rulings may loosen the J-courts up. Even though there are now precedents in Japanese court cases, we will still probably have to wait until the next case goes to court in Japan following the most recent incidents. Hopefully, it will be a good case with good backup information that is brought before the court.
The old saying is very true, "Bad cases make Bad Case Law."

[matsuki]

If it's a recent case, I imagine the US court could issue a new order that may be enforceable but for older cases, I think they're pretty much SOL. [edit] Guess not, good to know Greji

Slightly on topic but in regards to U.S. parents coming to Japan to retake their children...the embassy hasn't welcomed them with open doors but has anyone ever tried going to one of the military bases? Probably would need a friend living/working on base but I find it even hard to believe the military would give up the parent/child to Japanese authorities if they have all their paperwork intact.

[IparryU]

If it's a recent case, I imagine the US court could issue a new order that may be enforceable but for older cases, I think they're pretty much SOL. [edit] Guess not, good to know Greji

Slightly on topic but in regards to U.S. parents coming to Japan to retake their children...the embassy hasn't welcomed them with open doors but has anyone ever tried going to one of the military bases? Probably would need a friend living/working on base but I find it even hard to believe the military would give up the parent/child to Japanese authorities if they have all their paperwork intact.

if you get on base you need a sponsor... so if anything fuck wild happens and that person causes some commotion... the sponsor is gonna get dragged into it.

That having been said, a simple, "I invited them on base so the kid can get a taste of America, good food, good American people serving their country, and a jump start to speaking English in an English speaking environment. I had no idea that Japan would get mad if he took his kids, that he has legal custody of, out to have some fun."

That would get all chopped up by translations and other bs, but it would be a big slap in the face IF they dont return to Japanese soil. Would need to get a ride out of Japan too... a nice boat ride probably.

That would then technically work with the New Sanno too right Greji?

[matsuki]

if you get on base you need a sponsor... so if anything fuck wild happens and that person causes some commotion... the sponsor is gonna get dragged into it.

That having been said, a simple, "I invited them on base so the kid can get a taste of America, good food, good American people serving their country, and a jump start to speaking English in an English speaking environment. I had no idea that Japan would get mad if he took his kids, that he has legal custody of, out to have some fun."

That would get all chopped up by translations and other bs, but it would be a big slap in the face IF they dont return to Japanese soil. Would need to get a ride out of Japan too... a nice boat ride probably.

That would then technically work with the New Sanno too right Greji?

Yeah, have to imagine the sponsor would get grilled but that's a different issue. I also wonder if they could get the parent/children out of the country before the J-popos come knocking.

Another scenario related to your response - Has anyone tried buying a boat and trying to make the run to Korea? (or maybe even Taiwan in Okinawa's case)

[IparryU]

Yeah, have to imagine the sponsor would get grilled but that's a different issue. I also wonder if they could get the parent/children out of the country before the J-popos come knocking.

Another scenario related to your response - Has anyone tried buying a boat and trying to make the run to Korea? (or maybe even Taiwan in Okinawa's case)

if it was that easy...

[matsuki]

if it was that easy...

Not easy, nor cheap, nor easy to pull off...but possible.

[IparryU]

Not easy, nor cheap, nor easy to pull off...but possible.

i like the base idea... plus i'd rather not go to taiwan with young kids... or fuck up and dock up in NK

[matsuki]

i like the base idea... plus i'd rather not go to taiwan with young kids... or fuck up and dock up in NK

I dunno that NK would be all that bad. They may put you on their evening news to tell all of NK how the evil Japanese steal your children. (of course not mentioning they're half)

[gaijinpunch]

how the evil Japanese steal your children. (of course not mentioning they're half)

Yeah... those evil Japanese...stealing innovative NK ideas.

[Guest]

An article in the "Economist" concerning the abuse of children in Japan. (I know you guys have been all over the Economist lately, and this is a really good article.

http://www.economist.com/node/21543193

[matsuki]

[Guest]

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

[matsuki]

Yeah! Why can't we have courts that award $20 million damages payouts for spilled McCoffees?

(P.S. The above comment shouldn't read as being supportive of the inaptly named Japanese justice system. I generally agree with what Nakano is sayng, but can't think of a judicial system anywhere where pragmatism is not the rule of, er, law.)

LOL, you do know that the McCoffee in question in that case was at Fukushima status temperatures? I honestly can't say I'd take $20 mill to have my lemur rod doused in superheated coffee.

[Mike Oxlong]

LOL, you do know that the McCoffee in question in that case was at Fukushima status temperatures? I honestly can't say I'd take $20 mill to have my lemur rod doused in superheated coffee.

McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.

McFact No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.

McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.)

McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.

McFact No. 8: A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years.

via Snopes.com

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

McFact No. 9: The McCuppa in question must have been made from the McFountain of Youth because in the span of just four McFacts, the plaintiff -- in addition to suffering third degree burns -- also grew younger by eight years.

As they say in Japan, getting sillious, while I am no fan of The Man (and you don't get much bigger than The McMan), it's hard to see anything other than serious McFlaws in a judicial system that would award such an enormous amount to a single plaintiff despite all the McFacts supporting her case. (It should be noted that the same judicial system also consistently turns a blind eye toward the McCorporation's less than perfect business practices).

[IparryU]

dude... those were McCool McFacts there man!

[matsuki]

Making me McHungry...but my low carb diet says otherwise >_<

[Coligny]

Making me McHungry...but my low carb diet says otherwise >_<

Cheezeburger 'n nuggets times mofo's (and them nuggets are 100Y only these days)

[gaijinpunch]

Yeah! Why can't we have courts that award $20 million damages payouts for spilled McCoffees?

(P.S. The above comment shouldn't read as being supportive of the inaptly named Japanese justice system. I generally agree with what Nakano is sayng, but can't think of a judicial system anywhere where pragmatism is not the rule of, er, law.)

I'm not going to say the US system is better, but the law (and judges) at least have some teeth. Here, you can just say "shouganai" and never respect the judgement past down.

[gaijinpunch]

Making me McHungry...

Oh, let me help then.
http://docakilah.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/can-you-guess-what-mcdonald%E2%80%99s-food-item-this-is/

[matsuki]

Oh, let me help then.
http://docakilah.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/can-you-guess-what-mcdonald%E2%80%99s-food-item-this-is/

Mmm mmm goood I'm lovin' it!

[Mike Oxlong]

McFact No. 9: The McCuppa in question must have been made from the McFountain of Youth because in the span of just four McFacts, the plaintiff -- in addition to suffering third degree burns -- also grew younger by eight years.

As they say in Japan, getting sillious, while I am no fan of The Man (and you don't get much bigger than The McMan), it's hard to see anything other than serious McFlaws in a judicial system that would award such an enormous amount to a single plaintiff despite all the McFacts supporting her case. (It should be noted that the same judicial system also consistently turns a blind eye toward the McCorporation's less than perfect business practices).

McFact No. 8 is a follow-up report about another case stating that even a few years later, McDonald's still had not done anything to improve the coffee situation in it's restaurants. The original plaintiff goes by a different name...