[ScottGem]

That comment is just that, someone's erroneous idea that since the name of the act contains the word "kidnapping", it must be a crime. Comments by anonymous bloggers are not the law. Seeking relief does not necessarily mean asking the local police to arrest someone. In this case, it means going to civil court, and reminding the court that the custody decree from another state is entitled to full faith and credit, under the statute you cite.

"It is illegal to violate a [court] order" No lie. What else is new?

All you do by denying parental kidnapping is a viable tool for parents whose children were abducted by the other parent is to take hope away from them. If its not a crime then why does the FBI have a site for it?

FBI — Parental Kidnappings

[AK lawyer]

All you do by denying parental kidnapping is a viable tool for parents whose children were abducted by the other parent is to take hope away from them. If its not a crime then why does the FBI have a site for it?

FBI — Parental Kidnappings

All you do by incorrectly telling those parents that "parental kidnapping" is a Federal Crime is to give them a falsehood.

Look at the main case posted there now (for example):

"A warrant for child abduction was issued by Orange County, California, on August 26, 2008. A federal arrest warrant was issued on September 15, 2008, by the United States District Court, Central District of California, after Greenberg-Collins was charged with unlawful flight to avoid prosecution."

The child abduction warrant was issued by a state court.

If your imaginary "parental abduction" federal crime existed, why didn't the federal court issue a warrant for this so-called crime, in addition to one for unlawful flight to avoid prosecution?

All of the "wanted posters" on this site are the same: either the suspect was charged with a state-law crime or "international parental kidnapping". I see no mention of the federal crime you imagine exists in the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act.

[ScottGem]

All you do by incorrectly telling those parents that "parental kidnapping" is a Federal Crime is to give them a falsehood.

I never said it was a federal crime. Only it was a crime.

And I'm not going to argue with you anymore over this. But I will not allow further arguments on this.

[cdad]

That comment is just that, someone's erroneous idea that since the name of the act contains the word "kidnapping", it must be a crime. Comments by anonymous bloggers are not the law. Seeking relief does not necessarily mean asking the local police to arrest someone. In this case, it means going to civil court, and reminding the court that the custody decree from another state is entitled to full faith and credit.

Neither is a title of a statute the law. And if you believe that titles of all statutes are accurate, I happen to own a bridge connecting Manhattan to Brooklyn. Care to buy it? I can make you a very reasonable offer.

"It is illegal to violate a [court] order" No lie. What else is new?

Ok, then lets go one step further.

Ref:

Kidnapping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In criminal law, kidnapping is the taking away or transportation of a person against that person's will, usually to hold the person in false imprisonment, a confinement without legal authority. This may be done for ransom or in furtherance of another crime, or in connection with a child custody dispute. When it is done with legal authority, it is often called arrest or imprisonment.

In some countries such as the United States a large number of child abductions arise after separation or divorce when one parent wishes to keep a child against the will of the other or against a court order. In these cases, some jurisdictions[which?] do not consider it kidnapping if the child, being competent, agrees.


FBI — Family Abductions

How is a missing child defined? By law (specifically the 1982 Missing Children's Act), it's any person younger than 18 whose whereabouts are unknown to his or her legal custodian. Under the act, the circumstances surrounding the disappearance must indicate that the child was removed from the control of his or her legal custodian without the custodian's consent, or the circumstances of the case must strongly indicate that the child is likely to have been abused or sexually exploited.
The criminal processes enable the arrest of the abducting parent but do not specifically order the return of the child, although the child is usually returned when the parent is apprehended. The civil process, on the other hand, facilitates the return of the child but in no way seeks the arrest or return of the abductor. As a result, a criminal process would not be pursued if circumstances indicate it will jeopardize an active Hague Convention civil process.

(END)


If it is good enough for the FBI to show it as kidnapping then that is what it is. Why do you want to argue the contrary ?

[Alty]

Maybe it's time to stop fighting, stop hijacking the thread, and actually help the OP.

Just a thought.