Family of Sevenoaks schoolgirls missing in Thailand make plea for information

[DrLom]

If you abscond with children who are not in your parental custody surely that is abduction.

He shall have been awarded 'custody' for sure, but in Thailand parental responsibility is 50/50 and never intended to be devisive. If the children are in Thailand, then legally (and unfortunately, in this case), and in law, she has as much right to that parental responsibility. Thus, it is not abduction. As soon as he handed them into the 'parental care of mother', on a formal, even if ad hoc, basis, he handed parental responsibility for the time they are with her. If that time was not agreed on paper, in a contractual form, then the mother has done nothing wrong. (again, I re-iterate, unfortunately). Such issues are delicate matters where children are involved, and anybody should read this forum with severity at mind. Sort out the law, before you assume it works the way it does in your home country.

You have no idea what you are talking about. A father is able to get full custody in Thailand. In this case that is what has happened and her not returning the children makes this kidnapping.

Prove what you just said.

[Aussieroaming]

Anyway getting back to the theme of this post...if anyone sees the girls about then call the plod

[DrLom]

I was hoping they would have been found by now.

Has this story been covered by the Thai language national press and TV?

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Im not sure what you're a doctor of but it sure ain't law. Maybe macrame or flower arranging?

If the mother took them from their legal guardian without a court order or the guardians permission its abduction.

That the law here, and and in the west.

If their legal guardian does'nt know where they are, they are missing.

You need to get your facts right before pouring out.

The mother was HANDED the children, quite obviously wihthout written paperwork regarding the time of stay. That is cleat, is it not?

Thus - she didn't TAKE them.

The law of the WEST does not apply here; can you wrap that up in soft cotton wool into your brain?

Yep - they're missing from Daddie's point of view.

Facts are facts - despite your Western FACTS.

[Bender]

If you abscond with children who are not in your parental custody surely that is abduction.

He shall have been awarded 'custody' for sure, but in Thailand parental responsibility is 50/50 and never intended to be devisive. If the children are in Thailand, then legally (and unfortunately, in this case), and in law, she has as much right to that parental responsibility. Thus, it is not abduction. As soon as he handed them into the 'parental care of mother', on a formal, even if ad hoc, basis, he handed parental responsibility for the time they are with her. If that time was not agreed on paper, in a contractual form, then the mother has done nothing wrong. (again, I re-iterate, unfortunately). Such issues are delicate matters where children are involved, and anybody should read this forum with severity at mind. Sort out the law, before you assume it works the way it does in your home country.

You have no idea what you are talking about. A father is able to get full custody in Thailand. In this case that is what has happened and her not returning the children makes this kidnapping.

Prove what you just said.

i smell an old fart...

[Runamile]

Usual Thai Visa pedantry.

Can anybody actually help trace these children?

That is the yardstick for what constitutes a useful contribution.

[Bluespunk]

If you abscond with children who are not in your parental custody surely that is abduction.

When will you Brits "ever" get the message. This is NOT the UK. Good morning. Its long past due time, to wake-up, and smell the coffee. This IS still the Kingdom of Siam. Possession here is definitely 9/10th. of the law. And no! Its not a Thai News Media, "News Worthy" story. Care to venture a guess, as to why not?

A: I'm not a Brit. lived there most of my life till my 20s though, so guess that's a mistake that many make ;-].

B: the police are searching for the mother in order to return the children to their father. So possession is not 9/10 of the law it would seem.

C: it's not the Kingdom of Siam, it's Thailand.

D: I'm awake. Are you?

Edited August 12, 2014 by Bluespunk

[Tony125]

I was hoping they would have been found by now.

Has this story been covered by the Thai language national press and TV?

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Im not sure what you're a doctor of but it sure ain't law. Maybe macrame or flower arranging?

If the mother took them from their legal guardian without a court order or the guardians permission its abduction.

That the law here, and and in the west.

If their legal guardian does'nt know where they are, they are missing.

You need to get your facts right before pouring out.

The mother was HANDED the children, quite obviously wihthout written paperwork regarding the time of stay. That is cleat, is it not?

Thus - she didn't TAKE them.

The law of the WEST does not apply here; can you wrap that up in soft cotton wool into your brain?

Yep - they're missing from Daddie's point of view.

Facts are facts - despite your Western FACTS.

It was stated weeks ago that the courts in THAILAND gave the father FULL custody which is why they were living with him in England. He brought them back for a visit. You make it sound like "Oh once he turns them over she has custody" Really? So how long can she keep them 10 weeks? 10 years? He has legal custody given to him by Thai court which is why once he showed the paperwork to Thai police and they saw she had no joint 50/50 custody rights they issued a warrent for her arrest. The reason why they say her new husband may be aisisting her is he basically is hiding as well.

[atyclb]

If you abscond with children who are not in your parental custody surely that is abduction.

He shall have been awarded 'custody' for sure, but in Thailand parental responsibility is 50/50 and never intended to be devisive. If the children are in Thailand, then legally (and unfortunately, in this case), and in law, she has as much right to that parental responsibility. Thus, it is not abduction. As soon as he handed them into the 'parental care of mother', on a formal, even if ad hoc, basis, he handed parental responsibility for the time they are with her. If that time was not agreed on paper, in a contractual form, then the mother has done nothing wrong. (again, I re-iterate, unfortunately). Such issues are delicate matters where children are involved, and anybody should read this forum with severity at mind. Sort out the law, before you assume it works the way it does in your home country.

I am sure the last thing Mr. Day needs is the advice from another barstool lawyer, I would imagine by now he knows exactly what the laws are and what his rights are.

As for parental responsibility being 50/50, your correct it is, until a court order is issued otherwise: ie. FULL CUSTODY

IMO pseudo self delusional barstool lawyer. chatting a real lawyer on a barstool is a pleasantly enlightening experience. evan non lawyers can easily understand concepts like "court awarded full custody"

[atyclb]

heres a pic of the mother. i have seen that empty indifferent facial expression many times in dealing with an alcoholic female.

[DrLom]

heres a pic of the mother. i have seen that empty indifferent facial expression many times in dealing with an alcoholic female.

Rhetoric doesn't quite help on this one.

[simondan]

I was hoping they would have been found by now.

Has this story been covered by the Thai language national press and TV?

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Im not sure what you're a doctor of but it sure ain't law. Maybe macrame or flower arranging?

If the mother took them from their legal guardian without a court order or the guardians permission its abduction.

That the law here, and and in the west.

If their legal guardian does'nt know where they are, they are missing.

You need to get your facts right before pouring out.

The mother was HANDED the children, quite obviously wihthout written paperwork regarding the time of stay. That is cleat, is it not?

Thus - she didn't TAKE them.

The law of the WEST does not apply here; can you wrap that up in soft cotton wool into your brain?

Yep - they're missing from Daddie's point of view.

Facts are facts - despite your Western FACTS.

If you are handed something/someone (kids, a car, a phone, anything thats not yours in law) and the agreement is you will return it/them at a certain time, but instead you p@ss off with it/them without lawful excuse, I would hazard a guess thats stealing in any culture my learned friend.

Its a pretty basic social and legal principle! And its not solely western!

She clearly took them - you can split hairs all you want about the meaning of 'took' but she had no right to them (it seems, and the Thai police agree prima facie) after the date and time she agreed to return them.

You can say black is white all you like but it dont make it so!

BTW, can I borrow your car for the weekend? I promise I will have it back Sunday night....or whenever.

[DrLom]

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Im not sure what you're a doctor of but it sure ain't law. Maybe macrame or flower arranging?

If the mother took them from their legal guardian without a court order or the guardians permission its abduction.

That the law here, and and in the west.

If their legal guardian does'nt know where they are, they are missing.

You need to get your facts right before pouring out.

The mother was HANDED the children, quite obviously wihthout written paperwork regarding the time of stay. That is cleat, is it not?

Thus - she didn't TAKE them.

The law of the WEST does not apply here; can you wrap that up in soft cotton wool into your brain?

Yep - they're missing from Daddie's point of view.

Facts are facts - despite your Western FACTS.

It was stated weeks ago that the courts in THAILAND gave the father FULL custody which is why they were living with him in England. He brought them back for a visit. You make it sound like "Oh once he turns them over she has custody" Really? So how long can she keep them 10 weeks? 10 years? He has legal custody given to him by Thai court which is why once he showed the paperwork to Thai police and they saw she had no joint 50/50 custody rights they issued a warrent for her arrest. The reason why they say her new husband may be aisisting her is he basically is hiding as well.

Do you know the legalities of the custody offer made? Normally, conducive to if you want full custody - take them and be gone. The mother never loses 50% parental care, unless she is a convicted person, in Thailand. Why do you keep on looking at this from a Western law point of view?

[DrLom]

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Im not sure what you're a doctor of but it sure ain't law. Maybe macrame or flower arranging?

If the mother took them from their legal guardian without a court order or the guardians permission its abduction.

That the law here, and and in the west.

If their legal guardian does'nt know where they are, they are missing.

You need to get your facts right before pouring out.

The mother was HANDED the children, quite obviously wihthout written paperwork regarding the time of stay. That is cleat, is it not?

Thus - she didn't TAKE them.

The law of the WEST does not apply here; can you wrap that up in soft cotton wool into your brain?

Yep - they're missing from Daddie's point of view.

Facts are facts - despite your Western FACTS.

If you are handed something/someone (kids, a car, a phone, anything thats not yours in law) and the agreement is you will return it/them at a certain time, but instead you p@ss off with it/them without lawful excuse, I would hazard a guess thats stealing in any culture my learned friend.

Its a pretty basic social and legal principle! And its not solely western!

She clearly took them - you can split hairs all you want about the meaning of 'took' but she had no right to them (it seems, and the Thai police agree prima facie) after the date and time she agreed to return them.

You can say black is white all you like but it dont make it so!

BTW, can I borrow your car for the weekend? I promise I will have it back Sunday night....or whenever.

What date and time did she agree to return the children again?

Edited August 12, 2014 by DrLom

[DrLom]

He shall have been awarded 'custody' for sure, but in Thailand parental responsibility is 50/50 and never intended to be devisive. If the children are in Thailand, then legally (and unfortunately, in this case), and in law, she has as much right to that parental responsibility. Thus, it is not abduction. As soon as he handed them into the 'parental care of mother', on a formal, even if ad hoc, basis, he handed parental responsibility for the time they are with her. If that time was not agreed on paper, in a contractual form, then the mother has done nothing wrong. (again, I re-iterate, unfortunately). Such issues are delicate matters where children are involved, and anybody should read this forum with severity at mind. Sort out the law, before you assume it works the way it does in your home country.

I am sure the last thing Mr. Day needs is the advice from another barstool lawyer, I would imagine by now he knows exactly what the laws are and what his rights are.

As for parental responsibility being 50/50, your correct it is, until a court order is issued otherwise: ie. FULL CUSTODY

IMO pseudo self delusional barstool lawyer. chatting a real lawyer on a barstool is a pleasantly enlightening experience. evan non lawyers can easily understand concepts like "court awarded full custody"

Another Westerner talking with a Western point of view. You never left home - did you Peter Pans?

[shanahan]

He shall have been awarded 'custody' for sure, but in Thailand parental responsibility is 50/50 and never intended to be devisive. If the children are in Thailand, then legally (and unfortunately, in this case), and in law, she has as much right to that parental responsibility. Thus, it is not abduction. As soon as he handed them into the 'parental care of mother', on a formal, even if ad hoc, basis, he handed parental responsibility for the time they are with her. If that time was not agreed on paper, in a contractual form, then the mother has done nothing wrong. (again, I re-iterate, unfortunately). Such issues are delicate matters where children are involved, and anybody should read this forum with severity at mind. Sort out the law, before you assume it works the way it does in your home country.

I am sure the last thing Mr. Day needs is the advice from another barstool lawyer, I would imagine by now he knows exactly what the laws are and what his rights are.

As for parental responsibility being 50/50, your correct it is, until a court order is issued otherwise: ie. FULL CUSTODY

IMO pseudo self delusional barstool lawyer. chatting a real lawyer on a barstool is a pleasantly enlightening experience. evan non lawyers can easily understand concepts like "court awarded full custody"

Another Westerner talking with a Western point of view. You never left home - did you Peter Pans?

What part of a Thai court (not western) awarded him 100% custody of the kids that you can't grasp?

[spectrumisgreen]

If you abscond with children who are not in your parental custody surely that is abduction.

Of course it is! Some dolt not-so-cleverly quoting dictionary 'by definitions' to make a point is actually missing the point entirely!!.. these girls have been snatched (my definition!), as you say by someone who doesn't have them in their 'parental custody'!!.. yep, that (by any court's definition!!) is abduction and always will be!!!

Edited August 12, 2014 by spectrumisgreen

[Runamile]

My best hopes for this thread were:

1. Information.

2. Suggestions how to trace the mother.

My expectations were:

1. A load of pedantry around the legal status of the case.

2. Calls to arms - meaning suggestions that a few farangs with baseball bats would likely achieve more than the police.

3. Suggestions that tea money should be paid, or greater tea money should be paid, if the police retirement fund has already been enhanced.

So, I've been disappointed on two counts, but number 1 is being resolutely pursued. Anybody got any information? Anybody got any ideas on how to trace, especially given the limited geographic parameters.

[ericthai]

If you abscond with children who are not in your parental custody surely that is abduction.

He shall have been awarded 'custody' for sure, but in Thailand parental responsibility is 50/50 and never intended to be devisive. If the children are in Thailand, then legally (and unfortunately, in this case), and in law, she has as much right to that parental responsibility. Thus, it is not abduction. As soon as he handed them into the 'parental care of mother', on a formal, even if ad hoc, basis, he handed parental responsibility for the time they are with her. If that time was not agreed on paper, in a contractual form, then the mother has done nothing wrong. (again, I re-iterate, unfortunately). Such issues are delicate matters where children are involved, and anybody should read this forum with severity at mind. Sort out the law, before you assume it works the way it does in your home country.

You have no idea what you are talking about. A father is able to get full custody in Thailand. In this case that is what has happened and her not returning the children makes this kidnapping.

Prove what you just said.

What do you want me to prove that a father can get full custody? That will take a few days as i have to get my friend to give me a copy of his judgement from Thai court.

To prove the mother has commited kidnapping well, the police have issued an arrest warrant for her. Are you not reading what is going on?

[Basil B]

What date and time did she agree to return the children again?

Well when she is arrested will you be representing her? (do they allow council to sit on bar stools?)

The judge will probably send both of you down.

Which I think may be very unfortunate for he, even though she has committed a crime nothing so far has convinced me otherwise that she is a mother who loves her children, it is a sorry situation that seems to come about because she deserted her children for what ever reason.

Most important thing is to get the children back to their farther.

Edit in: Just twigged the good Dr, who only registered last week, googled "Lom"

Edited August 12, 2014 by Basil B

[HughJass]

go to the mothers home town and offer the police and the grandparents 500,000 baht for information leading to the recovery of the kids...the police will twist a few arms or the gp will cash their daughter in for the money

[claffey]

just so sad for the kids they come to Thailand with their Dad (who foolishly trusted his ex - well she IS Thai) and then she puts her needs above the law AND the kids AND the Dad, but as I said, she IS Thai and they have no concept of ethics as far as I have been able to see in the years I have been here

anyway good luck and hope they are home soon and NEVER set eyes on their mother again

You live in a country where you obviously mistrust the people and are almost racist against them!!! Perhaps the circles you move in involve people you cant trust..this attitude is unhelpful in this post and in my opinion should be removed...

[Runamile]

My view is also "motivational", be it money or baseball bats, with either to family, friends, fellow villagers (I'm assuming there that's she's not from Ayudthaya city, but nearby). I'd look into friends from other areas. My assumption there is a bar girl history; and they can be very close. That, obviously means tracing that history in Pattaya and Phuket. The solution may lie in any known area that the woman has been involved in, but equally, for instance, Isaan.

Do I believe the police are doing any of this? No. Or, at least, not without quantum amounts of tea money - another part of my comment in the previous paragraph.

[GAZZPA]

I was hoping they would have been found by now.

Has this story been covered by the Thai language national press and TV?

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Of course they are abducted, she has taken them with the intent of not returning them, that is abduction. The Thai police have issued a warrant for her arrest so it seems they disagree with your "analysis".

These girls need to be returned, their father and family is distraught. Your comments are not helpful.

I hope they are returned safe and sound very soon.

[Acharn]

I doubt by now they are very much 'missing in Thailand'.

Edit: Also, they were not abducted; they were handed to mother by father for a visit. If she absconded with them, then that by definition is not abducting.

The article needs to get its facts right before pouring out, as yet, still unknowns.

Don't know what your point is. In all American states this kind of thing is kidnapping, or abduction, if you will. I think the federal law includes it, but am not sure. It is unfortunately not uncommon. Sometimes it is used in divorce cases as a way to pressure the other party to a more favorable settlement. Sometimes it's because the parent who was denied custody believes they should have custody despite the court's finding. It's very rare for a child to be kidnapped by a stranger -- almost all kidnappings are by family members or persons well known to the child. Are you saying that under English law this is not abduction?

Why do you think they are no longer in Thailand?

[Thongkorn]

If it is believed that the new husband has anything to do with this he could find himself barred from Thailand.

Being barred from Thailand is not necessarily a bad thing.

See ya!

can you just feel the Love of Thai visa posters.

[luckyman]

Can't be too hard to find those kids here in Thailand as soon as the Army gets involved, unless there is more to this story.....

Edited August 12, 2014 by luckyman

[MrBlobby99]

I don't know if the BiB could do this legally, and I am just spouting off after looking at my 2 kids and thinking about this.

What I would want to see if I was the father though is an appeal to the boyfriend, in all the newspapers, saying.

"We don't know if you have anything to do with it and if you don't and are on a beach somewhere fine, drop into the police station and let us know.

If on the other hand you do know something, you are an accessory to a very serious crime, if you help us recover the kids we will take you to the airport and put you on an airplane, best not to come back.

If you don't come forward, when we find you, when not if. We are going to inspect every millimeter of your large intestine everyday for the next 15 years!"

I bet that would get buddy thinking!

There is every chance that the boyfriend has absolutely no idea that the kids are being looked for. The newspapers and TV should start publishing his name and picture asap, and call him in.

'There is every chance that the boyfriend has absolutely no idea'

I am sorry, but I think it is the other way around, and he is not 'the new boyfriend' he is the new 'husband'.

You think your wife can just abduct 2 children under your nose and not know about it or even be suspicious?

No matter what this woman may have told her new husband, or even convinced him the real father no longer wants the girls and the girls will go along with this story?... against their father they have exclusively lived with all their cognitive life?

The kids must be going nuts for a dad who they almost certainly have a lot of love for. Their stronger bond will be with their father. That is nothing other than pure logic.

These kids are being held against their will, I can almost guarantee that, and I can almost guarantee that the 'new husband' knows everything he is in fact involved with.

Also, The mother is on the run, and obviously there are many places she can no longer go, surely that would ring alarm bells..... Could this woman fool YOU in this situation???.. I doubt that.

I have a very sneaky and niggling suspicion that the member DrLom who seems to be just about the only person on this thread taking the defensive stance for the mother in the face of huge criticism, and the way his defense seems to be constructed seems to be that of someone who is living in blind denial.

I have a very slight suspicion that DrLom could well be the 'new husband'... Just my own personal suspicion. I just can't see any other motivation for his rationale.

Anyway, the 'new husband' is also missing and not been seen for the same amount of time as these little girls. The police would have almost certainly checked out his registered address on his visa. By law he has obviously failed to inform the immigration service about his change of circumstances. Maybe I am wrong, but I assume if you no longer live at the address on your visa, then you have to declare it immediately.

Maybe his 90 days report is almost up, and you definitely have to do that... If he does not show at an immigration, then he is going down for a long time when the authorities get him.... The BiB apathy in most of these cases is one thing, but once the farang is here illegally and now part of the case, then if Thailand is true to its xenophobic attitude, I can see it being ramped up with police, army, immigration and a certain embassy getting involved.

[MrBlobby99]

Just offer a couple of million Baht reward for their return - instant action guaranteed.

You are absolutely correct.

The money they have piled into this, if it was instead made available as a cash reward and used facebook etc to send it viral, I would think it would be just days before someone found them... Probably a family member of the mother.

[Jools]

Sadly, I suspect that they've been dead for quite some time, now. Medieval punishment for their abductors/murderers.

[metisdead]

Some off topic posts and replies have been removed as well as a post in violation of fair use policy.