Mother Finds Kidnapped Children On Facebook

[appleblush]

First of all, this isn't too uncommon. Often police use Facebook to hunt for criminals. This is more a case of vigilante style though.

Secondly, to all the people here going "THAT WOMAN IS A *****! SHE TORE APART THEIR FAMILY", please, stop talking. The minute you start feeling sympathetic and saying that he should be let off the hook for doing a terrible thing (and kidnapping is ALWAYS terrible) you're essentially assuming you know exactly what these kids want, exactly what these kids remember, and exactly what will effect these kids. Have you stopped for a few seconds to ask if they ever wondered about their mom? If they DID know about their mom but never searched because apparently they were that far away? You have no right to be calling this woman a ***** - her children were taken from her and she found them and you would do the exact same thing. One of the kids is an adult and the other is almost an adult so I doubt they're THAT psychologically scarred and I guarantee they're fairly understanding of the situation and if they really don't want to live with mom which I doubt is the case then they can just live on their own since they're both almost old enough to take care of themselves anyway.

You can't just let this man go free even after kidnapping his wife's children just because "Oh what about the kids" because then you're justifying HUNDREDS of kidnappings in which very young children were kidnapped and not found until years later. It's illegal. He should be punished. They have programs and counseling that is specifically designed to help children who have been kidnapped and reconnecting with family is apart of that. Stop acting like you're sympathetic and treating this woman like the enemy - she lost her children for 15 years. You imagine that. Imagine you have two beautiful children and the next day they're gone and you have to live never knowing what could have been and not being able to watch them grow up and then suddenly you find them. IMAGINE THAT. I HIGHLY DOUBT YOU WOULD SIT ON YOUR ASS AND GO "Oh, well I bet they don't even remember me."

 

[SarahSyna]

2) While the father may have overacted, I happen to be optimistic towards him, mainly becuase I haven't heard of any abuse coming from this case yet. Meanwhile, we have a mom who spent fifteen years searching, and finds her kids through facebook when they're practically adults; any competent person wouldn't have needed that much time and would've been able to find their kids before they're ready to ship off to college.

Personally, I'd like to know why you're optimistic towards the person who stole two children away from their mother who, more likely than not, loved them, certainly enough to spend fifteen years of her life searching at least. Or why you think that the woman doesn't deserve her children because of competence. What does competence have to do with it? What about her sheer dedication to finding them? On one hand we have a kidnapper who may have emotionally damaged the children by tearing them away from their mother (even if he had good intentions), one the other hand we have someone who spent fifteen years searching for said kids, even if she wasn't very good at it.

And whose fault is that? Whose fault is all of that?

Seems like the moms.

Now this you really do have to explain. She's not the one who kidnapped the children, he is. He's clearly to blame because he's the one who started this whole mess to begin with. If she hadn;t kidnapped them then she would never have to have gone searching.

Look, I understand what you are getting at, I really do. But your perception of the situation is exactly backwards. So, we are supposed to blame the victim, rather then the perpetrator? That's like saying "Well, if she wasn't so pretty and fragile, she wouldn't have gotten raped, now would she?"

You do realize that the victims are the kids, right?

And that kids are being separated from the dad they've known all their life, right?

It's not only the children but the mother as well. She had her children taken away from her by someone that she clearly must have loved and trusted at some point. She and the children are victims.

That was his fault. Are you really saying that they should stay with the kidnapper simply because they've known him for ages? 'Oh sure, he did a bad thing and all, but hey! They're used to him!' Would you say different if he wasn't a blood relation?
Just because he's their dad and because they've grown up with him doesn't make what he did right and it does not mean the law should be waived for him.

You can't just let this man go free even after kidnapping his wife's children just because "Oh what about the kids" because then you're justifying HUNDREDS of kidnappings in which very young children were kidnapped and not found until years later. It's illegal. He should be punished. They have programs and counseling that is specifically designed to help children who have been kidnapped and reconnecting with family is apart of that. Stop acting like you're sympathetic and treating this woman like the enemy - she lost her children for 15 years. You imagine that. Imagine you have two beautiful children and the next day they're gone and you have to live never knowing what could have been and not being able to watch them grow up and then suddenly you find them. IMAGINE THAT. I HIGHLY DOUBT YOU WOULD SIT ON YOUR ASS AND GO "Oh, well I bet they don't even remember me."

Well said. (All of it, but especially that)

 

[infinity_turtles]

snipped

1. Just because the law isn't infallible doesn't mean that he had to resort to kidnapping the children. There's appeals and all sorts of things, no need to resort to criminality from the get-go. The fact that he told her that she would never see them again makes it look a lot less lovingly motivated as well, since that seems quite like a taunt.

2. Well, I'm sorry that you suffered like that, and I do hope that life has treated you well since.
However, that seems less like 'women' and more like 'people with personality disorders'. No well-adjusted human being acts like that. Plus, that behaviour seems more fitting of the father in the story, since he's the one who went to the extreme of kidnapping and therefore is more likely to be the one that was all 'You can't have them!' than she is.

3. If she's that unstable to spend fifteen years looking for unwanted children just to slight her husband then I'm fairly certain he would have gotten the kids to begin with. As a general rule courts don't let crazy people take care of children and crazy that big usually has signs.

1) Just because she said he said that, doesn't mean he did. Honestly, that bit really does seem made up. The kidnapping shouldn't have gotten very far if he told her that in anything other than a note. Also, appeals can take years and aren't a guarantee, during which time, it's very likely his kids would've been taught to hate him.

2) It has actually. Thanks. But to the point, I was speaking from my experience, and the experiences those I've known. Based on that, women seem more likely to act against the other person just to act against them, while men usually try to cut off contact as much as possible. And I don't think him kidnapping them shows that he was more inclined to be playing keep away then the mother. If she was trying to keep him from his kids legally, the fact that he'd used illegal means to get around that makes sense.

3) I'm not saying that's the only reason she wanted her kids. I'm saying that it's quite possible she was trying to keep the kids from him, not for the kids sake, but out of spite for her ex-husband. I'm not sure how well I just communicated that, so to rephrase; I think it's possible that the mother, out of spite, tried to get full custody and deny the father the ability to see and help raise his kids. This doesn't mean she didn't love her kids, just that she hated her former husband enough to not want him to have anything to do with them, even it wasn't necessarily bad for them. I'm not saying this is actually what happened, so much as it's a possibility. That's why I think judging the situation immediately is bad.

 

[no one really]

That's it? Just an apple tree? She doesn't relly love them!

 

[infinity_turtles]

you would do the exact same thing.

No, if they were in good enough care that they're playing farmeville, I think what I'd do is go visit and try and restore a connection to them without destroying whatever life they happen to have. I'd definitely want to reconnect with them obviously, and I'd probably very much hate the other parent, but I'd be mindful of their lives; Both because I want them to be happy, and because I wouldn't want them to be bitter and hateful towards me. This is a situation that, not matter the circumstances and in the best interest of the children, needed to be dealt with very carefully. Instead, a hammer was applied.

 

[SarahSyna]

snipped

(Snipped!)

1) Just because she said he said that, doesn't mean he did. Honestly, that bit really does seem made up. The kidnapping shouldn't have gotten very far if he told her that in anything other than a note. Also, appeals can take years and aren't a guarantee, during which time, it's very likely his kids would've been taught to hate him.

2) It has actually. Thanks. But to the point, I was speaking from my experience, and the experiences those I've known. Based on that, women seem more likely to act against the other person just to act against them, while men usually try to cut off contact as much as possible. And I don't think him kidnapping them shows that he was more inclined to be playing keep away then the mother. If she was trying to keep him from his kids legally, the fact that he'd used illegal means to get around that makes sense.

3) I'm not saying that's the only reason she wanted her kids. I'm saying that it's quite possible she was trying to keep the kids from him, not for the kids sake, but out of spite for her ex-husband. I'm not sure how well I just communicated that, so to rephrase; I think it's possible that the mother, out of spite, tried to get full custody and deny the father the ability to see and help raise his kids. This doesn't mean she didn't love her kids, just that she hated her former husband enough to not want him to have anything to do with them, even it wasn't necessarily bad for them. I'm not saying this is actually what happened, so much as it's a possibility. That's why I think judging the situation immediately is bad.

1. He may have also used a phone. And even so, most rational people would still appeal rather than kidnap. Morality tends towards legal routes for some reason.

2. The reason I think the kidnapping is a sign that he's more likely to have bad intentions is because 1) it's illegal, 2) it's highly cruel. He must have known how much it would hurt her AND the children. At that age it's really not good for them to lose a highly important part of their world so abruptly.

3. It is possible, yes, but I personally would give her the benefit of the doubt. Also, though I'm not sure, wouldn't it be very unlikely for her to get FULL custody without a good reason, such as him being abusive or insane? I mean, I have a friend whose mother's side tend to be suffer schizophrenia, her brother and sister both suffer it and live with their mother, and by law she still must visit them each summer. I'd say the only reason it's each summer and not every second week is because she's in Ireland and they're in America.

Edit:

you would do the exact same thing.

No, if they were in good enough care that they're playing farmeville, I think what I'd do is go visit and try and restore a connection to them without destroying whatever life they happen to have. I'd definitely want to reconnect with them obviously, and I'd probably very much hate the other parent, but I'd be mindful of their lives; Both because I want them to be happy, and because I wouldn't want them to be bitter and hateful towards me. This is a situation that, not matter the circumstances and in the best interest of the children, needed to be dealt with very carefully. Instead, a hammer was applied.

She had no guarantee he'd even let her in the door to see them, or that he wouldn't simply abscond with them again. Once bitten, twice shy. If someone you had trusted enough to marry took your children, would you give them a chance to do the same thing again?

Plus, what he did was still illegal. I'm not too up on American laws, but I'm fairly certain that you have to report crimes. She might have gotten into trouble elsewise.

 

[infinity_turtles]

1. He may have also used a phone. And even so, most rational people would still appeal rather than kidnap. Morality tends towards legal routes for some reason.

2. The reason I think the kidnapping is a sign that he's more likely to have bad intentions is because 1) it's illegal, 2) it's highly cruel. He must have known how much it would hurt her AND the children. At that age it's really not good for them to lose a highly important part of their world so abruptly.

3. It is possible, yes, but I personally would give her the benefit of the doubt. Also, though I'm not sure, wouldn't it be very unlikely for her to get FULL custody without a good reason, such as him being abusive or insane? I mean, I have a friend whose mother's side tend to be suffer schizophrenia, her brother and sister both suffer it and live with their mother, and by law she still must visit them each summer. I'd say the only reason it's each summer and not every second week is because she's in Ireland and they're in America.

1) A phone is possible, but most uses of a phone would make it fairly easy to track him down. I do disagree that morality tends towards legal routes. The law is a system of rules that are made by flawed people and applied by those same flawed people. Any case where people make a mistake when applying the law makes it difficult to legally combat it. The justice system hates to admit it's made a mistake, because that's a reminder that the law isn't infallible.

2)I don't see illegality as a sign of wrongdoing, so I'm simply going to ignore that. As for it being cruel, at their age, they probably barely even realized what happened. The fact that it's cruel to her doesn't really matter to me in this case. Sure, it's regretful, but the welfare of the kids is the issue.

3) All the reason she'd need is that she's moving to another state for full custody. That wouldn't deny him visitation rights though. If the divorce were bad enough though, even if it's due to her actions, she might be able to deny him visitation rights solely because their fighting would be bad for the children. I've never heard of this being applied to older children though.

Even if he keeps visitation rights though, move far enough away and that means he'd rarely get to see them. Even if you can see them every now and then, not being able to be a significant part of your kids life just because someone hates you is rather harsh.

She had no guarantee he'd even let her in the door to see them, or that he wouldn't simply abscond with them again. Once bitten, twice shy. If someone you had trusted enough to marry took your children, would you give them a chance to do the same thing again?

Plus, what he did was still illegal. I'm not too up on American laws, but I'm fairly certain that you have to report crimes. She might have gotten into trouble elsewise.

You're supposed to report crimes, but in this case, if you don't, nothing is going to happen. I think I've also made it clear I don't particularly care for laws. I'd also hope that any loving parent would, even if they care about the law, care about their children's happiness more.

Doing that successfully with two kids in highschool isn't going to happen. Once they were found that time, that was it. Running away wouldn't have worked.

 

[Liquid Paradox]

2) While the father may have overacted, I happen to be optimistic towards him, mainly becuase I haven't heard of any abuse coming from this case yet. Meanwhile, we have a mom who spent fifteen years searching, and finds her kids through facebook when they're practically adults; any competent person wouldn't have needed that much time and would've been able to find their kids before they're ready to ship off to college.

See, this right here is why I couldn't tell if you were serious. Who are you to say that the mother is incompetent? As another member has stated in this thread, if finding missing persons was an easy task, there would be a lot less missing people.

by the way, kidnapping children and forcibly keeping them away from their mother does kind of sound like abuse to me. Searching for them for 15 years, on the other hand, does not.

3) Just becuase I happen to look at the situation differently, that doesn't mean I have a "jaded view", it means I'm simply means I'm looking at it in a different perspective.

I wasn't calling you jaded for having a different view, that would be silly. I was calling you jaded for having that particular view. Specifically, about the incompetent mother thing.

1) First of all, you have no damn prove that he was psychopath, so quit trying to make the dad out like some kind of monster and the mom like some damsel in distress.

Well, the father kidnapped two small children. I don't know weather he treated them well or badly, but I do know that he kept them from their mother for 15 years. Sounds like a monster to me. Besides, My assumption that he is a monster for kidnapping children is no worse then your assumption that the mother is a monster because she couldn't find them, except that my assuption is at least somewhat logical.

2) You don't know what their lives are going to be like, either.

I never claimed, nor implied, that I did.

3) Yes. I'm sure they were alot happier before they knew that their dad kidnapped them.

Yes, I agree with you on that point. They would be happy hugging the man who stole them from their mother; the man who lied to them their entire lives, who knew damn well why they didn't know their mother.

4) "Ignorance is bliss" is an expression, meaning that some times not knowing something is more pleasant than knowing. I wasn't calling you ignorant.

Yes, I know the expression. and I apologize that I mistook your statement for a personal attack

Now, how do you know that dad was crazy, again?

Because he kidnapped two young children. even if he believed his cause was noble, he is crazy.

And whose fault is that? Whose fault is all of that?

Seems like the moms.

Well, the mother never kidnapped her children; all she did was find them.

You do realize that the victims are the kids, right?

And that kids are being separated from the dad they've known all their life, right?

And that we aren't sure the mom even knows what these kids are like and how they might be fell towards the women who just separated them from their dad, right?

Yes, I know that the children are the victims. I never said anything to imply that they weren't. However, you cannot tell me that the mother is not also a victim.

As far as the whole "kids being separated from their dad" and "The mom doesn't even know what these kids are like or how they may feel about her after she took them away from her father" argument, well I ask you again. Who was the one who committed a heinous crime, one which, by all accounts, destroyed the family? Whose selfishness started all of this?

And you have no proof that the mom was doing the right thing.

Nor was I trying to imply that she was, only that it doesn't make any sense to immediately assume that she was doing the wrong thing.

 

[King of the N00bs]

true the father made a dick move but....I can tell those kids will majorly disagree with their mother on an uncountable amount of issues..I very well can vouch for that: as it is said often the good of the many overcomes the good of the few.

don't get me wrong...I just think that both parents acted rather selfishly and hatefully towards one another. Although the dad was the first one to strike out, this sounds like both parents clearly didn't like each other and each thought that the other one was dangerous for the children to grow up around

a strange thought just popped into my head....

and still my guitar gently weeps....*sigh*

 

[Booze Zombie]

Poor woman.
I guess Facebook does have some uses, like this and people playing malicious tricks on each other.

Not sure if this is a happy or a sad story, though.

 

[The Great JT]

That is effin' amazing. I love stories like this, where something I hate results in something like this.

 

[Nukey]

-snip-

-snip-

Because I've got important business to attend to and I can't waste anymore time trolling arguing with you lot, I'm going to leave with some comments from a very wise, level headed user, who seems to have explained the situation better than I was able to.

I think that most people are just looking at the fact that they were kidnapped. But they don't see the psychological trauma that taking the children away from the only parent that they have really known and then throwing them to some person that says that she is there mother, but it in reality just a complete stranger to them can cause.

I kinda agree with your stand point in that case. They don't know their mother, and she doesn't know them. So who knows if them meeting again is going to be actually good for either party.

Do you see what I've been trying to say?

I'm defending the dad becuase he was actually there for the kids, when the moms seems to have simply stumbled upon her kids playing a fricking computer.

He broke the law and committed an awful crime, I'm aware of that. But that dad, even if is a criminal, still raised them and kept them under a roof. Meanwhile the mom just wants her kids back.

Who seems more selfish? The dad who raised them, or the mom who just wants to see her kids again and had no problem separating them from the only parent they knew to do so?

 

[Gasaraki]

I'd be pretty pissed if some woman who I hadn't talked to in 15 years and probably didn't even have any memories of just decided to take away my parent and expected me to live with her.

 

[Aura Guardian]

Dear lord this thread is appalling.

Just try to imagine you are the mother. Your children, your own flesh and blood, were taken from you at such a young age that you never even got to spend much time with them. You searched a long time for them, but nothing ever came from it. Then you suddenly find one of them. Would you not be overjoyed? Would you not want to see the children that were stolen from you 15 years ago? I would.

Yes, it will be hard for the two children to build a relationship with their mother and adapt to a new home. Maybe in the end it would have been better to leave them with the father. Maybe the father was justified in trying to run away with the kids, and the mother is the irresponsible parent. But none of that has been revealed yet. You don't know why the father left with the children. So I don't understand why people are calling this women a selfish ***** when all she wanted to do was get her children back, which is a perfectly normal thing for a mother to want.

THANK YOU! She just wanted her kids back from her kidnapper and apparently she's the villain according to mostly everyone. Riiiight.

 

[antipunt]

Wow, what luck. Facebook JUSTICE?!

 

[CrazedRaptor]

Not gonna lie, this is pretty awesome. I'm happy for those kids n their mom. hopefully they'll be able restart, considering they hardly started life together.

 

[Blueruler182]

They probably bonded with the father more by now, well, good job destroying that relation Mrs.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Fifteen years, probably don't even remember having a mother. She just wrecked a family. Well, except for the eighteen year old, who's legally allowed to do whatever the fuck, but the other one, she just wrecked a family...

Dear lord this thread is appalling.

Just try to imagine you are the mother. Your children, your own flesh and blood, were taken from you at such a young age that you never even got to spend much time with them. You searched a long time for them, but nothing ever came from it. Then you suddenly find one of them. Would you not be overjoyed? Would you not want to see the children that were stolen from you 15 years ago? I would.

Yes, it will be hard for the two children to build a relationship with their mother and adapt to a new home. Maybe in the end it would have been better to leave them with the father. Maybe the father was justified in trying to run away with the kids, and the mother is the irresponsible parent. But none of that has been revealed yet. You don't know why the father left with the children. So I don't understand why people are calling this women a selfish ***** when all she wanted to do was get her children back, which is a perfectly normal thing for a mother to want.

THANK YOU! She just wanted her kids back from her kidnapper and apparently she's the villain according to mostly everyone. Riiiight.

I see the logic, it's very clear, but the fact of the matter is that the sane thing to do is to sit down with the father and discuss something. Or sit down with the child and discuss something. You don't just uproot your children because of a maternal need. If you actually love them you'd find a way to work it out, while the blackmailing the father with uprooting them because of a maternal need.

 

[firefly000]

of course... farmville

 

[Jfswift]

Good thing the kids didn't jump on the Quit Facebook day bandwagon.

yea.. I was thinking that too >.>