Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > General Chat

General Chat This forum is for discussing anything that doesn't fit into another forum, or for discussing things that are off topic, or just for general venting.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #41  
Old 10-22-2012, 02:00 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

RE: Victim Impact Statement
October 22, 2012

Dear Honourable Madame Justice J.F. Kenkel,

I am not a direct victim of the crime and the following is my relationship to this case:

I have come to know the struggles surrounding the abduction Christopher and Alexander Watkins from their court ordered custodial father Mr. Stephen Watkins through valiant efforts to bring much needed attention to the problems facing all Canadians in relation to parental child abduction in contravention of section 283.(1) and 282.(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

I have not been solicited for this statement but, kindly request that this honourable court consider this victim impact statement with regards to the sentencing of Mr. Tadeusz Ustaszewk on October 24, 2012.

How has the conduct of Mr. Tadeusz Ustaszewk impacted me?

The conduct of Mr. Ustaszewk has impacted me, as a citizen of Ontario, Canada, in the following ways:

1. Mr. Ustaszewk’s conduct has me question the applicability of Section 283.(1) and 282.(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. If our law enforcement agencies, officers of the court, government (municipal, provincial and federal) and society truly understands why child abduction by a parent in either situation is outlined in the Criminal Code of Canada and why it even exists as a law.

2. It has me question if “the best interests of the child” is really the consideration that law enforcement, the Children’s Aid Society, officers of the court, government (municipal, provincial and federal) and Canadian society truly understands the determining factor regarding child custody.

3. It has me question if perjury before the Family Court is even a weighting factor in the determination of custody and access in matrimonial disputes. If and why perjury is acceptable conduct before the Family Courts. I continually question what could have been done to protect Christopher and Alexander Watkins prior to their removal in contravention of Section 282.(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada from their court order custodial parent, Stephen Watkins. I continually feel that Mr. Ustaszewk has demonstrated that the laws of Canada are to be ignored and that unilateral and conduct by one parent and their immediate family members is acceptable to our society as a whole.

4. It has me question if false allegations of “intimate partner abuse” (“domestic violence”) and “child abuse” are occurring too often before Canadian courts and if that law enforcement, the Children’s Aid Society, officers of the court, government (municipal, provincial and federal) and Canadian society truly understands the impact this has on our family, friends and our most important asset in our society – our children. What are we saying to honest and upstanding parents who constantly have unsubstantiated and false allegations raised against them? That they should give up on their children and walk away because of the costs, both financial and emotional, are just too high? Those false allegations of “intimate partner abuse” and “child abuse” are acceptable patterns of behaviour before our courts and a justifiable means to an end because the false accuser goes unpunished?

5. It has me question if mental health services are properly being allocated to families in need and if a clinically focused resolution to the issues brought forward before the Family Courts could have been implemented to properly and thoroughly put in place to assist in identifying that the mother of Christopher and Alexander Watkins and subsequently Mr. Ustaszewk could have identified the flight risk prior to their removal from Canada to Poland in contravention of section 282.(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

6. It has me concerned for the health and well-being of Christopher and Alexander Watkins, born citizens of Canada and if they are currently being psychologically abused by members of their immediate family in Poland through well-known patterns of hostile aggressive parenting and/or parental alienation and may possibly continue to be abused.

Financial impact of Mr. Ustaszewk’s conduct on citizens and residents of Ontario, Canada:

Mr. Ustaszewk’s possibly bad faith in these and other proceedings has prolonged the need to investigate these matters, created numerous appearances before the family and criminal courts, impacted numerous police agencies and various child welfare services in Canada and internationally all while knowing where Christopher and Alexander were being harboured.

Public money has been spent to locate, find and bring forward these criminal proceedings. Public money that could have been better invested into improving Canada’s services we provide to residents and citizens as a whole. For example, investment into much needed improvements to our country’s delivery of mental health services for separating and divorcing parents and their children, our societies’ most important asset. Mental health services that could have assisted the courts in identifying the potential flight risk, false allegations of “intimate partner abuse” and “child abuse”, and provided help insure both parents are equally involved in their children’s lives.

Considerations for Mr. Ustaszewk’s sentencing that I kindly ask of this honourable court:

That this honourable court, when sentencing Mr. Ustaszewk on October 24, 2012 do so in a manner that identifies to potential and would-be abductors, be their plans to municipally, regionally, jurisdictionally or internationally abduct children that the laws and tenants set forth in the Criminal Code of Canada will be enforced and with the proper prejudice.

This court has a unique opportunity to set forth in jurisprudence that could bring forward much needed change in a number of aspects of law surrounding the “best interests” of our most important assets, the children of our country. I kindly request that this honourable court leverage all necessary means to establish jurisprudence that not just left behind parents but, future and possible left behind parents, law enforcement, the Children’s Aid Society, officers of the court and clinicians can rely upon, to identify past, current and future intentions of child abduction.

Yours very truly,
A Concerned Citizen of Ontario

Last edited by Tayken; 10-22-2012 at 02:05 PM.
  #42  
Old 10-22-2012, 02:04 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Dear Stephen,

I do realize that the court has requested "victim statements" from family per your article but, I felt compelled to write something on yours and your chlidren's behalf regarding the matter. Parental abduction has gone too long without being properly addressed in our country.

Good Luck!
Tayken
  #43  
Old 10-22-2012, 04:36 PM
StephenWatkins StephenWatkins is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
StephenWatkins is on a distinguished road
Default

Tayken, I am not sure If I can submit this to the courts but what you have written should be posted for many others to read.

As I am working on on the iCHAPEAU website and laws,I had created a section called testimonies. It would be an honour, if I could have your written permission to copy your post and place it on the iCHAPEAU website in the testimonies page. I will give credit to the Ottawa Divorce site for taking the post but I wanted to know, with your permission, if you wanted me to mention your handle name as well or just leave it signed the way it is?

I know you had mentioned questions before and I hope that with your ability to read the Transcripts, through the download link, that they have been answered. It was interesting that the defence tried to play the fact that the written order was signed the day after the abduction trying to argue that there was no custody order in place. I believe this is an important point for all of you on this forum as the Criminal Courts have ruled that orders are enforced the date upon the Judges endorsement and NOT when the court clerks finally get arround to making a final stamped page from the courts.

Also interesting in the transcripts that in order to find my ex-father-in-law guilty, the Judge had to make a determination that abducting parent is guilty first.
  #44  
Old 10-23-2012, 07:43 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenWatkins View Post
Tayken, I am not sure If I can submit this to the courts but what you have written should be posted for many others to read.
You have my permission to reproduce my statement in any format and manner as you see fit. Please do provide the link to OttawaDivorce.com so others can come to the forum and see the statement in original format.

I am in the process of retaining counsel to represent me anonymously (if possible) through client solicitor privileged with regards to the statement to maintain my anonymous nature in relation to this message board and to have a public figure represent this statement as truthful and factual from a privileged source. (Again if possible.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenWatkins View Post
As I am working on on the iCHAPEAU website and laws,I had created a section called testimonies. It would be an honour, if I could have your written permission to copy your post and place it on the iCHAPEAU website in the testimonies page. I will give credit to the Ottawa Divorce site for taking the post but I wanted to know, with your permission, if you wanted me to mention your handle name as well or just leave it signed the way it is?
Stephen, I am preparing a much more detailed statement which I will have hopefully counsel deliver to you directly that brings more light to your and validity of your efforts and much needed support.

In the mean time, feel free to leverage the public posting on this message board, which is indexed by Google in any way shape or form you see fit. The statements written are truthful and a much more detailed accounting and statement will come in support of your efforts is forthcoming. I just need to retain counsel to represent me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenWatkins View Post
I know you had mentioned questions before and I hope that with your ability to read the Transcripts, through the download link, that they have been answered.
I truly thank you for sharing that transcript. Once the sentencing is completed I will have a service provider retrieve the entire court record for further detailed analysis. Depending on the costs of ordering the oral testimonies given at trial those may be ordered as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenWatkins View Post
It was interesting that the defence tried to play the fact that the written order was signed the day after the abduction trying to argue that there was no custody order in place.
This is a demonstration that defense had no grounds for a defense. Hopefully the sentencing in the matter will come with a significant and meaningful criminal fine (as well as a term of imprisonment) that reflects the costs to society this person has cost everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenWatkins View Post
I believe this is an important point for all of you on this forum as the Criminal Courts have ruled that orders are enforced the date upon the Judges endorsement and NOT when the court clerks finally get arround to making a final stamped page from the courts.
I am actually in the process of composing a detailed analysis, relying upon this very case law (transcript) from this criminal matter to raise more awareness to the public regarding "when" a court order becomes an order.

This attempt to manipulate the court's opinion of when "an order becomes a law", stealing the idea from the popular cartoon from the 80s "When a Bill Becomes a Law" that many children were subjected to every morning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenWatkins View Post
Also interesting in the transcripts that in order to find my ex-father-in-law guilty, the Judge had to make a determination that abducting parent is guilty first.
Just to warn you, there could very well be an appeal in this matter from the defendant in the matter forthcoming. Do not lose hope or faith if an Appeal is brought forward but, it would have to be done on an error in law for which on my now 18th read through I can't see any but, I am not a lawyer and this is just personal opinion based on extensive research in case law in similar and related matters.

Good Luck!
Tayken
  #45  
Old 10-24-2012, 08:10 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Dear Stephen,

Any updates on the sentencing?

Good Luck!
Tayken
  #46  
Old 10-24-2012, 10:15 PM
StephenWatkins StephenWatkins is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
StephenWatkins is on a distinguished road
Default

-UPDATE-

The Criminal Courts in Newmarket have agreed to adjourn the sentencing this Wednesday due to the fact that the defence lawyer had a medical issue and could not attend. The sentencing date has been rescheduled for November 20th at 9:00am at the Newmarket, Ontario courts.
  #47  
Old 11-20-2012, 07:28 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default November 20, 2012 - SENTENCING DAY

From the office of Stephen Watkins:

CANADIAN COURT - SENTENCING DAY
Court Information and Details
"Watkins Missing Children"

DATE: November 20, 2012

TIME: 8:30am (Meet in Front of Court House)
Hearing starts at 9:00 but they say it will really be at 9:30. They say it may take up to 4 hours. Meet with News Press to make statement about iCHAPEAU Association launch and to hold up signs for photo's.

LOCATION: Newmarket Court House

ADDRESS: 50 Eagle St W, Newmarket, ON L3Y 6B1

MAP LINK:
https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=50+Eag...Y+6B1&t=m&z=13
  #48  
Old 11-20-2012, 07:43 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Dear Stephen:

My thoughts and hopes will be with you and your family today. As there has been no updates regarding the return of Christopher and Alexander to their habitual jurisdiction where they were born and raised for the majority of their lives - CANADA.

The criminal removal of children in contravention of section 283.(1) and 282.(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada continues to happen every day in our country. Parents every day are having to wonder where their children are being taken, enticed away, concealed, detained, received and harboured by "domestic violence" shelters, with the "assistance of police", by unscrupulous parents, their assisting family members and with the assistance of "counsel" in an attempt to "gain an advantage" in a custody and access dispute and ultimately in a clear and transparent manner to alienate and remove loving and upstanding parents from the lives of the children involved.

One would have thought that the wise words of the Honourable J.A. Osborne in 1998 would have rung true on many matters when a parent unilaterally abducts children in contravention of our country's Laws and Acts. They were put in place to, and I quote, "deter forum shopping and child abduction". Clearly, the message was not strong enough and hopefully the Honourable Justice presiding over matters today recognizes the need to update and strengthen jurisprudence ("case law") where the acts and laws of our Country and Provinces are clearly lacking.

Brooks v. Brooks, 1998 CanLII 7142 (ON CA)
Date: 1998-08-07
Docket: c29247
Parallel citations: 41 OR (3d) 191; 163 DLR (4th) 715; 39 RFL (4th) 187; 111 OAC 177
URL: CanLII - 1998 CanLII 7142 (ON CA)
Citation: Brooks v. Brooks, 1998 CanLII 7142 (ON CA)

Brooks v. Brooks 1998 CanLII 7142 (ON CA), (1998), 163 D.L.R. (4th) 715 (Ont. C.A.), stating at para. 22 (my emphasis added):

Quote:
22. Part III was added to the CLRA to deter forum shopping and child abduction, to provide some uniform powers and procedures for the resolution of custody/access disputes and to reduce the time for the resolution of parental disputes involving children. To secure the best information relevant to the children’s best interests, it is also important that jurisdiction over custody/access disputes not be unduly fragmented and prolonged, as has occurred here.
Every day, frivolous lawsuits are brought against loving and caring parents on "urgent" basis ex-parte by unscrupulous "negative advocate solicitors" and their "high conflict" clients in an attempt to strip the rights of every resident and citizen to a fair trial and to defend themselves as outlined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Every day, children are taken from parents, often with the "assistance of the police" because they feel "unsafe" and are harboured and "sheltered" at private residences of their immediate family members and friends, in "domestic violence" shelters and other locations unknown to the left behind parent.

All by leveraging as has been done to you Stephen - false allegations of "domestic violence" and "child abuse". This conduct is becoming all too common before the Superior Court, Family Law and the Criminal Court system and hopefully the "buck stops here" in Newmarket at 9:30 AM.

Shaw v. Shaw, 2008 ONCJ 130 (CanLII)
Date: 2008-03-25
Docket: 34/08
Parallel citations: 62 RFL (6th) 100
URL: http://canlii.ca/t/1w7sx
Citation: Shaw v. Shaw, 2008 ONCJ 130 (CanLII)

Recanting the wise words of the very Honourable Justice Pugsliy in Shaw v. Shaw para. 8:

Quote:
I do not know what advice Mr. Shaw received from the unnamed lawyer whom he consulted before, as he put it, asking for charges to be laid. I can only hope that no licensed lawyer in this province would have advised the father that the fastest way to get custody and exclusive possession of the family home was to report the mother’s transgressions to the police.
Left behind parents, who have had their children abducted in contravention of section 283.(1) still do not know what "advice" the abducting parent received from their often "known" lawyers whom the abducting parent consulted with days before the abduction, as often is done, before "asking for charges to be laid" against the other parent. I *do* know that there are "licensed lawyers" in this province that *have* advised parents that the fastest way to get custody is to attempt to leverage the police and false allegations of "domestic violence" and "child abuse" and to leverage the "wings" of Legal Aid Ontario to do so.

Reminding everyone that the Criminal Code of Canada section 283.(1) and section 282.(1) explicitly state:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Criminal Code of Canada
Sections 282 and 283 of the Criminal Code of Canada

Section 282

(1) [ Abduction in contravention of custody order ]

Every one who, being the parent, guardian or person having the lawful care or charge of a person under the age of fourteen years, takes, entices away, conceals, detains, receives or harbours that person, in contravention of the custody provisions of a custody order in relation to that person made by a court anywhere in Canada, with intent to deprive a parent or guardian, or any other person who has the lawful care or charge of that person, of the possession of that person is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

(2) [ Where no belief in validity of custody order ]

Where a count charges an offence under subsection (1) and the offence is not proven only because the accused did not believe that there was a valid custody order but the evidence does prove an offence under section 283, the accused may be convicted of an offence under section 283.

Section 283

(1) [ Abduction ]

Every one who, being the parent, guardian or person having the lawful care or charge of a person under the age of fourteen years, takes, entices away, conceals, detains, receives or harbours that person, whether or not there is a custody order in relation to that person made by a court anywhere in Canada, with intent to deprive a parent or guardian, or any other person who has the lawful care or charge of that person, of the possession of that
person, is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

(2) [ Consent required ]
My warning to parents who take children and commitment to the parents who have this happen to them:
I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you're looking for sole custody, I can tell you I don't have money... but what I do have are a very particular set of skills. Skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you think before you act and don't make children pawns in family law, that will be the end of it - I will not look for you, I will not pursue you... but if you do, I will look for you, I will find you... and I will stop you from doing it!
(Quote "tayken" and modified from the movie of the same name: "Taken".)

Good Luck! (Past, present and future abducting parents.)
Tayken

Last edited by Tayken; 11-20-2012 at 08:02 AM.
  #49  
Old 11-20-2012, 10:35 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,339
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Stephen:

I haven't seen any updates from you regarding today's sentencing... I hope it is some good news?

e.g. Christopher and Alexander are on a plane back to their "home and native land"?!

My thoughts are with your family today and especially Christopher and Alexander.

Good Luck!
Tayken
  #50  
Old 11-20-2012, 10:53 PM
wretchedotis's Avatar
wretchedotis wretchedotis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ON
Posts: 2,317
wretchedotis is on a distinguished road
Default

I've been paying attention to your situation in the news for some time now, Mr. Watkins.

I wish you the best of luck and the speedy return of your children.

I cannot imagine how you have been able to cope.

Godspeed.
Closed Thread

Tags
abduction, child, children, missing, watkins


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Divorce Law are a Joke and Dads are the Punch Line Decent Dad Political Issues 389 11-03-2012 04:45 PM
Joint Physical Custody: Smart Solution or Problematic Plan? WorkingDAD Parenting Issues 19 09-17-2012 06:38 AM
Divorcing Well SigRent Parenting Issues 2 05-06-2010 09:02 PM
Second children are "invisible" got2bkid Divorce & Family Law 17 06-25-2008 05:41 PM
Maybe the time has come to formalize?? mom22galz Parenting Issues 12 03-24-2007 09:46 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:07 PM.