{"id":4614,"date":"2009-10-02T09:45:12","date_gmt":"2009-10-02T00:45:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.debito.org\/?p=4614"},"modified":"2009-10-02T09:45:12","modified_gmt":"2009-10-02T00:45:12","slug":"court-transcripts-of-christopher-vs-noriko-savoie-re-child-abduction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/?p=4614","title":{"rendered":"Court Transcripts of Christopher vs. Noriko Savoie re child abduction"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Handbook<\/a>\"\\\"<\/a>\"Foreign<\/a>\"\\\"<\/a>\"\u300c\u30b8\u30e3\u30d1\u30cb\u30fc\u30ba\u30fb\u30aa\u30f3\u30ea\u30fc\u3000\u5c0f\u6a3d\u5165\u6d74\u62d2\u5426\u554f\u984c\u3068\u4eba\u7a2e\u5dee\u5225\u300d\uff08\u660e\u77f3\u66f8\u5e97\uff09\"<\/a>\"JAPANESE<\/a>\"sourstrawberriesavatar\"<\/a>
\nUPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito<\/p>\n

Hi Blog. \u00a0Obviously since yesterday the Savoie Child Abduction Case has gotten a lot more complicated. \u00a0So let’s go to the primary source information: \u00a0the sworn testimonies of the parties to the case.<\/p>\n

Now, divorces are generally nasty messy affairs with both sides at fault and deserving of criticism. But the fact is that wife Noriko Savoie negotiated in bad faith, broke her promises, abducted the children, and committed a criminal offense, and she should not be allowed to get away with it. Or else it just encourages other Japanese to take the kids and run (or threaten to) whenever there’s a domestic dispute. This situation as it stands will also remain a deterrent to people marrying Japanese, and is ultimately defeating of Japan’s intent to stem the demographic juggernaut that is Japan’s falling population.<\/p>\n

Courtesy of David in yesterday’s comments (thanks), here are the last seventy pages of testimony in Tennessee court.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/wtvf.images.worldnow.com\/images\/incoming\/Investigates\/savoie2.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

Highlights:<\/p>\n

There was a restraining order against Noriko Savoie filed due to various threats from Noriko to abduct the children (page 94).<\/p>\n

She promised in court under oath that she would not do that.<\/p>\n

She obviously lied.<\/p>\n

She came to the US willingly, knowing how things would turn out (i.e. divorce, not reconciliation):<\/p>\n

(pg 121)
\nTHE COURT<\/strong>: And she clearly understood that when she was
\ncoming to the United States, she wasn’t coming
\nhere to reconcile . And it was clear she came here knowing that
\nher husband was involved with another woman, and
\nshe came here knowing that he wanted a divorce. <\/em>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

and a social worker testified that she was in fact acclimatizing to the US and would probably stay (pg 109).<\/p>\n

Noriko even tried to use the allegation of husband Christopher’s Japanese citizenship (which looks like it may be true, although given the relatively amount of time Christopher was in Japan it was gleaned awfully quickly) against him to say that he had the same rights as a Japanese. Which he technically would (but not positively, when Japanese have so few rights between them regarding child custody and visitation following divorce anyway), but then again probably not (as the court admits, see below).<\/p>\n

Court testimony excerpts follow, then further commentary from me:<\/p>\n

http:\/\/wtvf.images.worldnow.com\/images\/incoming\/Investigates\/savoie2.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

NORIKO SAVOIE<\/strong>:
\nI don’t have any plans to
\nreturn to Japan or move to Japan, I haven’t had
\nany plans to move to Japan since I entered the
\nfinal decree<\/em>. (page 80)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(page 88-89)
\nCROSS EXAMINATION OF NORIKO<\/strong>:
\n… you put in writing to him
\nFebruary 12th that “it is very hard to watch the kids
\nbecome American and losing their Japanese identity . I
\nhave tremendous fear for my children and myself . I’m
\noverwhelmed without a problem . Therefore, please
\ncooperate with me in order for us to stay here”?<\/em><\/p>\n

A. Correct.<\/em><\/p>\n

Q. The only way I can read that is that was a threat
\nto him ; that if you don’t do what I want you to do, I’m
\ngoing to take your children and you will never see them
\nagain . You understand his fear?<\/em><\/p>\n

A I do understand his fear; however —<\/p>\n

Q. Well, what can you do today to alleviate that
\nfear ; what can you do, what can you say to Judge Martin,
\nwhat can you say to their father that assures us that
\nwhen you get to Japan —<\/p>\n

A. Yes.<\/p>\n

Q. — you will not let your parents and your friends
\nand your — as you said, all the people that came to the
\nairport, influence you to just stay there ; what
\nassurance do we have?<\/p>\n

A. Yes, actually that’s why I brought this here .
\nFirst of all, I have never thought about taking children
\naway from their father, never . And — but based on
\nthat —<\/p>\n

Q. Well, let me ask you this — and I’ll ask the
\nquestions, if you would — do you have plans to take
\nyour children and move to Japan?<\/p>\n

<\/em>A . No, I don’t <\/em>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(pg 96-97)
\nNORIKO<\/strong>: Yes, I actually want to say because if you
\ntalking about based on he has no authority in Japan,
\nhowever, he is Japanese citizen ; he is not — Hague
\nConvention has nothing to do with him, because that is
\nbetween American citizen and Japanese citizen .<\/em><\/p>\n

THE COURT<\/strong> : Ms . Savoie, let me just say that
\nthis kind of discussion concerns the Court . I
\nreally don’t care what his rights are in Japan .
\nWhat I care about is ensuring that you don’t take
\nthese children permanently to Japan .<\/em><\/p>\n

THE WITNESS<\/strong> : Right<\/em> .<\/p>\n

THE COURT<\/strong> : You’ll never convince this Court
\nthat this gentleman has the same rights that you
\nhave in Japan to freely enforce the terms of this
\norder, because every bit of the law that I’ve
\never seen as mediator — and this case was
\npresented – and this case, by the way, was
\ndiscussed in mediation, so that’s not anything
\nnew either .So for you to try to convince the Court now
\nthat Dr . Savoie has the full ability to enforce a
\nforeign decree in Japan, is not going to be very
\nproductive . That causes me concern that you
\nmight have some intent to move that you said you
\ndo not have . See what I’m saying? <\/em><\/p>\n

THE WITNESS<\/strong> : Yes, Sir, I understand<\/em> .<\/p>\n

THE COURT<\/strong>: They’re inconsistent positions .
\nOn the one hand you say, “I’m not moving, I’ve
\nmade no plans to move, I intend to go on vacation
\nand return here and bring the children back
\nhere”; on the other hand you’re saying, “but he
\nhas full rights to enforce the decree in Japan .”
\nWell, if you have no intent to move, why do you — <\/em><\/p>\n

THE WITNESS<\/strong> : Yes, Sir . <\/em><\/p>\n

THE COURT<\/strong>: — try to convince the Court
\nthat he has the full rights to enforce a foreign
\ndecree in Japan . There’s no reason to try to go
\nthere . You see what I’m saying?<\/em>
\n(skip to page 100)<\/p>\n

THE WITNESS<\/strong> : Yes . However, he won’t see
\nthem again that — that part is that concern
\nbefore me that from a long time ago, like I said
\nI’ve never split children and father . I know how
\nimportant father is for children, and I am not
\ngoing to do that . I keep telling him I’m not
\ngoing to do that .<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(skip to page 119-120)
\nTHE COURT, IN SUMMATION<\/strong>:
\n I think Ms . Savoie understands that if she
\nelects to go to Japan and not return, she’s going
\nto lose her alimony, because the Court’s going to
\npay it into court ; she’s going to have problems
\nwith her child support ; she’s going to have
\nproblems with her education fund ; she’s going to
\nbe fighting her husband in the courts of Japan ;
\nand it just — it’s going to be a terrible mess
\nfor her and the children if she pursues that, and
\nthe Court has no reason to believe that she
\ndoesn’t understand that or that she intends to
\npursue that .<\/em><\/p>\n

But on the other hand, obviously Dr . Savoie
\nis not convinced that his former wife is acting
\nwith him in good faith . Frankly, I don’t know
\nthat he will ever be convinced until time passes
\nand she’s made trips to Japan and she’s returned
\nfrom Japan, and the children seem to be
\nacclimating to the notion that they have two
\ncultures that form them ; one is a Japanese
\nculture and the other is an American culture, and
\nthey’re part Japanese, they’re part American,
\nthey have part Japanese heritage, they have part
\nAmerican heritage, and they’re entitled to know
\nboth heritages, they’re entitled to know
\ngrandparents from their Japanese heritage .<\/em><\/p>\n

And what she will do when she gets to Japan
\nand she’s under the pressure of her family and
\nfriends to stay there and not return, remains to
\nbe seen.<\/em><\/p>\n

(pg 121)
\nTHE COURT<\/strong>: And she clearly understood that when she was
\ncoming to the United States, she wasn’t coming
\nhere to reconcile . And it was clear she came here knowing that
\nher husband was involved with another woman, and
\nshe came here knowing that he wanted a divorce .
\n(snip, pg 122)
\nAnd it’s clear to this Court that it’s in
\nthe best interest of these children that these
\nchildren–and I’ll say it again–have a
\nrelationship with their father, and that they
\nalso understand their Japanese culture and
\nheritage, and it’s part of their makeup, and that
\nthey unde, and their American culture and
\nheritage as part of their makeup .
\nSo based on the limited issue that’s before
\nme, the Court’s going to dissolve the restraining
\norder. <\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

COMMENT FROM DEBITO<\/strong>: \u00a0So the retraining order gets dissolved and Noriko breaks her sworn promises. \u00a0That is the background to the case. \u00a0Her current extraterritoriality notwithstanding, she broke the law, and now there’s an arrest warrant out on her. \u00a0That’s what occasioned Christopher taking the drastic actions that he did.<\/p>\n

Now, speaking as a left-behind parent myself might be coloring my attitude towards this issue. But divorces are nearly always messy and fault can be found with both sides in mediations. And the fact remains that Noriko did what so many Japanese will do in these situations — abduct the children and claim Japan as a safe haven. Then the children are NEVER returned, and usually contact is completely broken off with the left-behind parent for the remainder of the childhood.<\/p>\n

This is an untenable situation. And it must stop. For the sake of the children. This in my mind is undisputable. The children must be returned to Dr Savoie in order to discourage this sort of thing happening again. Anything else is just more encouragement for Japanese to abduct their children.<\/p>\n

More media up on the case later today. \u00a0Arudou Debito in Sapporo<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What follows are excerpts from the court testimony of Christopher Savoie vs Noriko Savoie, indicating the bad-faith negotiations that took place. The messy circumstances notwithstanding, we have clear promises from Noriko that she will not abduct the children, and that her trip to Japan would be for no more than six weeks. <\/p>\n

So the retraining order against Noriko gets lifted, and Noriko absconds with the kids. That is the background to the case. Her current extraterritoriality notwithstanding, she broke the law, and now there’s an arrest warrant out on her. That’s what occasioned Christopher taking the drastic actions that he did.<\/p>\n

Now, speaking as a left-behind parent myself might be coloring my attitude towards this issue. But divorces are nearly always messy and fault can be found with both sides in mediations. And the fact remains that Noriko did what so many Japanese will do in these situations — abduct the children and claim Japan as a safe haven. Then the children are NEVER returned, and usually contact is completely broken off with the left-behind parent for the remainder of the childhood.<\/p>\n

This is an untenable situation. And it must stop. For the sake of the children. This in my mind is undisputable. The children must be returned to Dr Savoie in order to discourage this sort of thing happening again. Anything else is just more encouragement for Japanese to abduct their children.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[49,22,44,5,37,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4614","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-child-abductions","category-cultural-issue","category-discussions","category-human-rights","category-injustice","category-lawsuits"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4614","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4614"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4614\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4614"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4614"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4614"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}