I always wonder why the mom flees...makes me think that the courts go by who's lawyer spins a better tale..


I'm a guy but I think any children are the mother's..musta been something to make here get fake passports and run to Canada...and he could come up with a big reward...the judge seems to be more concerned with people listening to her...




Fugitive Main Line woman, daughter found in Canada

By Keith Herbert

INQUIRER STAFF WRITER


(File photo)
Mike Marran and his daughter, Rachel Librett Marran, in this undated photo taken before her abduction by her mother, Claudia Librett, 3 1/2 years ago.

Claudia Librett, the Main Line mother who for three years has been on the run with her daughter, now 7, in defiance of a Montgomery County custody order, was found Saturday in Ontario, Canada, police said today.
A tip provided to Ontario police led to the arrest of Librett, 51, in St. Catharines, Ontario, by the Niagara Regional Police. Police arrested Librett on a fugitive warrant, Montgomery County District Attorney Bruce L. Castor said today at a news conference.
"She can't thumb her nose at the court system of Montgomery County," Castor said.
In January 2003, Common Pleas Court Judge Rhonda Daniele issued an order that awarded Michael Marran, the father of Librett's daughter, joint custody. Librett, formerly of Narberth, refused to comply with the order, police said, and the child was not seen at her Wynnewood school after Jan. 10, 2003.
Librett was being held by Canadian police. A hearing for Librett before Canadian immigration officials was scheduled tomorrow, Castor said.
She used several aliases and obtained phony passports for herself and her daughter, Castor said.
"I want the child reunited with her father and Claudia Librett in custody, and somewhere in the pipeline to get her here in a Montgomery County courtroom," Castor said.
Contact staff writer Keith Herbert at 610-313-8007 or keithherbert@phillynews.com.

_krdDartInc++; document.write('');

__________________
"

She broke the law and denied her daughter 3 years with her father. If the father had any negatives to him, the court would never have given him any custody rights.

She should serve 3 years in prison and only have supervised visits with her daughter after that.

__________________
What's a newbold?

Family Court is a place you never want to be. EVER.

I know where some Judges just automatically believe a child should be with their biological mother no matter what.

Or you get a Judge who was like twenty years in criminal court, and now their settling family fueds. Not good.

Yep. She broke the law no matter, but I hear what you are saying, Zur. Unfortunately alot of people have to put the fate of their child in the hands of Family Court.

It's a tough call. The law is the law and should be upheld.

That said, there is a little history in this one that, as a mom, makes me question what I would do under the same circumstances.

The mother and father previously gotten into a fight, for which the father plead guilty. So clearly, the father has some sort of issues. They split up after that.

Originally, visitation was to be shared. The mother thought that the father was sexually abusing the daughter and filed several complaints with family services. Apparently the daughter's behavior changed after the visits, which the mother believed to be the result of abuse. Family services said no, that the changes in behavior were due to a new schedule (meaning visiting with the father) and said he "made some mistakes" (whatever that means). The mother lost her fight to keep the father away, lost again on appeal and then appealed to the PA Supreme Court. I think during the appeal, she fled.

Wrong to leave? Sure. But this is the thing... If the mom is wrong and just being spiteful, then clearly jailtime is warranted. She should follow the law. But if she's right...? I'm not sure what I would do in the same circumstance. If I truly believed that my daughter was being abused and the authorities would not help, I'd probably do whatever I felt I had to do to get her out of those circumstances.

I guess we'll never really know what went on in the mother's head. She violated a court order and will be punished.

What's really sad is what the daughter has been through. Abuse or no, this whole ordeal has had to be traumatic.

__________________
--

www.taxgirl.com

Apparently, Claudia didn't just rely on her own good judgement concerning her child's well-being. She consulted with several specialists, who wrote reports to make any mother's blood curdle.
Rachel's safety is the most important issue here; we have to keep her safe from harm. Claudia chose to give up her life, and break the law, to protect her daughter. What any good mother would do.
A friend in Canada.

Experts have often been found to lead children to insinuate things that didn't happen. The experts typically ask yes or no questions to which smart, intuitive children will answer what the expect the expert wants to hear.

Maybe you should change your sign off to "A harborer of fugitives in Canada".

KENfmt, a little harsh, no?

I agree that experts can manipulate facts to fit their own diagnosis - on both sides.

There are only two people in the world who know what really happened (or did not happen): that little girl and her father.

__________________
--

www.taxgirl.com

No, not harsh. The woman in question violated the law and kidnapped a child and this "friend" apparently assisted her in perpetrating her crime. A close relative of mine almost lost his daughter to his exwife using the same lies and excuses. Turns out, she made it all up to get custody so she could sue for child support. She had all the expert reports saying he molested the daughter. Unfortunately for her, he got tape of her talking about the plan with her new boyfriend who happened to have a conviction for sexual assault. It was his idea.

We have courts for a reason, you should no that better than most.

Supporters of the mother, you are being duped.

(1) The claims of sexual abuse were proven wrong and dismissed by the OCY in Pennsylvania. It was affirmed by a higher court that the investigation was not in error. The Montgomery County judge discounted the abuse evidence because they were hired help. Indeed, from the mother's blog (now discontinued), if the claims of abuse were true, any investigator would find it.
(2) Courts everywhere in North America (including Montgomery County and Pennsylvania) takes claims of abuse and the best interests of the child very seriously. Upon the original abuse charges, visitation was suspended.
(3) The therapist supervising the father's visits reported a strong bond. This is collaberated by the television video evidence.
(4) This women, the day after losing her court case, went to the child's preschool and disappeared with her daughter to another country. The woman forced her child to lie by saying that she had no father and assumed a different name. She lived this lie for over three years.

In my opinion, it appears that the mother kidnapped her daughter and had no justification to do so. She is using our anti-americanism sentiments, the fact that there was a conviction before, and our willingness to be duped to gain allies. And the fact is, that, by all accounts, she was a good mom - a good mom, profiled by America's most wanted, wanted by the FBI. Well, now this "good mom" is in jail, leaving her daughter to incredible suffering and pain (of losing her mom and losing her friends and community), which will leave an indelible scar for the rest of her life. This is acting in the child's best interests?

As for the father, he will face scrutiny for the remainder of the child's upbringing.

I am surprised by how quickly people assume that what they read in the media is the truth.
Yes, I am a friend of Claudia's, although I knew her as Cella. In the past week, since I learned of her arrest, I have read court documents and doctor's reports that would make you weep. And scratch your head, wondering how on earth this happened. And those doctor's reports were not even examined by the court, were dismissed.
As for 'hired help', what are the courts but public servants? With a political agenda, no less.
Whereas, renowned physicians, (one at Harvard),have their reputations at stake. And the idea that Claudia "bought" them is ridiculous.
Bruce Castor has sworn to see Claudia in prison, and Rachel with her father. Is there an election coming up?
Call me cynical.