David Goldman Custody Battle Leads to Block of Trade Bill

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: In The News

(AP Photo/Felipe Dana)

In an apparent effort to exert political pressure on Brazil to return a nine-year-old boy to his New Jersey father, Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey is planning to hold up a trade bill that would benefit that country.

The Associated Press reports that Lautenberg placed a hold on the bill, which allows certain countries, including Brazil, to export certain products to the United States duty-free.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court in Brazil kept David Goldman (pictured) from retrieving his son Sean, who was taken to Brazil five years ago by his now-deceased mother.

The court said Sean must remain in Brazil until the case is settled. It goes into a two-month recess at the end of the day.

Goldman had flown to Brazil after a lower court ruled that his son should be returned to him, though that ruling was stayed before he could take the boy back to America.

A number of American political leaders, including President Obama, have pressured Brazil to release the boy to his father. New Jersey Republican Rep. Chris Smith flew to Brazil in an attempt to force the issue.

Goldman's wife took Sean to Brazil in 2004, then divorced him and remarried. She died while giving birth to a daughter last year, and her family has sought to keep Sean in Brazil.

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

35 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 35 Comments


by ubguada December 25, 2009 9:28 PM EST: The US needs to be very careful imposing trade restrictions with Brazil. India, China, Russia and other commodity-hungry countries are doing completely the opposite, getting cozier and cozier. That seems to include Iran too.
With China hanging the US by the collar (Bonds) it would be at least worrisome making such heroic moves while in such fragile condition, desperately in need of international support.
On the other hand, while US was bluffing, playing with the thought of trade restrictions, Brazil just started imposing $829M sanctions on USA over illegal agricultural subsidies - no remorse, no second thoughts. Times have changed indeed.; Reply to this comment


by peer_gynt_mind December 25, 2009 5:51 PM EST: Ok. I am curious about one thing.
What if it was the other way around. What if Sean's mother was an American and fled back to the US with him when she decided she wanted to.
So is this hypothetical situation Sean would be in the US with a Brazilian father who wanted his custody after a number of years?
Would you still think the same? In this hypothetical situation would you still support his Brazilian father taking the child back to Brazil from his American grandmother?
I worry about Sean. I have a 11 year old nephew who is too going through a tough time and they carry that sadness in their eyes. Children are so vulnerable.
I will root for Sean to be happy wherever he is.; Reply to this comment


by funtrip2007 December 23, 2009 5:35 PM EST: littlestar, the logic you apply to justify kidnapping shows how poor your values are and those of the legal system in Brazil.
You claim to have a son who is a friend of Sean ... try and put yourself in a situation where your son is taken away by your spouse to another country without your permission by conspiring with your in-laws. Think about this and hope you will see the light.; Reply to this comment

by PJChilds December 22, 2009 1:08 PM EST

Remember a few years ago when Brazil got their panties in a twist over a Simpsons episode where Homer is kidnapped? Looks like kidnapping is a national pass time down there.

Reply to this comment


by peer_gynt_mind December 26, 2009 6:28 AM EST: As it is school's, university's, mall's and church shootings :)
Give me a break.

by jrz2001 December 20, 2009 12:38 PM EST

With a child abducted in a neighboring South American country, it took me 4 months however to get my son back, not years. This treaty is interpreted differently by each country. But, first, one has to act quickly immediately upon abduction. Case law indicates that the local courts look at the initial behavior of the foreign parent to show interest. Second, roll with the punches -- Treaty states proceedings must be in English or French. The foreign courts add some criteria not in the treaty ? e.g., proceedings in Spanish or was the child in safe care in the U.S.? Thirdly, deal with the public opinion. However, foreign tactics employ public opinion to sway the judicial proceedings and they work. One must preempt these situations. I certainly analyzed the legal proceedings throughout the world, asked a former ambassador about his experiences, inquired foreign local lawyers for their knowledge or experience in identical problems before initiating my proceedings.

What I see here now is a legal war of attrition -- Can the father battle, travel, and afford this contest now? I sympathize the emotional and economic travails suffered here. And the Brazilian lawyer knows the father has to travel to stay in Brazil. That is why I always attack swiftly. It will be many years before this father recovers emotionally and economically, even though he will triumph. This Treaty will always be interpreted by each country -- international treaties by nature are vague and hard to enforce. But to be swift, you have to find people with actual experience locally and internationally. It looks to me that Goldman has had faced many dead ends and poorly advised. I know of a father still battling Colombian and U.S. courts for years for his son. I know of a Chilean lawyer who two kids were abducted to the U.S. and took a year to recover them. I learned from these mistakes.

Reply to this comment


by mirandagrace December 21, 2009 7:55 AM EST: One of the main problems here is that the stepfather is from a family of very politically-connected, experienced attorneys who specialize in international custody disputes. It's hard to think of how Goldman could have acted much faster or better, with that sort of in-country expertise arrayed against him.


by jrz2001 December 21, 2009 3:16 PM EST: In my research, I knew of two cases very similar to Goldman's where the child has been held in contravention of the Treaty for several years -- for example, in the countries Germany and Colombia. In one specific case similar to Goldman's, I understand that the German mother had passed away and still the child is being retained by relatives. So, from my research, I noted that the political expertise of opposing legal counsel is not necessarily a determining factor in lengthy proceedings. But in the case of Goldman's situation, I sincerely doubt that this Brazilian opposing counsel played a role from day one in the legal proceedings. As I had stated, public relations and politics become part of the fabric of the proceedings in many of these cases. Goldman's case of political influence is not novel. So I expected it from day one when I filed my proceedings and countered it immediately.


by jrz2001 December 20, 2009 12:25 PM EST: With a child abducted in a neighboring South American country, it took me 4 months however to get my son back, not years. This treaty is interpreted differently by each country. But, first, one has to act quickly immediately upon abduction. Case law indicates that the local courts look at the initial behavior of the foreign parent to show interest. Second, roll with the punches -- Treaty states proceedings must be in English or French. The foreign courts add some criteria not in the treaty ? e.g., proceedings in Spanish or was the child in safe care in the U.S.? Thirdly, deal with the public opinion. However, foreign tactics employ public opinion to sway the judicial proceedings and they work. One must preempt these situations. I certainly analyzed the legal proceedings throughout the world, asked a former ambassador about his experiences, inquired foreign local lawyers for their knowledge or experience in identical problems before initiating my proceedings.; Reply to this comment


by ejanal December 19, 2009 6:43 PM EST: I have concerns about Sean's emotional state and hope, when he comes home, people will leave him alone and let him adjust and adjust he will. He will find out how much his father loves him and how selfish his maternal grandparents and "adoptive" family are. I also believe his "adoptive" family love him, why else would they fight so hard? I believe Sean could have had it all, he could have visited his maternal family during summers. How much healthier and wealthier he would have been. Sean's mother and step-father were wrong, wrong, wrong and now the families will have to pay a price, their pain over losing a child. I also hope they live with nothing but guilt about what they have done to Sean and the misery they have inflicted on him and that Sean will one day understand what they did to him. I hope, if Sean so chooses, and wants to see his adoptive family that David will allow it, in the US, with supervision. That is what would be best for Sean. For once the rich and powerful need to learn they are not above the law. They are the ones who are responsible for Sean's unhappiness. I so very sincerly hope our country will use every sanction they can, even if it mean boycotting the Olympics.; Reply to this comment

by Riverrat69 December 18, 2009 9:13 PM EST

littlestar2323 What Sean's family did and what the Brazilian courts sanctioned IS IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW and what Sean?s Brazilian family did amounts to kidnapping! I mean by your logic, if a husband kills his wife in Brazil, it is OK, it is not a violation of any law, because, after all, they are family?!?!?! Again. What you are saying is that it was OK that Sean was kidnapped 5 years ago and since Sean likes his kidnappers, he needs to stay in Brazil. What I am saying is that Brazil should have the integrity to live up to treaties it has signed. What I am saying that if the US denies Brazil favored nation status and starts charging tariffs on Brazilian imports, even though it hurts your economy, it is a choice Brazil has made because it refuses to abide by the Hague Convention for the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to which it was a signatory. Again, my guess is that it nationalism and testosterone talking and not common sense.

Reply to this comment


by littlestar2323 December 18, 2009 9:33 PM EST: Of course not. I never said it was legal. But NOW, what I mean, is just ABOUT SEAN. Kidnapping is not ok, but I would not use that word. They´re not strangers... And they´re not killing anyone.


by JDPECK December 18, 2009 10:26 PM EST: AMEN! Legal description of Kidnapping: The crime of unlawfully seizing and carrying away a person by force or Fraud, or seizing and detaining a person against his or her will with an intent to carry that person away at a later time. And Yes a FAMILY can kidnap a child.

See all 4 Replies

by Riverrat69 December 18, 2009 8:04 PM EST

It is interesting to hear the comments about Sean needing to stay with his family in Brazil. The reality is the US and Brazil are both signatories to the Hague Convention for the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and under this treaty, Brazil was legally obligated to return 9 year-old American, Sean Goldman, to his rightful father David Goldman, in the US within 6 weeks. Read? Brazil, as a nation by its actions, has condoned the kidnapping of a child in violation of a treaty that it bound itself to. I mean basically what you folks are saying is that it was OK that Sean was kidnapped 5 years ago and since Sean likes his kidnappers, he needs to stay with them. Give me a break! What kind of logic is that? My guess is that it nationalism and testosterone talking and not common sense!

Reply to this comment


by littlestar2323 December 18, 2009 8:09 PM EST: How can they be REALLY kidnappers when they are FAMILY? family!!!!!!!! not strangers!!!


by mirandagrace December 19, 2009 10:37 AM EST: Absolutely, littlestar, kidnappers can be family. It doesn't matter who the person is who's unlawfully stolen a child -- stranger, family, parent, they're all kidnappers.

I realize you know this family in some way, and so probably feel sympathy for them. But what if an abusive husband snatched his kids and then moved to Egypt -- that's kidnapping, no? And how about a grandmother who goes into hiding with a toddler, because she knows the mother is divorcing her son and would move back to another state -- kidnapping, right? How about a woman boarding a flight to her homeland, then calling her husband in the US and telling him not only is she not coming back, but he has to sign away all parental rights if he ever wants to see his son again -- kidnapping AND attempted blackmail!

This is not news to the Brazilian family, that they aided a kidnapper. Since the moment David knew what was happening, he's been in court trying to get Sean back. Not only did the Brazilian family harbor Mrs Goldman (and some say there's every indication they helped to plan the abduction, given they came to visit the Goldmans for a few weeks, then flew back with Sean and his mother), but when the mother died, they attempted to rename Sean's stepfather as his biological father. At every turn, the Brazilian family have known 100% that what they are doing is illegal.

So yes. Family can be kidnappers. Not to mention, they took Sean from the US, where he had a house and grandparents and an extended family and a culture and language, to Brazil, where all of that was different. They took him somewhere totally strange and unknown. It's crazy to say they get a pass just because there's blood relation.


by jenniferschmitt December 18, 2009 5:22 PM EST: Right on senator!

Elian Gonzales came to my mind, too. What if we had waited 5+ years to return him to Cuba and his father??

Unconscionable!; Reply to this comment