17 April 2011
Don't get me wrong. I believe the Johanssons should be in court fighting tooth and nail until their son has been rightfully restored to them, and I will support them to the best of my ability until that day finally arrives. As far as I am concerned, they've never had a real court trial in this case. Instead, these dear, gentle people have stood tried and convicted as guilty since June 25th, 2009, months before ever setting foot into an LVU court room.
As far as close observers of this case are concerned, the Johanssons have never been before a legitimate court. Every "trial" this innocent family has suffered since armed Swedish police swept onto an India bound jetliner and abducted their son, has been nothing more than what a Kangaroo Court of justice can deliver. Harsh words? Yes. Unwarranted? A resounding NO! Consider the following questions:
In what court, in this day and age, is it considered justice to deny the accused their choice of legal counsel, and the chance to offer witnesses and testimony supporting their claim of innocence?
In what court is justice served when a sitting judge is presented written testimony as evidence from doctors and psychiatrists stating the mental health of the accused to be sound, yet this same judge ignores the expert testimony and instead accepts as gospel truth the testimony of child welfare workers, who are neither doctors nor psychiatrists, but who "diagnose" the defendant as having a narcissistic personality disorder?
In what court is justice served when Eva Ernston, who is paid by the state of Sweden to "represent" Domenic's interests in court, publicly and indiscriminately boasts to friends and strangers alike, that "Domenic is better off without his weird father"? So much for keeping secret the reason Gotland Social Services has destroyed a family. According to Ernston, it is because Christer Johansson is, in her own words, "weird."
In what court is justice served when Domenic's foster mother tells little Domenic that he will stay with her regardless of what the judge decides, essentially telling the little boy she will break the law, if she has to, to keep him with her?
In what court is justice served when this same foster mother tells child welfare workers what she told Domenic: that she will not give him back to his parents no matter what the court decides; and upon hearing this declaration, rather than reprimand, correct or otherwise protect Domenic from a foster mother untrustworthy enough to break the law rather than relinquish a child not hers to keep in the first place, the child welfare workers put in an official Gotland Social Services document, word for word what the foster mother told Domenic, then send this document to the Johanssons to further demoralize them?
Folks, the only courts in which I am aware such perverted justice is practiced is in the kangaroo courts of the Swedish LVU system. And of what crime are the Johanssons guilty? Surely, for so much trouble and distress, they must have beat or otherwise abused or neglected their son and surely all of this abuse and neglect has been documented in the three court cases the LVU system has already entertained on behalf of the Johanssons....
In fact, no. There is no such case.
Instead, in court documents the Johanssons are accused of home schooling their son at a time when home schooling was still a legal option in Sweden. It is for this reason alone Gotland Social Services employed armed police to charge onto an airplane, upon which this family were passengers on the last leg of their journey back to India, where Christer and Annie were married and where Annie had always lived until a few months prior to Domenic’s birth.
After Gotland Social Services abducted the boy from the plane, they conducted a fishing expedition hoping to find more cause to keep Domenic. Their findings? Incomplete vaccinations (parents have the right to delay or deny vaccinations in Sweden) and a cavity in one of Domenic’s baby teeth. It was at this point that Domenic should have been immediately returned to his parents.
Not so, however. As is customary in many LVU cases in Sweden, it was time to pull out all the stops rather than admit Gotland Social Services acted erroneously on Domenic Johansson’s behalf. Parental character assassination is always the remaining weapon in the working toolbox of Gotland Social Services and apparently it is also their deadliest. The first accusations against the Johanssons is that Christer Johansson is a narcissist. This is not an official diagnosis. It is simply the opinion of the social workers. Even so, if narcissism is reason enough to destroy a parent/child relationship, I can think of hundreds of Hollywood celebrities whose children should be removed immediately. Next, he is accused of being overly obsessed with health, health foods and healthy living. Apparently health gurus should have their children forcibly removed as well? Next is the accusation that Christer Johansson is obsessed with human rights. After what his family has been through, who wouldn’t be? Even so, as Eva Ernston has so aptly deduced from all of Gotland Social Service’s findings, Christer Johansson is obviously “weird,” thus Domenic is much “better off without his weird father!”
Looking at Annie, who is a very soft spoken, loving, kind and gentle person, Gotland Social services found it more difficult to assassinate her character. Therefore, rather than attack her directly, they simply suggest to the court that Annie lives in the shadow of her husband. Yes, this is Annie’s crime. This is why Annie had her then 7 year old son ripped from her loving arms.
While all of these character “flaws” are enumerated in court records against the Johanssons, even more concerning is what is missing from court records. The court records fail to mention Christer’s accomplishments in music and the visual arts. They also fail to mention the very close and loving relationship Domenic and Christer enjoyed before Gotland Social Services disrupted it. They fail to mention how Christer was nurturing a love for animals and nature in Domenic. They fail to mention how Christer was passing on to his son a passion for capturing the beauty of the Swedish landscape in photographs, teaching him the art as they went on photo shooting expeditions, sharing these experiences side-by-side.
As for Annie, the court records fail to mention the fact that Annie holds a Master’s Degree in English, and that Domenic was fluent in both Swedish and English on the day he was taken. Ironically, Annie is more qualified to educate Domenic than the average Swedish classroom teacher. However, the court record fails to mention such things.
And so we ask, what can we expect from yet another court hearing within Sweden’s LVU walls of justice? Can we expect more of the same or will truth and justice finally be served in the now notorious case regarding the custody of Domenic Johansson? Will the Johanssons be allowed to bring in the defense attorney of their choosing? Will the judge act independent of the child welfare workers, allowing the Johanssons to have their entire and complete defense heard and fairly weighed?
PLEASE CONSIDER HELPING:
As this next court date fast approaches, please consider donating to the Johanssons. A donation button is located at the upper right of the Friends blog. If you decide you'd like to donate and you do not read Swedish, there is a little drop-down menu on the upper right of the Paypal page (where you go after pressing the yellow Donate button) that gives you the option to translate the page to the language of your choice. Thank you for you support!