"B.C. boy who vanished six years ago found when his mother

"is arrested in Arizona. Canadian Press

CHANDLER, Ariz. - A British Columbia boy who was abducted more than six years ago has been found in Arizona and will soon be reunited with his father.

"Valor Howell was believed to have been taken by his mother, Jamie Howell, in December 2004, when he was just three years old. The pair were found in Chandler, Ariz., on Sunday when someone called the police about a disturbance in a laundry mat. Jamie Howell was arrested for disorderly conduct and when police checked for possible warrants they found that she was wanted in Canada for parental kidnapping.

"Chandler Police Det. David Ramer says the boy is in good condition and his department is working to have him reunited with his father as soon as possible. Ramer says the allegation against his mother is not an extraditable offence in the United States, so RCMP plan to go to court in an attempt to have the woman sent back to Canada."

I wonder how members of SE would respond if spousal abduction wasn't an extraditable offence from Canada to the US. (and it may not be, I'm not a legal authority). It seems quite peculiar.


Discussion is locked
Reply to: "B.C. boy who vanished six years ago found when his mother
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: "B.C. boy who vanished six years ago found when his mother
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
- Collapse -
Sounds complicated and I'd rather not judge

without hearing more but you provided no link. As well, your question is in regard to spousal abduction but the case here seems to involve child abduction by a parent. The two are not at all similar.

- Collapse -
Clarification needed about Rob's question

" wonder how members of SE would respond if spousal abduction wasn't an extraditable offence" (sic)

The mother abducted her child. So, does spousal abduction refer to abduction of the spouse or by the spouse? I suppose it could mean either.

- Collapse -
Good point. I believe the designation in most of

US states is "non-custodial" whatever. That means a court ruling was violated, and the violator can't get off on a technicality. Don't know the Federal version.
Whether a state could extradite, if the Fed law didn't permit or didn't address, is another question.

Anyway, Rob AS USUAL takes an interesting story and turns into rant-bait. But we all knew that. Happy

And it's always about La Canada. Has anyone ever seen Rob's birth certificate?

- Collapse -
That's unfair, Doug. I don't know what the US law is.

But I can see a profound reaction from SE to Canada attempting to extradite a parent. It was really just a question of what SE's reaction would be.

And should you want to see my birth certificate, it's here. Come and visit and I'll show it to you, and my 3 passports. It'll take a little longer to produce my death certificate.


- Collapse -
Hey! It was a joke. We love ya',

warts and all. We, of course, are blemish-free.
Didja notice my "as usual" had every type of emphasis available?

"produce my death certificate"
Don't tempt us.

Hey! It's another joke! Happy

- Collapse -
Abduction of spouse = Abduction of spouse, Spousal abduction

= abduction of child by spouse.

- Collapse -
My impression is, and a quick search

doesn't contradict it, that while certain offenses are extraditable automatically by treaty, that the lack of such inclusion does not prohibit extradition.

- Collapse -
Years ago, remember the Foretich's?


If the allegations against Eric weren't true, it's a shame the mother ruined two lives over it, his and the daughter. It was a nasty event at that time and the conflicts of interest, such as the judge and Elizabeth cohabitating were just unbelievable, and also that the judge was never impeached. It was during a period when allegations of child sexual abuse were very rampant, used by many women to gain custody of children, even where no evidence of such abuse was extant.
- Collapse -
A hard one to decide

It seems so unlikely that she'd spend 25 months in jail for contempt of court for not revealing the whereabouts if she wasn't convinced she was protecting her daughter from danger.

- Collapse -
I though they were both strange people

The whole event, including Congress violating the constitution in creating a "bill of attainder" (later ruled illegal in court) shows how out of range it all had become. Personally I wish the child had been removed from custody of both them and placed in another home and any visits by either parent be supervised and limited in nature, at least till she was a teen when the situation could be assessed and she'd be better able to add her voice to the situation. It was a huge media circus which made it become more political in nature than legal. It may be the mother Elizabeth truly believed what she claimed, and it may also be she was wrong. Other than the superior court judge she married for a short while, I think she's remained single after that. Eric Foretich remarried and has 3 sons, and none of them believe Elizabeth Morgan's story about Eric. The child Hillary has changed her name to Elena and taken or created a new last name for herself, neither Morgan nor Foretich. The child is the one hurt the most by it all, scarred psychologically and I wonder if she'll ever be able to have any lasting relationship with a boyfriend or husband.

CNET Forums