ABDUCTION OF SEBASTIAN PAVON CUELLAR

ORIGINATING SUMMONS

LET the DEFENDANT SAMANTHA JENNIFER LOWRY whose last known address is unknown attend before the Judge of Chambers at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London, WC2A 2LL on the 24 day of April at 2.00 o´clock in the forenoon on the hearing of an application by the PLAINTIFF, DANIEL PAVON CUELLAR for an order that:

1)SEBASTIAN JOHN RAUL PAVON CUELLAR be returned to the Jurisdiction of Mexico pursuant to Part I of the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 and Article 3 of the Hague Convention of International Abduction

2)Defendant do pay the Plaintiff´s cost of this application.

3)In the alternative that the return of the child is not immediate,

Plaintiff hereby request the Court to ORDER:

Under Article 7 of the CONVENTION ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION

In regards to the safety of the child and his current condition, to give the Plaintiff the following information:
a)The whereabouts of the child and the history of the whereabouts of the child since his abduction of December 3, 2007 and,
b)Detailed information of any person(s) who have resided or spend the night in the same dwelling then the child at any given time since the abduction and,
c)Full medical records of the child since the abduction and,
d)Immediate physical full check up on the child and,
e)To request mediation between the parties as an attempt to secure the voluntary return of the child or to bring about an amicable resolution of the issues before the next hearing and,

4)To prevent further harm to the child or prejudice to interested parties by taking or causing to be taken provisional measures;
a)To require a Mental assessment of the Defendant. ( By reason of Attached Exhibit Series “N”)
b)To place restrictions against Defendant and any other party to take any action that interferes or places obstacles in the prompt return of the child
c)To immediately restrain Defendant from any actions that may continue to harm the child and/or Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff family (Exhibit Series “B” and “O”)

5)The Court to Grant to Plaintiff any other relief he may be entitled for the prompt return to Mexico and the immediate safety of the child and,

6)The Court to Grant permission for Plaintiff to take an immediate deposition of Defendant and/or to be allowed to take the Testimony of Defendant at the next hearing.

7)The Court to take the proper measures and sanctions against Defendant and Defendant Mother by Perjuries, and the use of False Documents and/or evidence in The High Court of England ( full proof at www.pendingjustice.com, partial proof hereby attached as Exhibit Series“A”, Any further evidence available upon request and in any manner the Court may require) Also can be seen Defendant was keeping decrees secret and still refusing to send the travel documents of Plaintiff and the child as of November , 2007

8)The Court to Deny any Process Defendant has initiated for the purpose to Delay the Application of The Hague Convention and/or any other action that creates a delay the Prompt return of the Child to Mexico.

9) The Court to Deny any Petition or Restrain the actions of Defendant that violates the Rights of the Child and/or his Family.

10) The Court to order Defendant Strict proof of any and all of her claims against Plaintiff or Plaintiff Family without delay

11)The Court to Order an immediate DNA test of the child, since Defendant abducted the child before a DNA test that she required took place and by such request, Plaintiff has reason to believe he may in fact not be the Father of the child

THE WRONGFUL REMOVAL OF SEBASTIAN IN BREACH OF THE CUSTODY RIGHTS OF THE PLAINTIFF.

Sebastian had resided in Country of Mexico for around 6 months before his wrongful removal and abduction by Defendant on December 3, 2007.

The child had ONLY the age of 8 months old at the time of the abduction when he was abducted by Defendant. The harm to the child by the actions of Defendant created a permanent harm to the child but also to the Plaintiff and his family

Sebastian had spent most of his life in Mexico before his wrongful removal and in Breach of the mutual Settlement Agreement of Custody and other matters that was reached between Plaintiff, Defendant and their counsels at the time and endorsed by United States, British and Mexican officials.

Plaintiff and Defendant agreed Sebastian was to remain in Mexico under mutual custody and could not leave the Country of Mexico at any time and for any reason without the written authorization of Plaintiff and Defendant. The child documents were to remain on the United States Embassy to prevent abduction of the child from Mexico. The United States of America Embassy of Mexico Consul Cecil K Scott personally took the duty to enforce the agreement. (hereby attached as Exhibit Series “C”535)

Certain Legal proceedings were to take place in Mexico and remain pending up to date, there are also open cases in United States and remain pending up to date, including rights of access of the Grandmother to the child. (Hereby Attached as Exhibit series “H”)

The Child, the Plaintiff and his Family rights, including but not limited to Human Rights, Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights and Children Rights have been and continue to be violated, any further delay on the prompt return of the child to Mexico will be exposing the child to a grave risk of permanent harm to his life and future, but continue to violate their rights as described below and with the Evidence Series.

HAGUE APPLICATION BACKGROUND

On April 14, 2008 the final trial took place, and the Judge did not grant the Duress claim of Defendant.
The first Hague Application was filed by Plaintiff on May of 2008 in The United States, but because of the “Settlement Agreement” ordered Sebastian to remain in Mexico under mutual custody of the parents and other matters as stated below, Plaintiff was required to file for the Convention with The Central Authorities in Mexico by been jurisdiction of Mexico and did so since September of 2008.

It has taken by “Unknown“ reasons to Plaintiff and beyond Plaintiff control, nearly seven months for just the first hearing to take place, and nearly a year since the first application.

These delays have exposed the child and Plaintiff to additional harm from the abduction and any delay places the child in grave risk to physical and/or mental harm, but especially by the history and past conduct of the actions of Defendant and her family further exposes the child to an imminent danger of a permanent Damage even Risk of Dead. (Evidence hereby attached as Exhibits Series “B” and “N”)

IMPORTANT INFORMATION

“Settlement Agreement” that includes the agreement of the parties of mutual custody and for the child to remain in Mexico, remains valid under Articulo 1793 of the Mexican Civil Code, and also Valid under Rule 11 Agreement of the Texas Rules of Procedure, Plaintiff has complied fully with the Settlement Agreement, including but not limited to hold harmless Defendant from all the crimes she has done as stated below and further describe on Exhibit Series “O”.

Plaintiff has save money to pay for all the cost of transportation for the prompt return of the Child to Mexico

Plaintiff believes it is in the best interest of the child to be protected by the Clauses of the “Settlement Agreement” reached and agreed by Defendant, Plaintiff and their counsels and endorsed by US officials, British Officials and Mexican officials along several others

The Settlement agreement brings immediate relief to all the human rights violation, Civil rights violations and grants Constitutional Due process, protects the Financial Stability of the Child, Protects the Child patrimony, ´protects the safety of the child and brings immediate Justice to the Justice that has been denied for nearly two years.

The prompt return of the Child to Mexico will stop the violations to His Children rights and also will stop the violations to his family rights

Defendant and Plaintiff lived in Mexico

Defendant has friends and Family in Mexico, but also high influences with Embassies and other entities.

Particulars in Short (4 pages)

Plaintiff and Sebastian left United States of America on May 25, 2007 , Defendant was to arrive 3 days later on May 28, 2007, Plaintiff even give her $2000 for the travel plans. Once defendant will arrive to Mexico City, they were to take a trip to the beach the three of them. Plaintiff waited at the station for Defendant, but defendant did not arrive. (Exhibit Series “M”)

Instead Defendant started an intrinsic and extrinsic fraud against Plaintiff and his family careless of Sebastian and for the sole purpose to steal all the assets of the Pavon Cuellar family by false claims and frivolous SECRET suits. (Exhibit Series “O”)
Defendant using her high influences, friendships and in conspiracy with others, by fraud and deception effectively making impossible the return of Plaintiff and Sebastian to Austin Texas;
1) by having stolen their travel documents of Plaintiff and Sebastian,
2) to have entered by force and by criminal trespass into the Homestead of Plaintiff to take illegal possession of all his personal documents and property, and
3) By placing restrictions against Plaintiff to obtain any travel documents for Sebastian
4) By making false claims to FBI working in conspiracy with others
By making false secret court proceedings and by fraud and deception claiming the child was in Austin Texas with risk of international abduction, and such proceedings kept secret, but , claiming by fraud and deception Plaintiff had left to Mexico after such orders (May 30) to be able to place false warrant of Parental kidnapping against Plaintiff.(Exhibit “F”)

Then Defendant by using and exploiting her own two month old son, and by fraud and deception, claimed Plaintiff kidnapped her son when in fact Defendant in conspiracy with others, made impossible the return of Plaintiff and the child to the United States, Defendant also made impossible the return of the child from Plaintiff to Defendant.
By the defendant actions in conspiracy with others, and keeping suits secret Defendant and her attorneys obtained out of this fraud while exploiting Sebastian a two month old child and his family, and to have successfully obstruct in everyway the return of plaintiff and the child to their home in Texas: 35 million dollar judgment based on frivolous claims and out of jurisdiction and even against the Plaintiff parents,

Also over 500 Fine Art Paintings, over half a million dollars of Attorneys fees (for two and a half months exparte proceedings) $ 4117 child support a month which is illegal in Texas (Plaintiff income was $18000 for the whole year), the Homestead of Plaintiff which is protected by the Constitution and Defendant is not entitled to it, over 160 acres of prime real estate, plus much more.

But also by theft Defendant obtained another 1200 Original Fine Art Paintings, extensive electronic equipment including professional sound and lighting for Shows and events, over 10000 Professional photos by Dapacu, all furniture and personal property of Plaintiff including all his personal documents, Defendant holds up to date illegally and by theft all such property, even all of Plaintiff personal Documents and work tools and been the future financial stability of the child, but also his heritage and education.

Defendant and her family used even physical violence and murder attempts to be able to obtain such fraud and amounts.
Once Plaintiff parents found their properties were been auctioned they hired an attorney, who found of the Secret, Out of Jurisdiction Judgment against them for 35 million dollars (and by reason that Defendant and her counsel by fraud, perjury and deception claimed all events happened in Travis County Texas to obtain Jurisdiction in Texas) and Plaintiff parents also found all their bank account were already emptied. They countersued Defendant, and

On November 28, 2007 a meeting took place between Defendant attorneys, Plaintiff attorney and Plaintiff Parents attorneys, also present Defendant and her Father. The meeting took 10 hours to hammer out a Settlement Agreement that was agreeable to all the attorneys and parties involved. The Settlement agreement was executed in Mexico City, Notarized and signed under Oath in the United States Embassy, also in the British Embassy and with a Mexican Notary and endorsed by British Consul and Vice Consul, United States of America Consul and Director for the Family section of The central authority of Mexico and several others.
Defendant Requested a DNA of the child but, abducted the child before the DNA test took place.

The Settlement Agreement was filed in the three existing cases in Texas.

On the same date, by fraud, Perjury and deception and in conspiracy with others, Defendant claim a duress claim by reason of a “Fabricated” email of November 3, 2007, and her counsel filed such duress claim in Texas. Such email not even from the account of Plaintiff and Defendant was very well aware such email was fake and received at least 5 emails from Plaintiff on November 5, 2007 (before the allege 72 hours) that specified he had not send such email and Sebastian was perfect and safe and protected by Plaintiff. (Hereby attached as Exhibit Series “A”)
Plaintiff Parents attorney filed the response for such false Duress claim and also for access to the child by the grand Parents (Hereby Attached as Exhibit Series “H”) These documents by fraud and deception have been withheld by Defendant from the High Court of England.
On or around January 20, 2008 Plaintiff parents went to Austin Texas to give their first deposition and attempt the first hearing, but Plaintiff father delivered the evidence of the fraud and the name involvement, Immediately the deposition and hearing was cancelled, and Plaintiff father was murdered (79 years of age) in front of his wife who were married for 49 years (plaintiff mother). Nothing was stolen from Plaintiff father.
Immediately after, Plaintiff and his mother received dead threats if they would go to the United States.

Days after the murder, Defendant by fraud and deception and in breach of the Settlement agreement and property rights of Plaintiff mother, sold a property of 20 acres adjoining commercial property in Two sides and owed by Plaintiff but with a lien and deed to Plaintiff father
On April 2008, the Judge ruled in favor of Plaintiff mother. The Judge did not grant the duress claim of Defendant.
May 2008 Plaintiff filed under the Hague convention from the United States, but by reasons that the Settlement Agreement was ordered to keep Sebastian in Mexico and other matters described below, Plaintiff was asked to file with the Mexican authorities by been jurisdiction of Mexico.
Plaintiff filed the Hague Convention application on September 2008 with the Central authorities of Mexico.
Over 6 months later on or around March 9, 2008 Plaintiff was told a solicitor may be working on his behalf
On or around March 14, 2008 Plaintiff received by email some documents from the Brethertons, (79 pages) and over 300 missing pages, Such service in violation of the Hague convention on service abroad. Plaintiff was given 6 days to file his Position statement, the Solicitor was unavailable, so Plaintiff filed his Position Statement to the best of his knowledge, then the solicitor contacted Plaintiff one day after the due date, and said she obtained an extension to file such Position Statement, so Plaintiff corrected some errors and added additional important information, the solicitor became once again unavailable, and plaintiff sent the Position Statement directly to the High Court of England.
On or around a March 31 a hearing was scheduled to take place, but was cancelled, on or around the same date, the Solicitor sent to me “her version of my position statement” full of errors and omissions, Plaintiff notified the court and legal services of the actions of this solicitor, then on or around April 8, 2009, the solicitor who claimed to be working for Plaintiff presented to Plaintiff her Originating Summons, time when Plaintiff after reviewing the documents found to have factual errors, crucial omissions, and misleading facts, but also inaccurate request and a missing page of the Settlement Agreement.
Plaintiff did his originating Summons and send it to the High Court of England by email to be filed and notified the court and the Brethertons of the False information contained in the solicitor Originating Summons.
Soon after Plaintiff solicitor said she will not represent Plaintiff, plaintiff does not feel he was ever represented by such Solicitor.
Plaintiff has requested documents from such solicitor and also from the Brethertons, but up to date they have not sent any of them.
A hearing is set to take place on April 24, 2009. Plaintiff to avoid any further delays (Nearly a year since the first application under the Hague convention and it will be the first hearing) has no other choice then to have to represent himself in such hearing.
Evidence to prove all of the facts herein described, were sent to the High Court of England on April 21, 2009 By Fed Ex and schedule to arrive April 23, 2009 and to be use on the hearing on April 24, 2009 along with this Amendment.

Particulars in Detail (11 Pages)

1.The child was born on the 29^th of March 2007 in Austin, Texas, born American Citizen
2.The Parental responsibility is established by the birth certificate.
3.The Plaintiff is an Artist by occupation, Texas resident and Mexican Citizen. The Defendant´s occupation is not known and is a British Citizen.
4.Defendant found to be pregnant on August 2006 in England, she claimed the father of the child was the Plaintiff
5.Defendant moved to Austin, Texas on September 2006 and became an illegal alien in the United States as of December 2006.
6.Defendant hired “Adelante Solutions” a company who will help her in “The Fraud” 5 months later
7.The Child was born on March 29, 2007. Defendant claimed she did not want the child, and did not even want her last name to be carried by him, therefore Plaintiff call the child, after both of his last names only
8.Soon after the birth of the child, Defendant engaged in actions that placed in risk of dead and/or at risk of permanent harm the child. Defendant also refuse to give the vaccines and any medical attention to the child, Defendant purposely harm the child to harm Plaintiff.
9.Defendant moved out of the homestead of the Plaintiff on or around May 16, with the intentions to take Sebastian to England, claiming she could not cope with the baby and for her mother Susan who has a child nursery to care of him.
10.After several emails and conversations and During that week, Defendant asked Plaintiff to Marry her and requested some time apart, time when Plaintiff decided to Go to Mexico
11.Plaintiff left with Sebastian to Mexico on May 25, 2007
12.Defendant agreed to join them on May 28, 2007, Plaintiff give defendant $2000 for her travel plans and after the child grandparents will meet the baby, Defendant and Plaintiff planned to take a vacation to the beach.
13.Without the knowledge at the time of Plaintiff, Tristan Nind (boyfriend of Defendant) and Joseph Lowry (Defendant´s brother) arrived to Mexico City on May 28. They did not contact Plaintiff even when they knew where he was, instead took the same actions to make false claims and attempt to file warrants against plaintiff. They were in contact with Police in Mexico and Embassies. (This is important since shows Samantha had no problem to go to Mexico)
14.Defendant kept illegal possession of the Travel documents of the Plaintiff but also all records and travel documents of the child.
15.Defendant trespass Violently into Plaintiff Homestead by braking a large window
16.Defendant HACKED the email account of Plaintiff and erased nearly all the emails between Plaintiff and defendant and, Plaintiff and Defendant Parents, hundreds of Emails from the birth of the child that showed Defendant violence, defendant harm and neglect to the child, that Defendant could not cope as a mother, Defendant actions that placed in risk of dead and/or severe harm the child were erased by Defendant.
17.When Defendant did not arrive to Mexico, Defendant mother Susan Called Plaintiff and claimed Defendant fell ill but she will arrive in a few days. Plaintiff contacted the Police in Austin Texas and the Family Violence Unit requesting for help and explaining the situation.
18.Defendant did not arrive, and started “Secret Proceedings” in Texas on May 30, 2007, claiming by Fraud and Deception the Child was in Austin, Texas and to place restrictions against Plaintiff to obtain travel documents for the child to prevent Plaintiff and his son to retun to their Home in Austin.
19.Defendant in conspiracy with others, by Fraud and Deception kept the proceedings secret while postponing her trip.
20.Defendant by a “Relationship” with a Police Detective named Andrew Westbrook, worked in conspiracy to make false warrants against Plaintiff and without Plaintiff knowledge.
21.Defendant in conspiracy with others purposely made impossible the return of Plaintiff and the child to the United States, including but not limited to Defendant refusal to send the travel documents of Plaintiff and the child for them to be able to enter the United States;
22. After Violence and Threats started against Plaintiff Family and for no reason, Plaintiff requested the Travel documents of him and the child from Defendant to return to Texas, Defendant refuse.
23.On or around June 3, 2007, Plaintiff even went with the child to the Border of Laredo where Defendant was to send the travel Documents for the Plaintiff and the child to enter the United States, but Defendant did not send anyone, did not even notified Plaintiff she will not send anyone..
24.Defendant continue to refuse to send the Travel Documents to the Plaintiff
25.Defendant in conspiracy with others sent a “Blank Joint Custody Suit” to Plaintiff, such suit without signatures, without been filed, but Defendant claiming she will file it ONLY IF PLAINTIFF WANTED TO, but defendant kept secret the real proceedings.
26.Defendant in concert with others used the answers of Plaintiff to the bank suit to claim by fraud and deception Plaintiff was served with the proceedings of May 30 that were purposely kept secret from Plaintiff
27.Defendant even created a “FAKE” email account similar to Plaintiff were the “suit of may 30” was sent, for Plaintiff to be unaware of such proceedings
28.Plaintiff requested over and over again their travel documents from Defendant to be able to return to United States with the child, but Defendant was either evasive or refused.
29.Plaintiff had to attend a closing of a property in Texas (work)
30.Plaintiff had left his car in a parking lot in Laredo Texas he needed to pick up.
31.Defendant while Trespassing into the Plaintiff homestead, 8 people other people moved in with her, working in conspiracy with her counsel and placing restraining orders against Plaintiff, this way seized all documents and property of Plaintiff. To further obstruct the return of Plaintiff and the child to Texas. Defendant in conspiracy with others started the theft
32.Plaintiff filed trespassing charges against defendant and defendant family, but The police detective friend of Samantha “Westbrook” removed such charges
33.Around June 11, Plaintiff even attempted to return The child, but Defendant refuse to any agreement, nor negotiate any, the attorney of Plaintiff advice to not return the child without a signed agreement
34.Even on June 13, a “Secret” proceedings took place, where Defendant and her counsel, by fraud and deception, claimed Sebastian was in Austin, Texas with risk of International abduction, and could not be removed from Texas or the United States, and failure to obey such order, will subject Plaintiff to Criminal and/or civil penalties. Plaintiff was in Mexico trying to return with the child to their home in United States
35.Defendant in conspiracy with others made false claims and withheld the emails from FBI, claiming by Fraud and Deception, Plaintiff left after the order of May 30, 2007 and was secreting the child.
36.Defendant in conspiracy with others kept “The Last Known address secret.” And been the home in Mexico where Plaintiff and Defendant lived together.
37.Defendant obtained the False Parental Kidnapping against Plaintiff by making false claims and obstructing the return of Plaintiff and the child to the United States including to have withheld their travel documents and even not send anyone to the border of Laredo for Plaintiff and the Child to enter the United States in June 3, 2007
38.Once Defendant knew Plaintiff had left the parents home by the Threats and Harassment of Defendant and her family and by the Heart condition of Plaintiff mother
39.Defendant family members initiated Physical Violence against Plaintiff parents in Mexico City, knowing the heart condition of Plaintiff mother. Plaintiff parents (above 6o years of age)
40.Plaintiff Parents were oblige to move out of their home by Plaintiff mother becoming seriously ill after Defendant Family Physical attacks against them, time when Plaintiff lost contact with his Parents.
41.Even when Plaintiff and the Child were in the State of Veracruz, Defendant claimed by perjury, fraud and deception the Parents of the Plaintiff were secreting the child and the events happened in Travis County, Austin, Texas just for the purpose to file a “SECRET” and frivolous suit against The parents and Plaintiff.
42.Plaintiff started contact with British Embassy, U.S. Embassy and Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores since around early June 2007 requesting for their help, and explaining the illegal actions of Defendant working in concert with others, such communications lasted until the “Settlement agreement” was reached and executed.
43.Defendant boyfriend Tristan Nind, defendant brother Joseph Lowry and a so call “Pete” Monitored by video the home of the Plaintiff Parents in Mexico City 24 hours a day.
44.The Defendant claims “Raids” were made to the Plaintiff Parents home in Mexico, but there is no legal record of such raids, but were a Grand Theft, documents stolen from such home, were used by Defendant in Court in Texas, including but not limited financial records of the Plaintiff parents. Such records were used for fraud to obtain illegal gains.
45.Defendant working in conspiracy with Police Detective Andrew Westbrook, “Fabricated” evidence for Court from the Home of the Police Detective
46.Such Fake evidence was to hide her attempts to take The child to England
47.Such Suits were kept secret, out of Jurisdiction, without notice or service to Plaintiff parents.
48.Defendant in conspiracy with others to have obstructed the return of Plaintiff and the child to the United States and by frivolous suits, false claims, perjuries, false evidence, obtained, sole custody of the child, 35 million dollars Judgment (without service), $ 4117 child support a month (Illegal in Texas), Half a million dollars in attorneys fees (for two and a half months proceedings without contest (exparte) and even with Duplication of attorneys fees, and without receipts or proof of such expenses), real estate including 166 acres of Prime Land (Against Constitution), the Homestead of Plaintiff (in violation of the Constitution and held illegally by defendant up to date) and over 500 Fine Art Paintings by Plaintiff. No evidence was given to prove any of their claims. Only 18 Exhibits were used in August 13, 2007 trial
49.Defendant in conspiracy with others, also STOLEN 1200 Fine Art Paintings, all personal property of Plaintiff including clothes and personal documents, extensive electronic equipment, Antiques and absolutely all property of Plaintiff, up to date, Defendant keeps illegally all property of Plaintiff, including all his personal documents, clothes, homestead, Photos, all Real, Intellectual and Personal Property.
50.Defendant claims to have destroyed the personal property of Plaintiff and all his life Artworks, including 1200 Fine Art Paintings and all the Murals in his homestead, Defendant claims to also have burned Plaintiff collection of Photos and chopped the trees of Plaintiff garden in conspiracy with all the members of Defendant family
51.The decree and Judgment were kept secret from Plaintiff and Plaintiff Parents
52.Defendant Emptied the all Bank accounts of Plaintiff Parents without notice.
53.Defendant in conspiracy with others started to auction in Secret the properties of Plaintiff Mother, Including over 160 acres of Prime Land.
54.Plaintiff attempted several agreements, since June 11, 2007, but all agreements were sabotage by Defendant, her counsel and Defendant parents purposely and for the reason to steal by fraud and deception all the assets and property of Plaintiff Family.
55.Plaintiff and Defendant reached an agreement on September 21, 2007, the terms were similar to the one executed on December 2007
56.Plaintiff kept requesting the Travel Documents for him and the child but Samantha refused, Plaintiff also requested the Decrees or anything Defendant had won, but Defendant refuse to send them.
57.Once Defendant passed such agreement to her counsel, Defendant attempted to Sabotage the Agreement, during this time Murder Attempts were done by Defendant Family against Plaintiff Parents to prevent them from returning to their home in Mexico City, Plaintiff Father filed Police reports of such attempts.
58.On November 5, Plaintiff received an email from his Counsel who had received an email from Defendant attorney of an allege email Plaintiff will kill the child
59.Plaintiff immediately and on the same day of November 5 wrote to everyone involved he did not sent such email, not from his email account and the child was protected by Plaintiff and safe, (before the allege 72 hours), in fact, Plaintiff sent over six emails to Defendant stating such “fake” email of November 3, 2007 was not sent by Plaintiff and not even from Plaintiff email account.
60.Defendant continued to try to Sabotage the agreement, careless of the child, during this time, the emails of defendant were “of a sexually depraved nature” Threats against Plaintiff, against Plaintiff Parents, and against the property and avoiding any negotiations. Plaintiffs remained calm and focus on the safety and resolution in the best interest of the child.
61.Defendant demanded her terms in the agreement.
62.During this time Plaintiff Parents found by internet their properties in Texas were been auctioned, time when they hired an attorney.
63.Plaintiff Parents attorney found of the secret Judgment against them (35 million) and countersued Defendant
64.The Agreement was reached between Plaintiff and Defendant on or around November 23, time when Defendant passed the Agreement to her counsel, who returned the agreement MODIFIED on November 26.
65.On November 28, 2007 Plaintiff Counsel, Plaintiff parents counsels, Defendant counsels, Defendant Father and Defendant had a meeting in Austin, Texas to “ HAMMER OUT A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT”
66.The Settlement agreement was finally reached after 10 hours
67.Plaintiff offered of his willingness to also negotiate a final agreement, also started to offer help to Defendant for her trip to Mexico. But Defendant refuse.
68.Plaintiffs attempted to give important information to Defendant in regards to the child safety and comfort, including to prepare the most “harmless” conditions to the child, but Defendant refuse.
69.The “Settlement Agreement” was executed in Mexico City signed under oath in the British Embassy, American Embassy, and with Mexican Notary, but also The United States of America Consul Cecil Scott personally agreed to enforce the agreement to keep the child documents to prevent his abduction from Mexico.
The “Settlement Agreement” was also endorsed by British Consul and vice consul, United States of America Consul and Director of Family for Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores along several others.
A pediatrician was present for a full check up of the child, and found him to be in excellent health and according to size and weight for his age. Defendant requested a DNA test on the child, time when Plaintiff realize the child may not be his

70.The “Settlement agreement” is an agreement of MUTUAL CUSTODY, also to have DUE PROCESS and the child is to remain in his habitual residence in MEXICO until Defendant will complete all the legal proceedings she agreed to do. The Settlement agreement was carefully worded for the maximum protection of the child and to prevent any abduction. The child will receive weekly visits to a doctor and/or child services to secure his safety, the Settlement Agreement was carefully worded to make a gradual change to Sebastian habitual surroundings he was used to.
71.Defendant waived, renounce and resign to all she had won by reason that was obtained by fraud, even purposely and with violence prevented Plaintiff to have Due Process or the opportunity to be heard or attend any hearing, but also based in Frivolous claims, perjury, fraud and deception were Defendant prevented in every way the return of Plaintiff and the child to their home in Austin Texas
72.Also by Texas Family Code 152.205 such custody is invalid.
73.The “Settlement Agreement” was filed into court on the three existing cases.

THE ABDUCTION

74.Defendant IN BREACH OF THE Settlement Agreement, apparently drove around 15 hours to Austin, Texas and then flew the child to England.
75.Defendant in conspiracy with others also signed a False “Duress” claim based on the Email of November 3, 2007 not sent by plaintiff, Such false Duress claim was signed on the same day she signed the “Settlement Agreement” (Perjury and fraud using false and fabricated evidence)
76.Plaintiff Parents travel to Austin, Texas on or around January 20, 2008 to give a deposition and attempt a hearing, at this time Plaintiff Father delivered evidence of the “Fraud”. Immediately the hearing and deposition were cancelled.
77.Plaintiff father was murdered on February 8, 2008 (79 years old) in front of his wife, they were married for 49 years.
78.Plaintiff and his mother immediately received “Dead Threats” if they would go to the “States”
79.Defendant sold a property of 20 acres owned by Plaintiff Father, adjoining commercial property in breach of the settlement agreement, without notice to Plaintiff mother who became the legal owner
80.Defendant and her counsel started the sale of the Fine Art Paintings Property of Plaintiff Father (Now passed to Plaintiff mother)
81.Plaintiff Mother continued the suit, and on April 14, 2008 the Judge granted a New Trial in Favor of Plaintiff Mother
82.The Judge rejected the “duress claims” by not signing any order granting such duress, the “Settlement Agreement” remains in full force and effect.
83.Plaintiff attempted contact with defendant since then, but defendant never replied.
84.Plaintiff attempted to reach her family members in regards to Sebastian, but also never replied.
85.Plaintiff attempted reaching Defendant friends and usual contacts, but they did not replied
86.Plaintiff attempted to reach Defendant counsel but they neither replied

87.Plaintiff has waited as long as he can and has not file criminal charges against Defendant, as Jail terms exceed decades in Jail. Nevertheless, plaintiff has notified the proper Law Enforcement agencies of Defendant actions and others involved.
88.Plaintiff has set Websites online with the evidence for Law Enforcement agencies and other agencies to investigate the “Conspiracy” and crimes, including now the perjuries of Defendant and Defendant Mother in excess of 50% ratio of the contents of their affidavits filed In the High Court of England.
89.Defendant has now attempted to change the Identity of the child to “hide from Justice” and even attempted to do so in Secret and without Notice. This was done after Defendant received an email from Plaintiff that proves with Defendant own evidence to have been in the Home of the Police Detective “fabricating” evidence and also the Allege Diary of “Susan Lowry” proved false with Defendant own evidence filed in Court
90.Plaintiff does not look to place Defendant in Jail
91.Plaintiff does not look to have sole custody of the child
92.Plaintiff believes in equal rights, regardless of Defendant actions
93.Plaintiff believes The compliance of Defendant of the “Settlement agreement” valid under Articulo 1793 of the Mexican Civil Code, Valid under Rule 11 Agreement of the Texas Rules of Procedure, The Settlement Agreement is Fair and Just, Grants Due Process, but also the optimal solution for the safety of the child. Stops the Violations to the Civil, Human and Constitutional Rights that had been violated and continue to be violated up to date. Protects the financial stability of the child but also his children rights. The Settlement Agreement is the optimal solution to bring the process into an amicable and civil process in the best interest of the Child, maintaining him in the best possible surroundings while a final resolution is reached. Even in such Settlement Agreement Plaintiff has agreed to Hold Harmless Defendant from all her crimes she committed against Plaintiff and his Family.
94.Plaintiff has even offered the forgiveness to Defendant to her actions, but defendant refuses to not lose the money she obtained by fraud, deception and theft and reason of all this ordeal.
95.Plaintiff has even offered a Mediation for a Final Resolution, but Defendant and her counsels refuse to even open a mediation
96.Plaintiff belief is, the safety and the well being of the child and to work for his future is the most important now.
97.The Child has suffered greatly by the actions of Defendant and the delay of his return would expose the child to additional and permanent physical and/or mental harm but even at risk of Dead by the history of behavior and actions of the Defendant and her family.
98.Any Delay of the prompt return of the child would expose the child to additional and permanent damages to his financial security, and Defendant continues to dispose of property of Plaintiff that has been obtained by theft and fraud in conspiracy with others.
99.Any further delay of the prompt return of the child to Mexico will continue to violate his Children and Human rights, but also the rights of the Plaintiff and his family

CONCLUSION

The past is forever gone, only by finding peace today the child can have a happy tomorrow.

The Settlement Agreement was reached and agreed by all the parties and their counsels for the purpose to find such peace and for conflict to stop once and for all by starting Civil process while the child will have his needs met and his safety secured, while remaining under mutual custody and having Constitutional Due Process under an amicable and gradual process where the rights of each individual will be respected and honored.

Defendant has prevented constitutional Due Process, and Plaintiff has lost all his rights without a hearing, without a Fair trial, but also all his property and even personal documents are withheld illegally by Defendant.
Defendant took the rights of Plaintiff and the Child by theft, fraud and deception, even with violence but also Defendant in conspiracy with others by fraud and deception used the Authorities in three countries to obtain their illegal gains of Millions of Dollars
The Plaintiff cannot and will not stop until he can recover his rights and the rights of his child that he is entitled by the International Treaties, by Constitution and by Law and until the Human rights of Plaintiff and the Child are respected and honored.

Especially when Defendant holds illegally Plaintiff son and his rights, and in violation to the Fathers rights, but also the rights of the child have been and continue to be violated up to date.

The Plaintiff beliefs the child is in imminent danger to his life by the previous actions of Defendant and her family against the child and his family, Including to have place the child at risk of dead and/or permanent harm in the past.
Also when all of the Plaintiff property is withheld illegally by Defendant, including all personal documents of Plaintiff and all his life´s work, the future financial estability, education and heritage of the Child is threaten.