Quantcast
Published On: Sun, Dec 16th, 2018

Brazilian Couple, Carlos and Jemima Guimaraes Sentenced for Kidnapping of Grandson

An international businessman and his wife have learned their fate for international parental kidnapping, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick and Special Agent in Charge Perrye K. Turner of the FBI. A federal jury deliberated for more than two days following a 10-day trial before convicting Carlos Otavio Guimaraes, 68, and Jemima Guimaraes, 66.

Today, U.S. District Judge Alfred Bennett heard arguments from both the prosecution and defense teams. The government requested the court impose a term of imprisonment advised by the sentencing guidelines or slightly higher, while the defense asked for a non-custodial sentence. Ultimately, the court imposed a three-month sentence for Carlos Guimaraes, while Jemima was ordered to serve one month. Both will also be ordered to serve one year of supervised release following their terms of imprisonment during which time they will be required to remain in the United States. The court continued its order that both their U.S. and Brazilian passports remain surrendered and they cannot obtain new ones. The court also ordered the defendants may not have any contact with their fugitive co-defendant daughter, but placed no prohibition on communicating with their grandson.

Each was also ordered to pay a $75,000 fine. Restitution will be determined at a later date, but could be in excess of $400,000.

photo Wset10

At the hearing, the judge also heard from the victim – the child’s father – who gave impassioned testimony about how this has impacted him and how much he misses his son. He stated that he has been “emotionally crippled by this experience. What my family and I have endured at the hands of these defendants has been so painful that I cannot imaging inflicting it on another human soul. How do you take away a parent’s right to have their child in their life?” He further noted that he has been consumed by grief. “My boy was just gone,” he said. “For years, I have begged and begged and begged them to bring my boy back, but they refused.”

The father also told the court the court that each trip to Brazil to see his son for even a short time cost him close to $20,000 and that, for years, he had been working an enormous amount of hours – averaging 100 a week – just to finance his fight to try to get his son back.

He also noted that what these defendants did was devoid of any concern for the child’s well-being, that the decision was motivated by greed, power, control and fear – fear not of him, but that he would get in the way of them taking the child for themselves. “They sought to enforce their own brand of vigilante justice,” he said, adding that the couple had undermined orders, lied to the court and succeeded in obtaining full custody of the child, noting they had stripped him of his parental rights, “making a mockery of the United States judicial system.”

At trial, the jury heard that the child’s grandparents helped illegally retain the child in Brazil away from his father in Houston. The mother and minor child traveled to Brazil to attend a family event in July 2013, but were supposed to return to Houston no later than July 20, 2013. The child was never returned to the United States.

The jury also heard how the child’s mother allegedly orchestrated a plan to travel to Brazil for her brother’s wedding via an agreed travel agreement as part of the pending divorce. While in Brazil, she went to a Brazilian state court and obtained custody of the minor. From that moment forward, the father of the child was limited in his ability to visit with his son. The visits he did have were supervised by a guard hired by the child’s mother. Currently, despite a Harris County divorce ruling in 2015 favorable to the father, his ability to maintain a relationship with his son has been incredibly difficult. The child no longer speaks English, and the father had to learn Portuguese to navigate the Brazilian legal system and communicate with his son.

The child’s father testified and told the jury that all he ever wanted was for his son to return to Houston so he could be a constant presence in his life.

Evidence was also presented which included the fact that the grandparents support their daughter by providing housing and employment as well as attorney fees. Additionally, when the father would visit Brazil, Jemima was present for most of the exchanges of the child. Video evidence showed both Carlos, Jemima, the hired guard and their Brazilian attorney at one of the exchanges.

The defense attempted to convince the jury that the Brazilian court rulings should be respected despite the fact they disregard the father’s position. The rulings found the United States was not the place to raise a child in the “egotistical profile of the American family.”

 

 

About the Author

- The generic Dispatch designation, used primarily for press releases or syndicated content, but may be used for guest author requesting a generic nomenclature

Tags

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



Categories

Archives