Who will get Zahra's remains?

[Flakes]

BTW, I think it's highly inappropriate and careless for us to accuse the extended family of failing Zahra. She was in the care of her father and his new "wife" – it was his decision to take her to the USA to start a new life. In all fairness, how can any of the extended family have possibly predicted the outcome (or even AB)? What power did they have to exercise control or supervise Zahra's care in the USA? Zahra's uncle and other relatives were not responsible – they had no say in the matter.

Zahra's family are ALL great victims in this – Emily, the Bakers and more. They are in ALL my thoughts and I hope for an end to their suffering.

 

[Sabot]

Adam Baker removed Zahra from Australia illegally without informing her mother which he was required by Law to do, especially as Emily had been consistently paying Child Support. And also trying to find out where Zahra was.
Adam Baker's actions led to Zahra's death. The thought of him and his family trying to deny Emily the right to bury her daughter makes me feel ill.

 

[Allusonz]

I personally think AB, ED, and KB should all come to a common ground on this matter and bury her in a place they can all agree on. I just cant imagine Zahra being happy about any kind of family fued over her final resting place. I would hope that 3 adults would take into consideration where Zahra would want to be and place her there. It saddens me to even think about there being any discord over this subject. I hope they all put thier love for Zahra ahead of any hard feelings and put her in a place she had special happy times. JMHO

I have to agree here. This is about Zahra and I do hope they work this out between them. I know we all have very strong feelings all across the board but ultimately it is about Zahra

 

[Hickory Born]

I am of the opinion that Zahra's remains should be returned home by the Government of Australia and that her funeral should be a State one. This means that there's no individual charged with the responsibilities or rights to her remains, and that a decent and fitting memorial and funeral should be provided that perhaps her family might not be able to afford. Also it would provide for a large number of the extended community to attend, as many have mourned her loss so terribly.

I don't think the Government has the right, or should have the right, to tell individuals how, when, and where to bury their loved ones. The Government should not force anyone to have a large funeral just for the public's sake. IMO

 

[Hickory Born]

BTW, I think it's highly inappropriate and careless for us to accuse the extended family of failing Zahra. She was in the care of her father and his new "wife" – it was his decision to take her to the USA to start a new life. In all fairness, how can any of the extended family have possibly predicted the outcome (or even AB)? What power did they have to exercise control or supervise Zahra's care in the USA? Zahra's uncle and other relatives were not responsible – they had no say in the matter.

Zahra's family are ALL great victims in this – Emily, the Bakers and more. They are in ALL my thoughts and I hope for an end to their suffering.

Flakes, I think the tone of the Townville Bullentin article showed all of us the Bakers, including the uncle, still have bitterness toward Emily and want to shed a bad light on her. If this negative tone had not been so prevalent in this particular article, maybe we would feel a different way.

Questions in my mind: Was the Baker family aware of the laws of Australia regarding taking Zahra out of the country? Were they aware that Adam had not spoken with Emily about this?

 

[LCoastMom]

Flakes, I think the tone of the Townville Bullentin article showed all of us the Bakers, including the uncle, still have bitterness toward Emily and want to shed a bad light on her. If this negative tone had not been so prevalent in this particular article, maybe we would feel a different way.

Questions in my mind: Was the Baker family aware of the laws of Australia regarding taking Zahra out of the country? Were they aware that Adam had not spoken with Emily about this?

Were they aware Adam was systematically keeping Zahra from her mother while still living in AU? Were they aware Emily had been searching for Zahra for years? Were they complicit in keeping Zahra from Emily?

Adam took Zahra from Emily and his family. While I disagree in principle that they should be excluded from her funeral - family often pays the price for a loved ones mistakes.

I believe Emily should have all rights to Zahra's remains and to bury her daughter as she sees fit. If Adam's family is excluded there is nothing stopping them from having a memorial service at a later date.

 

[Flakes]

A state funeral in Australia is a tribute and an honour. My comments were in that vein, not in a negative one. My hope is to see Zahra honoured and not fought over by bickering family members. They are ALL suffering from Zahra's death and I can't understand how it should determined who is more deserving to have rights over her remains. They ALL loved her.

 

[Flakes]

Flakes, I think the tone of the Townville Bullentin article showed all of us the Bakers, including the uncle, still have bitterness toward Emily and want to shed a bad light on her. If this negative tone had not been so prevalent in this particular article, maybe we would feel a different way.

Questions in my mind: Was the Baker family aware of the laws of Australia regarding taking Zahra out of the country? Were they aware that Adam had not spoken with Emily about this?

I do understand how and why you are reacting this way to that article. And it's is only fair that I explain why I am reacting the way I do.

I have worked in the media for years and also conducted research on corrupt and misleading representation of information in the media (emotionally, factually, etc). I do not trust the perspective that the media presents in an emotive article like that – I have seen considerable evidence of manipulation of information in the past. It makes me very skeptical! As a result I only trust media information that is repeatedly corroborated across multiple outlets and by reliable sources.

When I read the article I initially saw a man in pain from the loss of his niece. One man, not an entire family being represented. Next I saw frustration and fear about the possibility of not being a part of her burial. Why would he fear that? Why would anyone believe that they would be excluded from the funeral or other events for their family member who they loved?

The media is responsible for the line of questioning in an interview, so that probably led to the fear and frustration aspect. The media also chooses how they edit the article – and they certainly don't print the questions or the provocations which occur in order to glean reactions from the people they interview. A single comment can be taken out of context (either deliberately or inadvertently), and become something quite sensational.

I do not promote or agree with excluding anyone in the family from being a part of Zahra's return to Australia, her funeral or memorial service (or whatever events they choose to hold). There is no reason to exclude Emily simply because she gave up Zahra as a baby – she hurts, she loves Zahra, IMO she deserves to be a part of events, and her family as well as they're "extended family" and have been touched by the recent events too. The Bakers –*they loved Zahra too, they hurt, they deserve to be a part of the events. Why should any be excluded?

Compassion for ALL these victims of this horrible crime dictates that they ALL would benefit from the opportunity to see Zahra put to rest, to see her life celebrated, and to say goodbye. How can anyone determine that any one individual is not deserving to be a part of it, when they are ALL suffering?

 

[Flakes]

Adam Baker removed Zahra from Australia illegally without informing her mother which he was required by Law to do, especially as Emily had been consistently paying Child Support. And also trying to find out where Zahra was.
Adam Baker's actions led to Zahra's death. The thought of him and his family trying to deny Emily the right to bury her daughter makes me feel ill.

Do we have all the facts?

I am not so sure Adam took Zahra out of Australia illegally. There are special forms (Form B-9) which a parent is able to use for passport applications for their child, which do not include signatures or permissions from the second parent. These are quite legal and the applications are stringently managed as they only apply in certain special circumstances. If Adam used this form, and it was approved by the passport office (after corroboration of the facts), then Zahra was removed legally.

Was Adam sole parent of Zahra? I have read this, but do not trust the media articles that have stated it, so I'm not sure what to believe. If he was, then no permission from Emily would be required for a passport.

If Adam forged Emily's signature on the regular passport application form then he absolutely removed Zahra illegally. If this is the case then the Australian government will pursue this in the courts on his return to Australia.

We do not know if any investigation has taken place by the Government of Australia. If it has, then it has not been widely publicised. I certainly hope that such an investigation would take place!

In Australia a parent is, by law, expected to pay child support to the parent who cares for the child – even if they have no contact with that child whatsoever. There is no requirement for negotiation or contact between the parents, as the government agency takes care of that. Of course many slip through without ever paying this and some choose to not accept payments from the other parent. The law states that a parent paying child support gains no personal benefits – not access, visitation, or anything else.

I have no idea if Emily was paying child support. If she did, then all credit to her for ensuring that Zahra was provided for!

 

[Sabot]

Adam Baker said that he was unable to ask Emily for permission as he didn't know her new married name and couldn't trace her. So one can only wonder how he managed to drag himself to the bank each month to collect the payments if he didn't know where they were coming from, or the name of the person paying them.

Emily did have visitation rights. But she couldn't find out where they were. She once travelled several hundred miles to see Zahra, only to find that The Bakers had moved without informing her.

It is my belief that The Bakers made a concerted effort to keep Zahra from Emily, reflected in their animosity. Although why they should feel animosity towards someone who was helping to support her daughter is a mystery to me. Emily is not overly well off, and it was costing her a great deal of money to try to find Zahra, money that she could ill afford, which meant that she had to save it before she could pay The Court for information as to her daughter's where abouts, and to pay anyone else who could help her.

That child died on Adam Baker's watch while he was stoned out on cannabis, by his own admission. He lost all rights, certainly at that point.

I do not believe that he had anything to do with Zahra's death or dismemberment, but I hope that Australia kicks his sorry arse when they finally get him back. He seriously neglected Zahra.

 

[Flakes]

The following is how the child support payments operate in Australia. There are many processes, but when parents are estranged and not in contact, all is arranged by the government. Payments into the primary care giver's bank account is marked as from the Agency, not from the other parent. The paying parent's name is not used, and there is no contact required between the two parents.

Child support payments are means tested – the agency takes estimates of BOTH parent's incomes and uses a complex formula to determine if any payments are required. The number of days in a year that the primary care giver and the paying parent provide care for the child (nights spent in the home) is also part of the calculation.

They look at the paying parent's income first. They deduct a base $ value from the income to determine if they can afford to make payments. The amount above that minimum $ amount is then assessed. It's then compared with the income of the primary care giver. If that income is higher, then it automatically lowers the paying parent's contribution. If the paying parent has some access then this will also lower the amount paid to the primary care giver. A monthly amount is determined by the agency. A low income person may only be required to pay approx $300 per year ($5 per week – ie equivalent to the cost of a cup of coffee, or a loaf of healthy grain bread, or a pair of socks).

Where the government agency is involved in determining child support payments they periodically send out an assessment – so each party sees what the other parent declares as their taxable income. The details of income are provided by the tax department; there's no input by the individuals. This form offers the individuals the opportunity to challenge the assessment – a form can be submitted to request a reassessment. The agency's assessment form contains the name both parents are legally known as with the tax department.

If there is no child support agency payment arrangement then the above process does not apply. There is no involvement by the government agency.

 

[Hickory Born]

Thank you Flakes for that info. Now, could you please tell us if Adam would have had to inform this part of the Australian government that Zahra was living in the US?

OR did Adam keep the same banking account in Australia so the government would not know Zahra was in the US?

Did he transfer these monies from his Australian bank to the US?

We all are aware that he did NOT pay any type of income taxes in the US because he was an illegal. There was US government money going into his household here in the US and he was living off the good citizens of America. Yet, he wouldn't take his daughter for free medical services. It was all about ADAM.

 

[Flakes]

...Emily did have visitation rights. But she couldn't find out where they were. She once travelled several hundred miles to see Zahra, only to find that The Bakers had moved without informing her.

It is my belief that The Bakers made a concerted effort to keep Zahra from Emily, reflected in their animosity. Although why they should feel animosity towards someone who was helping to support her daughter is a mystery to me. Emily is not overly well off, and it was costing her a great deal of money to try to find Zahra, money that she could ill afford, which meant that she had to save it before she could pay The Court for information as to her daughter's where abouts, and to pay anyone else who could help her...

The courts will provide locations of children to the parents, even when estranged, unless there has been a court decision made otherwise.

Consider a scenario that I experienced: an abused woman and her 2 children flee from the abusive husband. The woman notifies family court of their location as it's required legally. The man sends out a warning that when he finds the woman he will kill her or any family member that protects her. The woman and children move from safe house to safe house in fear of being found. The man petitions the family court under the Freedom of Information Act to identify the location of his children (actually only one child was his) and they hand over the woman's current location. He arrives at that location, batters her from head to toe, then shoots her 5 times until she is dead – all in front of the two children. He goes to jail, and the court orders that the children should be taken to visit him every month by their grandparents.

The above woman was the sister of my flatmate at the time. We were involved as there was fear he'd arrive on out doorstep and the family's lives were all threatened. This was a well-to-do, and respectable family.

I hope that gives an idea that it's not hard to gain information on the whereabouts of your children in Australia. The law gives you rights. If you approach a court you can get that information unless you legally have no rights to that information (eg because of a protective court order). The court uses taxation department and/or other information to identify people's locations.

Also, if a person of low income does not have the $ to go to court they are entitled to Legal Aid in Australia which assists them to go to court fully subsidised. A means-tested assessment is then made for them to pay back costs as appropriate to their income.

Please don't get me wrong, I have nothing but absolute sadness for Emily's situation. My heart pours out to her as her pain must be incredible. At the same time I think we need to view things with a understanding of the facts of law and process – especially when these differ from the USA to Australia.

 

[Flakes]

Thank you Flakes for that info. Now, could you please tell us if Adam would have had to inform this part of the Australian government that Zahra was living in the US?

OR did Adam keep the same banking account in Australia so the government would not know Zahra was in the US?

Did he transfer these monies from his Australian bank to the US?

We all are aware that he did NOT pay any type of income taxes in the US because he was an illegal. There was US government money going into his household here in the US and he was living off the good citizens of America. Yet, he wouldn't take his daughter for free medical services. It was all about ADAM.

First, let me say I think he was a despicable person – negligent and selfish beyond comprehension. IMO his decision to move to the USA was unwise, and not in Zahra's best interests from a health perspective. It also took her a long distance away from her beloved family (I'm certain they were), on whom they had been very dependent in the past.

When an Australian travels abroad they are required to: 1) have a valid passport; 2) have a visa to that country (certainly in the case of the USA) and on that visa they need to declare the location they are to be staying at. A child must travel to the USA with a guardian (there is process to follow in order to be permitted into the country if a parent is not present – ie a guardian must be nominated).

So my opinion (and that is all it is, as I have no access to government archives) is that the Australian government would have known that Zahra was accompanying Adam to the USA and of the location of their initial stay (Elisa's father's home?). I have no idea what type of visa they obtained. The government will know this though. And they will also know if Adam and Zahra returned (which they presumably did not) through Australian customs at any time. So this will be evidence of any breach of visa, and will also indicate exactly what US laws he has broken with regard to being in the country.

Whether he was required to inform the Child Support Agency would depend on whether in fact there was an arrangement through them for child support. I am not certain that there was. The government agencies all operate together, so cross-referencing of information would have provided any relevant government agency with Zahra's location if it was required. Also the taxation department would have been tracking Adam and his bank accounts (as I say it is all cross-referenced) if there was any question relating to him.

An example of how these things operate here is: there's currently a scam where people's credit cards are being used at Walmarts across the USA. Sometimes thousands of $ being charged. The Australian banks were immediately onto it. They knew the locations of the cardholders, they noticed impossible timeframe debits (ie one debit in Australia, two hours later a debit in the USA) and this set off the alarm bells. If we make a purchase online to a foreign country, our bank rings us immediately to confirm it is us making the purchase – ie they know where we are now, they know where the purchase is being made and need to ensure it is legit.

So, given this level of efficiency, if Adam was to have a bank account in Australia operating but all debits were being made in the USA then this would have been tagged. They would freeze his account if he had not made arrangements. Also the taxation department would have access to this information, and in turn all other agencies that require information would know his location was no longer Australia.

Australian bank credit cards and debit accounts can be accessed through ATMs in the USA (with a $2 charge or thereabouts) so there would be no need for transfers from an Aussie account to a US one. Most Australians use netbanking now too. Both would be a fully traceable trail of Adam's activities. The government agencies can access your bank account – they can also freeze it (eg to take out child support payments if you're failing to meet your obligations to pay the agency). On our tax returns we must declare our banking account numbers, our interest earned, etc. They can cross reference these and look for unusual transactions in case we're hiding income.

Re: Adam's income tax in the US. Would his employer be taking tax out of his earnings automatically? If not, wouldn't his employer have to complete forms with Adam that declare the employer is free from the responsibility of withholding tax and that Adam must do so? Or Adam would be invoicing the employer (ie trackable records of outgoing from the employer to Adam would be submitted to the tax dept)? Or was Adam working for cash in hand – which is illegal? In Australia there's cross referencing of records from companies and individuals/businesses – all trackable by the taxation dept.

Also, other things I haven't been able to understand: 1) how was Adam's household receiving payments from the government if he was not legal, and 2) how was Zahra enrolled in public schools if she wasn't legal. These two things, plus that he was able to get a job, have always made me wonder what the real facts are regarding Adam and Zahra's residency in the USA (terms of visa, etc).

 

[Hickory Born]

Flakes, to the best of my recollection Elisa stated when she was first arrested (in order to receive free legal advice) that around $200 a month was coming in from the government. I don't think at that time the courts were aware that Adam & Elisa were not legally married.

As for Zahra being enrolled in publis school, that is a norm in our country. Don't ask me why, I don't know. Some of our public hospitals are going broke absorbing the cost of treating illegals, but we still give them medical care. The State of California has a huge financial burden because of illegals

I have no idea how and why Adam's employer did not file taxes on him. But I think that needs investigation.

We all are fully aware that Adam is in the US illegally. Immigrations has pointed that out to us...I might add a little too late.

It gauls me that Adam was in our country and not living by our laws, in soooo many ways. How would Australians feel if an American came over there and used illegal drugs, took a job that one of your citizens could have had, neglected his child to the point your government had to spend time and money investigating it, ripped off Australian businesses with bad checks or non payment of rent, and didn't bother to obtain the legal paperwork to be there? I forgot, then your country/citizens would have to pay for his legal respresentaton in two courts of law.

That is what Adam Baker has done in the US.

 

[Flakes]

Undoubtedly Australians would not be happy with anyone (American or otherwise) who acted in this way. When these situations occur, and if a solid relationship exists between the two countries, Australia enters into arrangements with those countries to sort out legally (in particular we have a good relationship with the USA based on our long-term and considerable economic, diplomatic and military support to your country). Of course the complex scenario involving Zahra's death and her family circumstances is without precedent. I do not think we have heard the end of this – barely the beginning – so I'll just wait and see what awaits Adam. I suspect he'll be dealt with for a combination of offences under American and Australian law where he has broken these, and I think the governments will work together to action this. Chances are, he will probably serve his time on Australian soil in order to avoid being a burden to the USA, but that will depend on the charges and the decisions by the two governments (the US may choose not to release him back to Australia). Certainly if he was deceptive in the process of obtaining Zahra's passport then he will face charges in Australia for that, amongst other possible charges, depending on what they can sting him with.

Yes, we are told he is in the US illegally. I just have never seen any specifics of this, so don't know what type of visa he entered with. I am sure the governments are well aware.

Never think for a moment that the Australian government will be negligent or lax in its dealings with AB. Our legal system may be different to yours – ours in based on the traditional English model – but it is a noble one and is accountable. The governments are undoubtedly working together on things AB, but they are not going to reveal all that to us until they are good and ready (if ever).

The only things we know about AB are he has been excluded from the crimes involving the death, dismemberment and disposal of Zahra, and he faces a number of listed charges. There may well be more to come (as I suspect). Time will tell.

You've probably worked out I'm a stickler for miniscule detail, and do not trust heresay or generalised information from the media. I play Devil's Advocate to see both sides – even of my own theories, I can assure you. I try to remove the emotion from what ideas I test out. This is why I haven't posted my personal feelings about Adam in the past here (ie before the court case) ... though I have above as I feel it's OK now that the case has been dealt with legally. I have been accused on WS of being part of some Adam Baker defense fund-raising group, of having a hidden agenda, and all sorts of absolute nonsense which I have found extraordinary. I guess because I do not post ideas that are necessarily popular, and people simply don't know whether I'm posting it as my idea or as a challenge to an idea (ie. Devil's Advocate). I can assure you all I have no ties to Adam, Emily, Elisa, family or extended circles. I simply want to know the truth, not succumb to some popular or easy theory that accommodates and softens my sorrow for Zahra.

 

[Sabot]

Thank you, Flakes. I do believe that Emily was looking for Zahra, and that it was being made difficult, although I do not know in precisely what way.

Emily was possibly content to some extent in the knowledge that Zahra was safe with her grandmother. She certainly did not know that Zahra was in America, she discovered that via the media when Zahra was reported missing. She never at anytime gave permission for Zahra to be removed from Australia, and nor did she agree to Zahra having a passport. This begs the question of how Adam obtained said passport. This at least is highly suspicious.

Also, certainly in England, it is difficult to gain lawful access to a child living with another parent if that other parent chooses to be obstructive. This can take several years of Court Applications and Judgements which are often ignored.

I agree that opinions should be based on fact, and I do most certainly try to be objective, but I am finding it difficult in this case because the fact remains that if Emily had been made aware of Adam's desire to remove Zahra from Australia, she would have objected, and The Australian Courts would have done so also. And in that case Zahra would still be alive and well cared for.

Your information is respectfully received. I often fight against incorrect public opinion, so I do know that it doesn't always go down well.

 

[Flakes]

Sabot, in dialogue on another website, I read a person professing to be Emily herself (who can really tell, though it seemed to be accepted as correct) that she discovered the whereabouts of Zahra a matter of days prior to her disappearance. This was through a friend of a friend on a social networking website (facebook I recall).

 

[Sabot]

Sabot, in dialogue on another website, I read a person professing to be Emily herself (who can really tell, though it seemed to be accepted as correct) that she discovered the whereabouts of Zahra a matter of days prior to her disappearance. This was through a friend of a friend on a social networking website (facebook I recall).

I think you will find that it is Emily, if we are talking about the same website. Her credentials have been checked, certainly to my satisfaction.

It appears to have been a bit complicated as this friend of a friend seems to have asked Karen Baker if she could pass on information about Zahra, but Karen Baker refused. Lots of speculation about whether or not Karen Baker knew where Adam and Zahra were before Zahra disappeared. Karen Baker herself has been very vague about it all. Whatever it was that happened it is pretty horrific to discover the whereabouts of one's daughter in this fashion.

But at least it would suggest that Emily was in fact searching for her daughter.

 

[LCoastMom]

Zahra Baker's remains released to her father

- The remains of 10-year-old Zahra Baker have been released to her father Adam Baker.

Adam Baker says he wants to return to Australia and give Zahra a proper service and burial there. Baker can't leave the country until he resolves criminal charges alleging several misdemeanors and two felonies unrelated to the girl's slaying.

http://www.wcnc.com/news/zahra-baker/Zahra-Bakers-remains-released-to-her-father-135163373.html

Why did I hold out hope that this was not going to happen, that Zahra would be going home to her mother?

Not a word about Emily in the short article - Adam wants to return the remains to AU for burial...