Nanjing Men Negotiate Son's Custody Right to Take His Ex-wife

In a lawsuit to change the child custody rights in Nanjing, Xu Hong, the ex-husband’s ex-husband, came up with a group of unsightly “bright photos” and pointed to the heroine in the photo as the current wife of his company’s ex-wife Wang Qin. The misbehavior of his ex-wife did not qualify for child care and asked the court to decide to change his son's custody to himself. However, Xu Hong could not prove that the woman whose face was mosaic in the photo was an ex-wife. The Court of Drum Tower in Nanjing City heard the case and the ruling rejected the plaintiff's claim. Recently, the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court finalized the verdict in the first instance.

The origin of the case

Her ex-husband took away her son and accused her ex-wife of "taking pornographic photos"

In the early 30s, Xu Hong and Wang Qin originally were married couples. After the two parties agreed to divorce through the Gulou District Court in the second half of 2008, Wang Qin gave up the right to property claims and won the custody of Xu Hu, the son of the two sides. One day in the summer of 2009, Xu Hong proposed to bring his son to live for a while. Do not want to, after Xu Hong took his son away, he did not hand over his son to Wang Qin. Wang Qin realized that it was not good. He went to Xu Hongya’s son, but Xu Hong said, “The son is not willing to be with you. Now I am going to raise him. You don’t have to worry about it anymore.” “This law is impossible, you Quickly hand over my son!” Wang Qin went to Xu Hongya’s son again and again. Xu Hong refused or avoided. In the past two months, Wang Qin searched all possible places, inquired all who could inquire, and found no trace of his son.

On the afternoon of August 7 last year, Wang Qin received a text message from Xu Hong: "Where did you take a sex photo with a man? The location is like your home." The next day, Xu Hong sent a text message saying: " You see that the scandals you made were photographed on the Internet. The son also saw the photos. He said that he was shameful to have such a shameless mother." However, Wang Qin did not find Xu Yan's pornography afterwards.

It was through Yan Yan’s request for custody of the son.

Wang Qin, who was not ready shortly afterwards, received the court’s responding notice. Originally, Xu Hong sued her to the court and sue to change her son’s custody rights.

Xu Hong said that Wang Qin lived in a rented house for a long period of time, and rented the house again for a number of people, resulting in the child not having enough stable living space. Wang Qin only has high school culture and cannot afford the task of counseling and educating children. In addition, Wang Qin's income is not stable and her life is not inspected. Her obscene sex photos are transmitted to the Internet. Such a mother is not suitable for raising children. Xu Hong also said later that he has a bachelor's degree, he has a good income and stability, has a large area of ​​housing, good character, and after the divorce has not yet been married, the conditions for raising his son than Wang Qinqiang many times. Wang Qin angered Xu Hong and fabricated his own facts.

Case hearing

Controversy: Pornography is mosaic and unknown

Soon after the court filed the case, Xu Hong filed an application to the court requesting the court to carry out a judicial appraisal of the photo to prove that the heroine in the photo was Wang Qin. However, the court did not accept Xu Hong's application on the grounds that the photograph was of unknown origin. The group of photos that Xu Hong provided to the court was stored on a CD. Of the 10 photos, except for the first one revealing the heroine's face and making a mosaic, the rest did not reveal the heroine's face.

Before the official opening of the trial, on the afternoon of November 9, 2009, the presiding judge passed the original and defendant to the court, but Xu Hong did not come on time. When answering the judge’s query, Wang Qin firmly denied that he had filmed so-called pornographic photos. Xu Hong’s agent said: “Because the photos of the group were uploaded to the Internet and were processed technically, the facial features of the heroine could not be shown. However, Xu Hong From the details of the photos and Wang Qin's body details, it can be proved that it is Wang Qin himself.” After the conversation, the trial judge asked the plaintiff to bring Xu Hu to the court when the plaintiffs officially opened the trial on November 17th, otherwise the court Will regard it as a refusal to appear in court.

But on the day of the trial, Xu Hong and the child still did not appear. Wang Qin said that her son’s right to custody was lawful and effective, and that she was able to meet the child’s needs for life and learning and requested the court to dismiss Xu Hong’s lawsuit request. For the group of pornographic photos, Wang Qinjian stated that the heroine was absolutely not her own. Xu Hong’s actions were to defame and frame her. She reserved this to pursue Xu Hong’s rights.

Judgment: The court decided not to accept the rejection of the claim

On November 23, 2009, the Drum Tower District Court held a public hearing to make a first instance verdict on the case. The court held that Xu Hong had taken the dependents from Wang Qin, who had legal custody rights, without legal procedures, and his whereabouts were still unknown, infringing Wang Qin’s legal rights. Its provided dependents’ videos of life and a group of obscene pictures without facial features have no probative force for the facts they claim and the court refused to accept them. Therefore, the court's request for a change in the litigation request was not supported by the court and the court rejected Xu Hong's claim.

Xu Hong refused to accept the first instance verdict and appealed to the Nanjing Intermediate Court. The Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court held that the first-instance court’s determination of the picture was in compliance with legal requirements and that all the facts found in the judgment were clear. Therefore, the dismissal appeal was made on June 6 of this year and the final judgment of the original judgment was upheld. In response to the judgment of the case, the official ruling of the trial at the first instance of the case pointed out in the interview that if the party raising the child has serious problems with moral quality, the other party may sue to change the custody of the child, but the claimant’s party must provide proof. In this case, the group of obscene photos without facial features provided by Xu Hong failed to explain the origin, time, and location of the photo, and there was no evidence to prove that the woman in the photo was tied to Wang Qin. Therefore, the court did not organize the group of photos. The appraisal also does not recognize that it is not improper.

Ending: The case is closed, the child is still missing

The method officer also said that in this case, Xu Hu was taken away by his father and hid afterwards to artificially cut off his mother's feelings. To love children, we must think of children. Parents can't vent their hatred that causes divorce. The method officer believes that Xu Hong used a group of photos that lacked facts to change the child custody lawsuit and refused to appear in court to explain the source of the photos. This is an irresponsible manifestation, and damage to the child's mother’s reputation is actually for children. It is also an injury. This is not desirable.

Today, Wang Qin has applied to the court for mandatory enforcement based on the verdict. After the court accepted his application, Xu Hong played a “disappearance”, which caused implementation to meet resistance. At present, the executive judge is still trying to find the whereabouts of the executor Xu Hong. Wang Qin said that she will never give up her son’s efforts. (The parties in the article are all pseudonyms)

Next:Installation, use and regulation of marine diesel generator sets
Previous:One dead and six injuries caused by explosives explosion in a villager in Jingyuan County, Gansu