Link: http://www.lahora.com.gt/notas.php?key=59930&fch=2009-12-16

National
Miércoles, 16 de Diciembre de 2009 Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

TRIBUNALES: Se le acusa de trata de personas y documentos falsificados
COURT: She is accused of human trafficking and forged documents
Capturan a abogada sindicada de ser cabecilla de red de adopciones anómalas
Capture: lawyer accused of being ringleader of anomalous adoption network
Gerson Ortiz Gerson Ortiz
gortiz@lahora.com.gt gortiz@lahora.com.gt
Imprimir

María de la Asunción Loarca Saracho, abogada de origen mexicano, fue capturada esta mañana en su residencia de la zona 10; el Ministerio Público la sindica de ser el cerebro de una red de adopciones anómalas.
Maria of the Assumption Luarca Saracho, Lawyer of Mexican origin, was captured this morning at her residence in zone 10, the Public Prosecutor's accused of masterminding a network of abnormal adoptions.

La fundación Sobrevivientes, quienes acompañan varias investigaciones relacionadas con procesos anómalos de adopción, se manifestaron satisfechos con la captura de la abogada, a quien también señalan como responsable de varios casos.
Survivors Foundation, who accompanied several investigations related to abnormal processes of adoption, were satisfied with the arrest of the lawyer, who also singled out as responsible for several cases.

La captura fue ordenada por Marta Sierra de Stalling, jueza Octava de Primera Instancia Penal, quien autorizó el procesamiento de Loarca por tres delitos.
The seizure was ordered by Marta Serra Stalling, Judge Eighth Criminal Trial, who authorized the prosecution of Luarca of three felonies.

Casos Cases
Alexander Colop, titular de la fiscalía contra la trata de personas del Ministerio Público (MP) explicó que la recién aprehendida está directamente vinculada a por lo menos tres casos de adopciones anómalas de los cientos de reportados en el país.
Alexander Colop, head of the prosecution against the trafficking of the Public Ministry (MP) explained that the recently seized is directly linked to at least three cases of anomalous adoptions of hundreds of reported in the country.

"Durante la investigación que realizó el MP se ha podido determinar que esta persona es la que lidera, de alguna forma, la Asociación Primavera, que es una entidad dedicada al trámite de niños para darlos en adopción, pero que en su mayoría eran irregulares", explicó el fiscal Colop.
"During the study undertaken by the MP has been determined that this person is the one that leads, somehow, the Association Primavera, which is an organization dedicated to the processing of children to give them up for adoption, but were mostly irregular" said the prosecutor Colop.

La fiscalía asegura tener tres casos detectados en los que se pueden evidenciar "palpablemente" las irregularidades en las que incurría la Asociación Primavera.
The prosecution claims to have detected three cases in which one can identify "palpably" irregularities at the AP were incurring.

Operación Operation
La fiscalía estableció la forma de operar de la hoy aprehendida, pues según afirma el MP, la abogada tramitaba los procesos de los infantes en el Juzgado de la Niñez y la Adolescencia de Escuintla presidido por Mario Peralta, contra quien fue solicitado un antejuicio por anomalías en sus resoluciones.
The prosecution established the modus operandi of today's apprehended, as he claims the MP, the lawyer handle the processes of infants in the Court of Children and Adolescents in Escuintla, chaired by Mario Peralta, against whom it was requested a preliminary hearing by abnormalities in its resolutions.

Tras los fallos del citado juzgador, las y los niños eran declarados en abandono para ser sometidos a un segundo proceso de adopción, sin embargo, en tres de estos casos, la fiscalía detectó que eran los mismos padres adoptivos los que aparecían tanto en el primero como en el segundo proceso y obtenían la adopción.
After the failures of that judge, the child were reported abandoned in order to undergo a second process of adoption, however, in three of these cases, the prosecution found that adoptive parents were the same as those appearing under the first as in the second and obtained the adoption process.

"Durante el primer proceso de adopción se detectaban irregularidades, pero la Asociación Primavera intervenía y solventaba este problema por medio de un trámite de abandono irregular y ejecutaba un segundo proceso de adopción que al final era con los mismos padres adoptivos", detalló Colop.
"During the first process of adoption irregularities were detected, but the Associacion Primavera stepped in and solve this problem through a process of abandonment irregular and executing a second process that ultimately was adopted with the same adoptive parents," he noted Colop.

La profesional del derecho fue procesada en el Juzgado Octavo de Primera Instancia Penal por los delitos de trata de personas, asociaciones ilícitas y uso de documentos falsificados.
The legal practitioner was prosecuted in the Court Eighth Criminal Trial for the crimes of trafficking, racketeering and using forged documents.

I don't have a personal axe to grind with Susana L as I don't know her personally and I've never had any dealings with her. But I find it hard to believe that one of the most active Guate lawyers had ALL CLEAN cases--it was just impossible to process so many cases and NOT COME INTO CONTACT with dirty cases.

When we were in process with Susana, our agency (who only used her) flat out told us that 'susana's birthmothers do NOT change their mind.' And with all the families that we met during the 2 years that we dealt with adoptions, NOBODY lost their child for that reason. Many other families with different agencies/different attorneys did - you would hear about them all the time on the forums. But several families I know with Susana went from relinquishments to abandonments. But never a bmom changing her mind. Just sayin'.

As a victim of what in my opinion was a very questionable case, where the child I was referred by a FL agency, and approved to adopt by the US E. was returned to her mother by a judge in a Guatemalan court, I don't believe that anyone just happens to 'come into contact with a dirty case', as was posted earlier.

Adults make choices, children have none!

As I have said before, I do hope that all involved with fraud in adoptions in Guatemala, and countries beyond, will be exposed and brought to justice. Sadly, those we are aware of, seem to keep getting just a slap in the wrist. That's not much of a deterrent compared to the obvious benefits.

No surprise on the 'bail', again!

Elizabeth

Kevin,

can someone translate these articles for those of us who can not read Spanish? That would be really helpful, as I am sure most of us do not.

Elizabeth

Hi Elizabeth- The article posted above is translated already. The lines are in both languages.

No surprise here other than...what took so long!

I do not think that it is fair for anyone to have an opinion on what is going on with Susana's case if you are not "fully" aware of what is going on with her case. You would not like it if others said these things about you. Treat people with the respect that you would like given to yourselves. Again you are innocent until proven guilty, I think people forget that sometimes.

I know for a fact that Susana has had mothers who changed their minds and wanted their child back.....And they were given their child back. And this isnt a duck!! We can assume all we want but we arent Susana or the Guatemalian goverment. What we need to do is offer words of encouragement to these families that are still waiting on their children to come home.

We worked with Susana. At the beginning, our agency told us about a child, but soon after, Susana told the agency that the child's family decided not to relinquish. So...how about keeping the judgments to the facts? Considering how many enemies Susana made and how many adoptions she did, if she were truly guilty, don't you think it would have come to light before, and the charges would be more specific than "irregularities"?

Thanks Alouisiana for your comments.

The "duck" comment in the signiture and some of the other comments above are uncalled for and rude.

Almost everyone here seems to be forgetting something very important here.

If it wasn't for the efforts of Susana and some others back in 2003 to reopen adoptions, NOBODY would have adopted internationally from Guatemala in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 or 2009. NOBODY.

How many of us adopted our little ones in those years? How ungrateful many of us (not all of us) are for the blessings of people like Susana who have worked so hard for the children and the birthmothers of Guatemala.

How quick many of us are to judge from sound bites, controlled newspapers, and a few spiteful posts on the internet.

My chilren came home in 2004 and 2008, and I am one parent that is very thankful that Susana fought to reopen adoption in 2003, which she is now being blamed for. She is being accused of trafficking for all of the thousands of adoptions that occured since 2003, not just hers, but everyone's cases since 2003 because she fought to get them started again. Is that fair?

I challenge those who are attacking Susana here to look at your Guatemalan child/ren and to be thankful that she fought so hard for you in 2003 and beyond.

anonymous

I also believe that the facts of the case have to be used to determine IF Susana is guilty and if so what crime she is guilty of. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

Although I'm grateful to Susana for keeping adoptions open, I don't think that gets her a free ticket either.

Has the original attorney been charged with anything?

Ah, there I go again :) I'm not entirely on anybody's side.

Best, Cheryl

Well said Anonymous.

Anonymous,
Thank you for your post. I was in the process of writing my own, but you've summarized it perfectly. I couldn't agree more!!

Kevin: I don't blame you one iota for being angry re the PoundPup Legacy comments. I couldn't find a place to respond on the appropriate thread, so I'm posting here. Did you intend the irony in the "bastards" comment?

Thanks to those that have said that Susana let the mothers change their minds. What saddens me the most is that, is how political these cases have all become. Norma Cruz has stated that her family has received threats, but what about the mothers she is working with? How will they protect themselves? Honestly what would have been safest for these mothers and children would have been to try to investigate these cases as private as possible. Also, nothing mentions that maybe one of the reasons the other countires stopped with the adptions is because their governmnets felt like their countries were becoming too diverse. Many European countries do not want much diversity. I have relatives in other countires that have said this fact.
As far as the pound puppy website is concnerned,my relative an international adoptee from Romania who is now 25, saw the Pound Puppy and said she was sick to her stomach! She KNOWS what it is like to live in an orphange and share a tooth brush with 30 other children and sleep on a bed wihtout a mattress. She KNOWS hunger. She even had family come to visit once and awhile, but could not care for her. One she was found in a building right before demolishment.(left there by her own bio family-(think deeply about that one folks)They were pleased that she was adpoted. She said she feels sorry for the ones who were left behind. Tonight she is sitting with her toddler and wonderful husband in their home happy safe and sound home filled with love. I can not imagine to think of whre she would be now if she had not been adopted.(she was one of the last ones to get out!!!). All I know is she had some excellent attorney working to get her out. I do know that her her birthmother years later said she was so happy she was adopted because the birthmother was able to marry. Her half sister was rejected by this same birthmother as an adult because she her bio father was of the gypsy hertigage. My mine point is life is complicated.Susana,has probably seen things we could not imagine in our wildest nightmares.Despite that I feel she seems to haved used ethics with practicality. I think there must be a better way to do adoptions, however, this strong anti-adoption movment is very scary and I feel there are many agendas involved.

Patti,

Very well put.

I will also add a story. A woman recently said to me, "Adoption is so COOL! I was adopted and I think it is really cool." I said, "Yes, I think it is cool too. You know there is a lot of anti-adoption sentiments now days." She said, "Oh ya, why did you take on someone else's problems." "No," I said. "There are people that just feel that it is wrong to adopt someone else's child. I guess they feel it is a kind of stealing." She replied, "Clueless."

I want to add that I was not referring to the cases where children really were kidnapped. Obviously, that really is stealing.

Best, Cheryl

Sobrevivientes is not the enemy. I think that Sobrevivientes is doing important work--and remember that they have other campaigns besides this one (roughly the equivalent of a domestic violence shelter/advocacy agency). They are also providing accompaniment (including protection) to the mothers while they search for their children.

I don't understand why Patti thinks this investigation into corruption and kidnapping should be "private". That would be like doing an undercover "Amber Alert". Important information is coming to light from Sobrevivientes' advocacy and investigation and that's right and just.

Andrea,

I see your point about the Amber alert idea, however IMO Guatemala is not the U.S.A where Amber alerts have a chance of working. Also, children/adults are kidnapped often in Guatamala for various reasons all the time.(drug debts etc,) Guatemala has virtually very little police (for the poor) and their are other factions that control the country!.A more generalized campaign could have made her statement about adoption, and protected many children and mothers,(that is why I believe the information about these cases should have been presented privately, within the adoption community and autoritis, and kept private) and I believe their would have been a much better chance for them seeking truth and cooperation using other means. The protection of the lives of these people should have taken precendence over the campaign. I hope you are right and they are all protected, however, I wonder for how long?

In June of 2007, my husband and I were presented with a newborn baby boy to adopt. We accepted and signed a POA. Four or five weeks later, our agency sent us an email stating that the child was no longer available due to false paperwork and the child was put into an orphanage. A couple of days later we were presented with another child, whom we signed a POA. To make a long story short, this adoption has been a nightmare. I will not get into specifics.

After reading all the pound puppy posts, I decided to explore the site out of curiosity. I visited the link that dealt with child trafficing cases. After scrolling down to the Guatemala cases, I learned two horrifying facts. 1. One of the little girls who was stolen from her mother and whose adoption was nearly completed, but in the last few weeks was recognized by her mother at PGN. DNA proved the mother/daugher connection and they were soon reunited. I learned the attorney in that case is our very own attorney. 2. Scrolling down further on the website, I recognized a name. It was the name of the first little boy in which we signed a POA. I was sickened! I learned that this innocent child was abducted from the arms of his mother by gunpoint at 40 days old. Thank God, it only took officials 27 days to reunite this innocent child with his parents. We still have the pictures of this little boy and a copy of the signed POA.

I have learned more than I ever wanted to learn about the evils of corruption from our attorney, facilitator, and agency. Throughout the horrors of our adoption, we have been given few answers, and then manipulated to feel like we are ungrateful, rude, and nonappreciative if we dare question anything...........not that this has stopped us.

We did not want a child bad enough to where he was ripped from the hands of his birth mother by gun point, nor did we want to be involved with ANY corruptive type of activities. We wanted a child no one else wanted. We wanted a child whose birth mother CHOSE to relinguish him for adoption.

How dare our AMERICAN agency collaborate with criminals on our behalf, not once but twice! We did not want this! We have been put in an extremely difficult position.

Dear MSSM - my heart goes out to you and to the innocent boy and his birthmom who almost lost him. I have come to think that while what you described does not represent the majority of adoptions from Guatemala, it is far to prevalent to allow to continue. Also, even in situations where there was no hint of kidnapping, there was still a huge inequity. While we have established a relationship with our daughters birthmom, I know that she did not receive the basic protections that a US birthmom would receive, such as couseling prior to relinquishment.
Again, your post really touched my heart because you spoke to your desire to parent a child, but not at the expense of another loving parent.

MSSM, what an awful story! My heart goes out to you and your family. Your story just illustrates why I have so much trouble with anti-adoption types (including many on the Pound Puppy site) who blame PAPs/APs for the mess that Guatemalan adoptions became. PAPs like you are VICTIMS, not the cause of the problem. You entered the process in good faith. The corruption was entirely not your fault. Yet, many blame PAPs/APs. The real enemies in this process were the corrupt facilitators /lawyers /agencies.

I've read most of the posts and I have to say that I feel for many who have dealt with so much. My wife and I started our adoption with Susana back in October of 2006 and we finally got our little girl home last spring. We picked up the final paperwork the week after my 43rd birthday, so it was quite a gift. Unfortunately, we endured so much during that wait and it could have been worse - much worse.
We were never told of how she would have little or no compassion for the PAP's and their struggle. Susana Is not loved in our home, for reasons that no one has really discussed here. I believe strongly in diplomacy, yet this is not one of Susana's strong points. It cost us a lot of grief and heartache; although, she is truly an advocate for the children. If she had been politically motivated, she would have probably been less effective in bringing children home. It is a catch 22 in most situations and I’m not sure I could have done better. I just feel that if you stick your tong out far enough, someone WILL cut it off. She stuck out her tong and handed people the knife. Gutsy to some, stupid to others; you decide.
Most of our anger was centered on her conflicts of interest. If she would have been a "voice for the children" instead of an “attorney for adoptions”, there would have been less confusion and more support. All monies were going straight to her. She was the hogar’s owner, the name of interest on our adoption, and the legal guardian to our child. We didn’t even realize until almost a year after the adoption started that our actual attorney in Gautama was someone completely different; we never even met the man. It would be like driving into a town where the sheriff, judge, and landlord were the same person. You would have a hard time taking them seriously, let alone feel that you were being treated fairly.
Susana is ultimately where she is because of her own actions – good or bad. She believes in laws that her government seem to change daily. This isn’t a bad thing, but a bit idealistic. Her taking the legal route cost us almost 1.5 years of waiting, but ultimately brought our child home. To me it’s bitter sweet. We can’t say that her actions early on would have ended in an earlier adoption, but we were told on several occasions of how we had no rights and she would do what she thought was best, regardless of what we had to say. When someone threatens to stop your adoption because you insist there are alternatives, it creates hard feelings.
Long and short…..She has been alone all of the years by choice. Susana alienated herself through harsh words, denial of responsibility to her perspective parents, and tough and often bad choices. Sometimes things worked, other times not. I can feel for her as a Christian, but I cannot defend her actions. I don’t think that she is guilty of any crime that any other attorney (whether Guatemalan or US) could inadvertently get involved in. Working in the environment that she is stuck with would make it more than hard. I just see a person that has made more enemies than friends. The enemies are taking advantage of this.
I hope she can continue her work, but if she reads this post, I hope she takes heed to the following:
- Use your legal background to battle corruption. Stop being an adoption lawyer and be a lawyer for the children. Start being their leader and stop micro managing. Trust those that can care for the kids day to day and work strictly on that which will bring forth change. Do not become personally involved – stay at 50,000 feet. The world of adoption needs those that find ways to use the system, not fight it.

our daughter came home in 2005. A neighbor handed me a NYT article about irregularities in guatemalan adoptions in which Susana Luarca defended her position. i have periodically checked the internet for news of her because i feared exactly what has now come out. If susana has been a part of the things she is accused of i hope she never partakes in another adoption case again. there are many honorable lawyers out there who are doing this for the right reasons!! but what has torn my heart in two is what this will mean to my daughter. she is forever asking questions about her birth mother, about La primavera, about the pictures i have of her in Susana's arms feeding her. i am fully open to sharing all of her story with her. but my god... as if adoption isn't a difficult enough thing for these children to deal with, how on earth do i tell my daughter that the person who was responsible for her coming home, who owned the 'orphanage' she spent 7 months in has been accused of such atrocious things. furthermore when i read the relinquishment statement in her file where the birthmother is quoted as saying 'she met a woman who convinced her it would be better for her child to give her up' i can only wonder,.,, who was that woman. susana? and how was she convinced? bribed, threatened... I wanted to encourage my daughter a reunion with her birthmother if it was something important to her, now i am terrified that we will all find out something that could hurt my daughter so deeply. how dare anyone make this the story our children have to live with. how dare anyone bring suffering to the mothers in guatemala who already suffer so deeply. nina