[Claire] I can’t wait to see my child.
I want my child returned to me in a peaceful and safe manner.
Taiwanese table tennis player Chiang Hung-Chieh, 34, who held a press conference at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan (Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo) on July 27, spoke earnestly, sometimes with tears in his eyes. Dressed in a black suit, his face was tense from start to finish. Jiang asked for the return of his child, Ai Fukuhara, 34, his ex-wife and a silver medalist in women’s table tennis at the London Olympics.
Jiang is demanding that Fukuhara hand over their oldest son (4), whom he allegedly took from Taiwan. The Tokyo District Court, which filed the appeal, issued a decision on July 20 ordering Mr. Fukuhara to return the eldest son to Ms. Jiang. According to the lawyer who attended the hearing, a “temporary restraining order” was also issued to immediately hand over the child. Depending on the situation, it was suggested that charges of kidnapping of a minor may be filed.
Mr. Fukuhara’s side, on the other hand, has responded with an outright refutation, claiming that The decision to extradite him was made by the court of first instance, and no final judgment has been made on the facts,” and “(the decision to hold the press conference) is a form of domestic violence against children. He had asked for the press conference to be canceled in advance so that he could deal with the issue in an adult manner.
Jiang and Fukuhara announced their marriage in September 2004. They divorced in July 2009, but they agreed to joint custody and Jiang raised their eldest daughter (5) and son in Taiwan, but in July 2010, trouble began. In July 2010, trouble began to brew. Jiang left her son with Fukuhara to visit him during his summer vacation, and they were unable to contact each other.
Why did the couple’s relationship deteriorate to the point where they exchanged criticisms? FRIDAY Digital” reported in detail on the “child taking commotion” that triggered the trouble in an article distributed on July 27, 2010. We would like to reproduce the article and look back at the conflicting claims of Mr. Jiang and Ms. Fukuhara (some parts of the article have been corrected).
The “disappearance” hoax.
It seems that he and his ex-partner are locked in a bitter dispute.
Fukuhara and Jiang, who are now divorced, are in trouble, criticizing each other vehemently. It all started with a message posted by Jiang, a Taiwanese table tennis player, on July 24, 2010.
I don’t understand this behavior of a parent at all. From last night until now, he has not answered my calls or returned my messages. Is this the way to treat a child?
Fukuhara said she was visiting Taiwan to see the child she had with Jiang. However, Mr. Jiang was furious when he took his eldest son out of the country and could not be reached. He was furious when Jiang took his eldest son out of the country and could not get in touch with him.
In response, Fukuhara’s former coach and close friend, Ehime Yu, responded at the time.
Yuhime expressed her understanding of Fukuhara’s feelings as a mother who could not see her child,” she said. He then countered that Mr. Jiang was spreading various one-sided information in order to play the role of a good father. He wrote on his SNS
[Joon] It was the father who kept stopping the mother from taking the child home. （The father is lying and spreading false information about the disappearance of the child, knowing that the child is safe with the mother.
(A Taiwan-based writer) The claim that Mr. Jiang was lying about taking the child away without permission and not being able to contact her is a falsehood. Soon after, Fukuhara himself issued a statement to the Taiwanese media, including “Kagami Weekly. The content of the statement was as follows
Ms. Fukuhara and Mr. Jiang have joint custody. Naturally, Ms. Fukuhara has access to her children. However, Mr. Jiang frequently refuses to allow her to visit him. So Ms. Fukuhara had no choice but to recommend to the Taiwanese court that Mr. Jiang be allowed to see his child.
Mr. Fukuhara also announced, “Mr. Jiang has handed over the child to Mr. Fukuhara. Mr. Jiang handed over the children, but due to many obstructions, he called the police to handle the matter. But Mr. Jiang announced through the media that he had lost contact with me. This is exactly the opposite of what Mr. Jiang claimed.
Will Mr. Fukuhara accept the Tokyo District Court’s decision in light of this press conference? Or will he not change his position and continue to engage in a mud-slinging exchange of criticism? Fans in Taiwan and Japan will be keeping a close eye on the future of Mr. Jiang and Mr. Fukuhara.