The FBI charged me with kidnapping in a secret closed door hearing. I never kidnapped anyone. I never even entered the United States. My son was taken from his mother by police, placed on a plane by court order, and returned to me legally. Tennessee had custody jurisdiction. Pennsylvania admitted it. Then lied about basic facts. No state ever filed criminal charges. Not one. Yet in 2009, the FBI quietly sealed a federal indictment anyway. I was arrested overseas on an Interpol notice. Bulgaria reviewed the case and refused extradition. Courts kept ruling the same way. No crime. No kidnapping. No unlawful removal. Still, the charge stayed alive. The FBI kept the warrant active. They kept my son listed as a missing child into adulthood. They destroyed my career. Burned through my savings. Locked me out of medical care. Now here is the trap. They say the case gets reviewed only if I return to the US and get arrested. I say let me stand trial without delay. They refuse. I live in Russia under asylum. Leaving ends it. Travel risks my health. The charge stays frozen. This is not a custody dispute. This is not flight from justice. This is a federal prosecution built on facts courts already rejected, kept alive by procedure alone. I am not asking for sympathy. I am asking for one thing. A real legal review. By someone willing to read the record and explain why a man who won every custody ruling and every extradition challenge still carries a federal kidnapping charge. Full documentation ready. The question is simple. Why does this case still exist.
Legal Summary
CASE SUMMARY
Chad Zachary Hower
Federal International Parental Kidnapping Charge (18 U.S.C. §1204)
This case concerns a federal indictment for international parental kidnapping that has remained pending since 2009 despite the absence of any state criminal charges, repeated judicial findings undermining the factual basis of the charge, and the eventual mootness of the underlying custody dispute.
Background and Custody Jurisdiction
Chad Hower and Nancy Oberlander divorced in Tennessee in 2002. Their son, Aarys Charles Oberlander-Hower, was born in Tennessee. Tennessee was the child’s home state and, by court order, retained exclusive jurisdiction over custody matters until the child reached the age of eighteen by explicit court order.
Mr. Hower worked abroad for Microsoft and resided outside the United States with the court’s knowledge. Custody and visitation occurred internationally pursuant to Tennessee orders. Under U.S. law and applicable treaty principles, foreign countries are treated as equivalent to U.S. states for custody purposes; absent Tennessee’s retained jurisdiction, custody jurisdiction would have transferred to the child’s country of habitual residence.
Ms. Oberlander had visitation rights but not primary custody.
In 2004–2006, Ms. Oberlander removed the child from Tennessee to Pennsylvania without notice to Mr. Hower or the Tennessee court, in violation of Tennessee orders. Pennsylvania was never the child’s home state.
Pennsylvania Proceedings
Venango County, Pennsylvania initially acknowledged jurisdictional defects and repeatedly deferred to Tennessee. Despite this, the Pennsylvania court later asserted jurisdiction based on demonstrably false factual premises, including an incorrect finding that the child was born in Pennsylvania.
Even after asserting jurisdiction, the Pennsylvania court ultimately enforced the Tennessee custody order. When Ms. Oberlander refused to comply, law enforcement removed the child from her custody and placed him on a flight pursuant to court order, returning him to Mr. Hower abroad.
Pennsylvania never filed criminal charges against Mr. Hower. Its involvement was strictly civil custody. The matter later became moot when the child reached the age of majority.
Federal Indictment
In May 2009, the FBI without notice, warning or chance of defense, led a closed a federal grand jury in the Western District of Pennsylvania returned a sealed indictment charging Mr. Hower with international parental kidnapping under 18 U.S.C. §1204.
The indictment rests on the assertion that Mr. Hower unlawfully removed and retained his child outside the United States in violation of parental rights. This theory requires that the child’s removal be unlawful and attributable to Mr. Hower. The indictment also completely ignored the standing Tennessee custody order which Tennessee continued to exude jurisdiction over in hearings as late as 2012.
That factual predicate is false.
Mr. Hower did not enter the United States to remove the child. Immigration records confirm he was not present. The child was returned to him pursuant to a court order and police enforcement. No unilateral or unlawful removal occurred.
Extradition and Foreign Court Findings
Mr. Hower was arrested abroad in 2009 pursuant to an Interpol Red Notice. Bulgaria denied extradition and subsequent extradition efforts also failed. Courts consistently recognized that custody rested with Mr. Hower and that the alleged conduct did not constitute kidnapping under applicable law.
Despite these findings, the federal indictment and arrest warrant remain active.
Procedural Stalemate
Because the indictment is sealed and Mr. Hower resides abroad, the government maintains that no substantive review can occur unless he submits to U.S. jurisdiction and is arrested. Courts have declined to intervene absent his physical return.
Mr. Hower has repeatedly expressed willingness to stand trial without delay. The government has declined to proceed on that basis.
Mr. Hower currently resides in Russia under a grant of asylum. Departing Russia would terminate that status.
Health and Harm
Mr. Hower suffers from serious chronic medical conditions and has undergone significant surgical intervention. His ability to travel fluctuates depending on acute medical flare-ups and pending surgical needs. At present, long-distance international travel is medically contraindicated, and additional procedures are pending.
The indictment has destroyed his career, exhausted family resources, restricted medical access, and resulted in his son being erroneously listed as a missing child well into adulthood despite ongoing contact.
Core Issue
This is not a custody dispute and not a flight-from-justice case. It is a federal prosecution sustained on false jurisdictional and factual premises long after those premises were disproven, with no viable mechanism for review short of surrender and arrest, despite repeated offers to proceed to trial without delay.
Specific Request
Mr. Hower has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars over nearly two decades pursuing relief through counsel, motions, extradition proceedings, and court appearances. Those resources are exhausted.
He is seeking pro bono legal assistance or guidance from someone willing to review the full record and assess whether the federal charge is legally and factually sustainable. This may include direct representation, referral to appropriate counsel or clinics, or preparation of an independent legal analysis that can force meaningful review.
He is not seeking sympathy or delay. He is seeking informed legal intervention or direction from someone with the expertise and standing to evaluate why a man who prevailed in every custody proceeding and every extradition challenge continues to face unresolved federal criminal charges.
Full documentation is available immediately upon request.
More Information
This site is being reworked, for further information please refer to my LinkTree.