Common Assault and moral turpitude?

#1
Hi team,

I have a question on whether my common assault charge constitutes CIMT?


Extensive reading on the subject always goes along the lines of Common assault usually doesn’t constitute a CIMT.


From what I know of my issue (got into a scuffle with a bouncer in front of a cop, no one hurt) I should be fine for ESTA VWP purposes, but who makes that definitive determination?


From what I understand, a common assault (by Australian and UK standards) is equivalent to a simple assault in the usa. If someone was hurt in the fight the charge would be something like aggravated bodily harm and so forth.


Common assault constitutes a 2 year jailtime maximum, whereas it is 1 year maximum if common assault is indeed the equivalent of simple assault. Fighting, no one hurt etc.


I’d ideally like to travel to the usa on the esta program with a clear conscience and not go through the costly and tedious visa interview, especially as my circumstances dictate that I would be visiting with only short notice with my work situation.
 

Britsimon

Super Moderator
#2
Hi team,

I have a question on whether my common assault charge constitutes CIMT?


Extensive reading on the subject always goes along the lines of Common assault usually doesn’t constitute a CIMT.


From what I know of my issue (got into a scuffle with a bouncer in front of a cop, no one hurt) I should be fine for ESTA VWP purposes, but who makes that definitive determination?


From what I understand, a common assault (by Australian and UK standards) is equivalent to a simple assault in the usa. If someone was hurt in the fight the charge would be something like aggravated bodily harm and so forth.


Common assault constitutes a 2 year jailtime maximum, whereas it is 1 year maximum if common assault is indeed the equivalent of simple assault. Fighting, no one hurt etc.


I’d ideally like to travel to the usa on the esta program with a clear conscience and not go through the costly and tedious visa interview, especially as my circumstances dictate that I would be visiting with only short notice with my work situation.
With "extensive reading" you should know that the final determination is down to a consular officer. So - apply for the ESTA, answering questions honestly and if the system rejects the ESTA you'll need an interview.
 
#3
With "extensive reading" you should know that the final determination is down to a consular officer. So - apply for the ESTA, answering questions honestly and if the system rejects the ESTA you'll need an interview.
Remember, the pertinent question on the ESTA VWP reads;
"Have you ever been arrested or convicted for a crime that resulted in serious damage to property, or serious harm to another person or government authority?"

On the surface, if I was to answer honestly, I would say 'no'. Two punches (one that missed) by my logic absolutely would not constitute serious harm (different story if someone's teeth got knocked out or nose broken), so I don't believe I'd be lying whatsoever by clicking 'no' and proceeding to the next question.

However, it gets me thinking what actually constitutes 'serious harm' so when you look into the questions information tab it says 'the question revolves around whether it constitutes moral turpitude'.

So hence why I'm back to the original question in OP. Whether a common assault charge is moral turpitude.

If I am correct in my assumption that it does not, then I would not waste both mine and the embassy's time , as well as the costs, to go down a visa route when it's simply not needed. If I am wrong, then that could be devastating.

Hence why I'm reaching out.
 
Top