How far back can they go.

usaboy57

New Member
I am married to a US citizen and have been for two years this coming November. USICS have said yes. now because of thing that took place 11 years ago and the way it's written here does not good the way the National visa center would see it so a lawyer is telling us.


What I don't understand is, this it took place a 11 years ago so what's got to do with now. Could someone please explan this to me thanks Steve.

I have not seen my wife since she left here to go back to the States FEB 08 and she is a very sick lady.


Use in the Visa Waiver Program
The first question on document I-94W for those visiting the U.S. on the Visa Waiver Program asks:

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or been controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?

No guidance is provided to the traveler as to which offenses are included in the definition; the website of the U.S. embassy in London advises that a visa is required for anyone who has ever been arrested or convicted for any offense.[2].

An arrest that does not lead to a conviction causes a person to be inadmissible to the United States if that arrest was for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude. There are Petty Offense exceptions to this rule, even if convicted. A police caution for cannibis use would also deem a person inadmissible as this would be "a violation related to a controlled substance". There is no special standard of admissibility for the visa waiver program.


[edit] Interpretation of moral turpitude
A definition of moral turpitude is available for immigration purposes on the United States Department of State website.[3]

For offenses (or arrests on suspicion of such offenses) occurring outside the U.S., the locally defined offense must be considered against the U.S. definitions, and in such cases it is the definition of the offense (as defined in the appropriate country) which is considered for immigration purposes, and not the circumstances of the individual's actual case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Some "things" can make you inadmissible to the United States for the rest of your life, even if they happened 50 years ago. So yeah, there is no time limit on how far back they can go.
 
What is this "thing" that took place 11 years ago?




To Whom It May Concern.

This is another case of being forced to do something to which I wanted to be no part of. When you write a cheque you always put your address on the back of it, will in this case I was told to make up an address so that nothing could be traced back to her place to which did not work because that is where the police showed up.


The police where going to charge her with this matter but because I am the one who wrote the cheques it was me that took the whole blame for this unfortunate case. When Maryanne heard the tapes from when I was being questioned by police she got aggressive and abusive to me and I was kicked out of the house with no where to go I spent three days living in park .

During the whole court time which was something like months. I told my lawyer that I wanted to pay compensation, I wanted to tell the judge just how sorry I am about this. Instead my lawyer told me I should say nothing because it would not do my case any good only make it worse. When it come to the day of sentencing the judge said because I have made no attempt to do anything he was left with no choice but to sentence me to six months imprisonment.
I was also told on the day of sentencing that the arresting police officer was shocked that I got jail.




This is what is written on the police check I had to get done.
Theft (2charges) on each charge: Imprisonment 6 months.
I should point out here that it was ONLY 6 months not a year has it may look to be for the whole lot.

Minor theft (13 charges) On each charge imprisonment 3 months concurrent.
Now our immigration Lawyer is reading that as moral turpitude.


This what my lawyer here has to say.

Section 135.2 Criminal Code Act 1995. (Your offence was under para (1));
2. Sections 89 and 90 of the Crimes Act 1900. (The oldest reprint of the Act I have is the reprint as of 1.3.04).

Your 1998 conviction in relation to the cheques was, to my recollection, fraud rather than theft but I would need to check your record for the actual offence for which you were dealt with.
 
Just because I got screwed by a person and a lawyer. Why should I and now my wife and family have to suffer in pain have to live not knowing when I will get see them and we just hard our second grand child in the last 24 hours .

I have never meet my children or my grand children for that matter.

Could someone please give us something to go on hopefuly with a light at the end of it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This the email I got from my wife back in late March this year.


I got a call from Mary today. Its good News and we will have alot to talk about YES They accepted our application to expedite. WE WERE ACCEPTED Now there are some further things we need to do to get this to move on. I took notes. Its all written down and Mary is sending me something too. She said once we get those other stuff done, it can go faster from here
__________________
 
Top