Two officers in the interview

A

assylum

Registered Users (C)
Hello All,
Do you have any idea why I was interviewd by two officers? Both of them were asking me questions and both of them were taking notes? Was it because they want to focus more on me or because of the quality assurance program that they have to follow?
 
One was probably on training. They don't need a witness to sit on, because interview room are equipped with audio visual recording system, that alone is hard evidence. It was just for training purposes. If you were any potential suspect to any grounds; a Supervisor, or district director would interview you.
No worries.

Best luck.
 
Then if one of them was on training, then who will be making the decision? Do you think officers on training are usually tough?
Was it a good luck or bad luck that I got an officer who was on training?
 
I thought the law prohibited the recording of asylum interview. How certain are you about audio visual recording system?

I think one of the officers was on training.
 
They usually let you know at the beginning of the interview what would be the role of the second officer (the one supposed to in training). If in your case they did not, may be he was not in training. I don't know what he was doing there. Maybe he/she was a human rights lawyer.
 
The other officer said he would supervise the interview and they both were asking and taking notes. Is that usuall for other cases?
 
I would say they will debate the case.Over all superviser will have the power to approve or deny it. Even if there was one interviwer he or she would need to get approval from their superviser.Conclusively the trainee one won't be the one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
assylum said:
so who do you think should make the decision? The trainee or the trainer?
Click to expand...

The more senior officer will most likely call the shot. Think about it, if you are a newbie on training you are going to defer to what the more senior person believes.
 
The senior officer asked me to send more documents at the end of the interview. Do you think this is a good sign or bad sign?
 
What kind of more document we are talking about here? For example on my case, IO ask for more document to clear and proof of what my real name is .I did not have much of idenification from COP to verify my idenity but expired hand writted international driver liscense. At the time my attorney said that it is not a big deal as long as I can prove my idenity and I should provide some reliable ID. Also he was emphesising that USCIS can deny or delay my case for very long time. As soon as I provided some reliable ID, my case was recommended for approval.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They asked for a letter from the district attorney. I have that letter and I already sent it to them. Does that mean a good sign or bad sign?
 
assylum said:
They asked for a letter from the district attorney. I have that letter and I already sent it to them. Does that mean a good sign or bad sign?
Click to expand...

how can people know if this is a good sign or a bad sign? we were not there to see the officer's body language. We know nothing about your asylum application or your background. All we can say is that if the officer feels that your case is really weak then he probably would have denied it without asking you to submit anything else.
 
Thank you guys for the info that you have been providing. I really appreciate it.
The senior officer also told me that I don't have to come back to pick up the decision. The officer said that I will get the decision by mail and he already knows that I am out of status. He also took my photo and fingure print again and asked me to send the letter from the district attorney. He asked for that letter because I helped a district attoney with a case and she won it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top