What is your interpretation on this .......

[Greentocitizen]

Look at the following questions from the N-400. Please pay attention to how the questions are asked. I am not arguing here what’s wrong and what is right. But the initial assumption any one can make that leads to right or wrong.

Part 10 - B – Question # 8a - Have you ever been a member of or associated with any organization, association, fund, foundation, part, club, society or similar group in the United States or in any other place?

I cannot assume that this only applies in USA. It clearly states “OR IN ANY OTHER PLACE”

But if the same question was phrased like this to begin with

“Have you ever been a member of or associated with any organization, association, fund, foundation, part, club, society or similar group? “

I can assume that this can only applies to events in USA. (I can be wrong or right depending who is interviewing me and how their interpretation at that time is)

Now let’s look at Part 10 – D – Question #16 –

#16 – Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason?

Here I can assume (I can be wrong or right depending who is interviewing me and how their interpretation at that time is) this ONLY applies to events in USA

But Instead if it reads/phrased like this

“Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason in the United States or in any other place?

I cannot assume that this only applies to events in USA and if I do I claim my self to be stupid.

Besides the reason that you didn't meet the 5 year rule , the officer was clearly asking you how come they give you the green card with all the arrest records that you had before she knows/realizes that it relates to your asylum case. Her interpretation of the #16 is clearly ties to events that happened in the USA. But this interpretation might be different if other IO with a different asylum interview experience comes along.

What do you guys think about the assumptions if the questions are phrased differently?

 

[WBH]

Arrest/cite/charge/convict/sentence/prison records should include anywhere in the world not limited to USA.
This is true for both N400 and I485 and perhaps even on nonimmigrant visa application form like OF 156 or
DS 156. If you pre-GC criminal activities, you were supposed to already have listed them on your I485 form.

 

[GungaDin]

Look at the following questions from the N-400. Please pay attention to how the questions are asked. I am not arguing here what’s wrong and what is right. But the initial assumption any one can make that leads to right or wrong.

Part 10 - B – Question # 8a - Have you ever been a member of or associated with any organization, association, fund, foundation, part, club, society or similar group in the United States or in any other place?

I cannot assume that this only applies in USA. It clearly states “OR IN ANY OTHER PLACE”

But if the same question was phrased like this to begin with

“Have you ever been a member of or associated with any organization, association, fund, foundation, part, club, society or similar group? “

I can assume that this can only applies to events in USA. (I can be wrong or right depending who is interviewing me and how their interpretation at that time is)

Now let’s look at Part 10 – D – Question #16 –

#16 – Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason?

Here I can assume (I can be wrong or right depending who is interviewing me and how their interpretation at that time is) this ONLY applies to events in USA

But Instead if it reads/phrased like this

“Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason in the United States or in any other place?

I cannot assume that this only applies to events in USA and if I do I claim my self to be stupid.

Besides the reason that you didn't meet the 5 year rule , the officer was clearly asking you how come they give you the green card with all the arrest records that you had before she knows/realizes that it relates to your asylum case. Her interpretation of the #16 is clearly ties to events that happened in the USA. But this interpretation might be different if other IO with a different asylum interview experience comes along.

What do you guys think about the assumptions if the questions are phrased differently?

Perhaps you need to check the meaning of 'ever'.

If somebody asks you "Have you ever killed anybody" they aren't asking you whether you've killed anybody in the United States.

Here is an extension of your thinking:
According to your thinking, you could lie like crazy while applying for a visa in your country and then get to say 'No' to Q16 - because 'It wasn't in the United States'.
(In case you're still confused - you are wrong on your assumptions)

Basically, if you've been part of a crime syndicate, committed atrocities etc. the US Citizenship is probably not going to happen and even if it does, google John Demjanyuk to see what can happen afterwards.

 

[Bobsmyth]

Look at the following questions from the N-400. Please pay attention to how the questions are asked. I am not arguing here what’s wrong and what is right. But the initial assumption any one can make that leads to right or wrong.

Part 10 - B – Question # 8a - Have you ever been a member of or associated with any organization, association, fund, foundation, part, club, society or similar group in the United States or in any other place?

I cannot assume that this only applies in USA. It clearly states “OR IN ANY OTHER PLACE”

But if the same question was phrased like this to begin with

“Have you ever been a member of or associated with any organization, association, fund, foundation, part, club, society or similar group? “

I can assume that this can only applies to events in USA. (I can be wrong or right depending who is interviewing me and how their interpretation at that time is)

Now let’s look at Part 10 – D – Question #16 –

#16 – Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason?

Here I can assume (I can be wrong or right depending who is interviewing me and how their interpretation at that time is) this ONLY applies to events in USA

But Instead if it reads/phrased like this

“Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason in the United States or in any other place?

I cannot assume that this only applies to events in USA and if I do I claim my self to be stupid.

Besides the reason that you didn't meet the 5 year rule , the officer was clearly asking you how come they give you the green card with all the arrest records that you had before she knows/realizes that it relates to your asylum case. Her interpretation of the #16 is clearly ties to events that happened in the USA. But this interpretation might be different if other IO with a different asylum interview experience comes along.

What do you guys think about the assumptions if the questions are phrased differently?

Ever supersedes location in this context since they are asking you if (during your entire life) you have ever committed a crime, regardless of where it was commited.

 

[WBH]

Ever supersedes location in this context since they are asking you if (during your entire life) you have ever committed a crime, regardless of where it was commited.

If a country is lawless, public securtry is pretty much enforced by mob/militias, maybe one do not need to
report arrest there because N400 mentioned "By Law Enforecement Officer".

 

[Bobsmyth]

If a country is lawless, public securtry is pretty much enforced by mob/militias, maybe one do not need to
report arrest there because N400 mentioned "By Law Enforecement Officer".

Nice try but no cigar. Mind you, an applicant may be asking for trouble for disclosing a criminal conviction in a puppet regime that fabricated evidence..kinda like what happened to some of the prisoners at Guantanamo.

 

[GungaDin]

If a country is lawless, public securtry is pretty much enforced by mob/militias, maybe one do not need to
report arrest there because N400 mentioned "By Law Enforecement Officer".

I don't think you get arrested by a militia. You get abducted. There is a difference.

 

[WBH]

Nice try but no cigar. Mind you, an applicant may be asking for trouble for disclosing a criminal conviction in a puppet regime that fabricated evidence..kinda like what happened to some of the prisoners at Guantanamo.

So the advice "do not disclose"?

 

[WBH]

I don't think you get arrested by a militia. You get abducted. There is a difference.

N-400 says " ... detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers)".

Many countries allow the military (not just the ,ilitary police) to do the police work even without martial law declared

 

[GungaDin]

Nice try but no cigar. Mind you, an applicant may be asking for trouble for disclosing a criminal conviction in a puppet regime that fabricated evidence..kinda like what happened to some of the prisoners at Guantanamo.

So the advice "do not disclose"?

I think he got confused. You HAVE to disclose. Better you get a delayed approval than being de-naturalized for not being truthful on your application.

 

[JPBoston]

I think he got confused. You HAVE to disclose. Better you get a delayed approval than being de-naturalized for not being truthful on your application.

Well, if you were arrested/detained/cited (for minor incidents ... traffic accident, bar brawl lockup ) in another country for something you absolutely do not have proof of resolution, I would not disclose it. That's just me because if I can't even defend myself with evidence for something that happened a while earlier in another land, good luck trying to dig that one up and lay that against me. That 80-year old ex-Nazi guard who got his citizenship revoked and deported back to wherever in Europe recently, was caught because his case and crimes were high-profile enough to not be forgotten. Something tells me that unless one is a Nazi/Communist/terrorist/etc criminal on the run, the US Govt is not going to be bothered with tracking down your petty deeds from abroad. Anything committed within the borders of the US of A, regardless of how minor, is a different story because those have the potential of one day being resurrected and could potentially jeopardize your situation.

 

[GungaDin]

N-400 says " ... detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers)".

Many countries allow the military (not just the ,ilitary police) to do the police work even without martial law declared

Military ≠ Militia

 

[GungaDin]

Well, if you were arrested/detained/cited (for minor incidents ... traffic accident, bar brawl lockup ) in another country for something you absolutely do not have proof of resolution, I would not disclose it. That's just me because if I can't even defend myself with evidence for something that happened a while earlier in another land, good luck trying to dig that one up and lay that against me. That 80-year old ex-Nazi guard who got his citizenship revoked and deported back to wherever in Europe recently, was caught because his case and crimes were high-profile enough to not be forgotten. Something tells me that unless one is a Nazi/Communist/terrorist/etc criminal on the run, the US Govt is not going to be bothered with tracking down your petty deeds from abroad. Anything committed within the borders of the US of A, regardless of how minor, is a different story because those have the potential of one day being resurrected and could potentially jeopardize your situation.

So basically you're suggesting lying on the N-400.
Besides, who decides what is minor? You? That's awfully convenient.

But, I understand that people who commit atrocities in other countries would rather lie on the N400 and hope they never get caught than own up to their deeds and face the music.
I just didn't expect to see it as 'advice' on these forums.

 

[JPBoston]

So basically you're suggesting lying on the N-400.
Besides, who decides what is minor? You? That's awfully convenient.

But, I understand that people who commit atrocities in other countries would rather lie on the N400 and hope they never get caught than own up to their deeds and face the music.
I just didn't expect to see it as 'advice' on these forums.

Like I said, that is just me and it is any consequences of doing so that I, and not anyone else, would have to live with.

 

[Vorpal]

I think he got confused. You HAVE to disclose. Better you get a delayed approval than being de-naturalized for not being truthful on your application.

Let's suppose that a revolutionary group seized a small town and arrested everyone who didn't supoprt them. Why would this have to be disclosed on the N-400?

 

[WBH]

Let's suppose that a revolutionary group seized a small town and arrested everyone who didn't supoprt them. Why would this have to be disclosed on the N-400?

Does citizen's arrest count as arrest for the purpose of Q16 of Part 10D?

If you commit a crime without any authority knowing, you can let your wife lock you up in the closet for 1 hour to cover
yourself so you can also honestly answer No to Q 15 of Part 10D.

 

[WBH]

Military ≠ Militia

So if one was once detained for shoplifing by, say, Hamas or Hezibulla controlled area in Rebannon, he does not have
to mention it?

 

[Bobsmyth]

So the advice "do not disclose"?

Not "do not disclose", but rather use your own judgment. Think about it, would you disclose a serious conviction in a foreign country even if it was based on fabricated evidence or there is no paper trail available? Sure, you're supposed to disclose it, but an IO may use it as a reason to deny your application even if you never actually committed the crime (again, this is based on fabricated evidence in a puppet regime, not an ordinary case).

 

[WBH]

Not "do not disclose", but rather use your own judgment. Think about it, would you disclose a serious conviction in a foreign country even if it was based on fabricated evidence or there is no paper trail available? Sure, you're supposed to disclose it, but an IO may use it as a reason to deny your application even if you never actually committed the crime (again, this is based on fabricated evidence in a puppet regime, not an ordinary case).

How is one supposed to know which country is a puppet regime or a country ruled by law? Even in USA one
can be convicted based upon fabricated evidence so if one think he is wrongly convicted,then he is better off
not disclosing it?

 

[Bobsmyth]

How is one supposed to know which country is a puppet regime or a country ruled by law? Even in USA one
can be convicted based upon fabricated evidence so if one think he is wrongly convicted,then he is better off
not disclosing it?

Difference is that in US there almost certainly will be a record of it.