christmasoompa

Exactly, which is why I think it's not terribly clear. Somebody might think 'oh, I only shoplifted a pack of gum so clearly that doesn't apply to me', even though any theft should qualify. Most people will downplay their crimes, whatever they may be, so think that unless it's something more serious, they can tick no to that and qualify for ESTA.

S Folinsky

I am not party to the thought process behind the change in the language. I am unaware of any documentation regarding the change. But as a matter of speculation, it should be borne in mind that eligibility for the visa waiver and concomitant ESTA is not substantive eligibility, but rather the procedural issue of whether or not a consular interview is necessary. Hence the vague overbreadth may be deliberate to shunt the moral turpitude question to a trained consular officer.