8u11d0g

Hi,

i have been posting regarding my issue on moneysavingexpert and was directed to your good selves by one of the members.

this is a copy of what i wrote over there

Hi,

sorry to jump on someone else thread but i didn't want to start a new one which is similar to a degree.

I got a conviction nearly 2 years ago for computer misuse (Basically used to work for the police and checked up if my mum still lived at the same house as we had lost contact)

Ive had a good read through the moral turpitude stuff and as many others have figured out, its not the easiest thing to interpret.

I visited the states before which was only 3 years before my conviction.

I didn't get fined or do time for my conviction but had the lowest punishment the court could give as they stated it was such a minor offence. (60 community service/payback)

any answers would be a great help

p.s. again apologies for jumping on your thread!

Not sure what to do as i have been to the states twice before and i love it out there.

The system i used is a system which can also be used in a public library but i got "done" as i was on a police computer which i was authorised to use, just not to search about my mum.

Really appreciate your time

materialcontroller

Hi and welcome to BE.

This doesn't sound like moral turpitude to me. However I'm not a law expert and without knowing the full circumstances it's impossible to be more helpful. What was the exact charge you were convicted of?

8u11d0g

Hi,

thanks for your response.

I was convicted of computer misuse, some on MSE thought it was data protection but it isnt, it also isnt hacking as i had authorised access to the computer and its systems.

materialcontroller

You've said that you've already looked at a lot of the moral turpitude information that is freely available, so are you familiar with the guidelines to consular officers from the US State Dept Foreign Affairs Manual?

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86942.pdf

As you've probably guessed by now, nobody is going to give you a definite guide to moral turpitude because such a thing does not exist. The rules are loosely defined in order to provide the US authorities with an enormous amount of leeway and discretion when making decisions. Therefore it is impossible to say with 100% certainty exactly where your particular offence lies within the overall scope of things.

What is your own feeling, having taken on board the information you've learned and the advice you've received so far? Do you believe your offence involved moral turpitude or not? Are you worried about how to answer the questions on an ESTA application? Or are you looking to immigrate and live in the USA permanently?

8u11d0g

again thanks for the reply I really appreciate it.

My main concern is the ESTA, it would be for holiday purposes only (Would love to go to New York and visit Florida again)

I don't feel that my offence is Moral Turpitude. The judge who sentenced me said that my offence was very minor and that to replicate what I did again I would have to be working for the police again, which is obviously not going to happen.

At the time the officers I worked with stated it wasn't in the public's interest due to it being minor. Everyone was stunned when it did go to court.

The last thing i want to do is arrive at the airport and for whatever reason they look into my background and send me back.

materialcontroller

I would say that if you are really worried about the whole issue you should look for a consultation with an immigration attorney. All they can do is offer advice but it might set your mind at ease. However it won't be cheap. You will need to weigh the costs against the benefits of peace of mind.

That said, you have done your research and seem satisfied that there was no moral turpitude involved. So perhaps you feel confident in applying for ESTA and answering "NO" to the question about arrests or convictions.

I completely understand your fears about maybe being refused entry at a US airport, but that is always going to be a risk. Even for somebody like myself, who needs a waiver of ineligibility to overcome many moral turpitude offences, I can still be refused entry with my visa. There are no guarantees unfortunately.

8u11d0g

So let me get this right, even with a visa i could still get refused?

materialcontroller

Sure. Only American citizens have the right to enter the USA. Everyone else just has to turn up at the border/airport and see which way the wind's blowing that particular day.

A visa holder does have a few more rights than somebody visiting using an ESTA though. I believe they have the right to a review of the immigration officer's decision if they are refused entry, which is something not open to those using ESTA. The Visa Waiver Program means that when travelling on an ESTA you waive those rights which visa holders have.

8u11d0g

Ah ok.

Well i dont feel that it is Moral turpitude, so looks like the first trip back will have to be too new york for a few days. If i get turned back then its only a few days rather then 3 weeks for florida!

Really appreciate the replys

materialcontroller

Hey you're very welcome! Hope you get ESTA approved alright and have a great trip. Would like to think you'll check back in here at some point and let us all know how things went with the CBP officers at the POE. Good luck to you!

8u11d0g

thanks very much, i will jump on once weve been.

You'll know whether i was successful or not if there is any tears in my post

materialcontroller

Just one last piece of advice. Once you arrive at the POE remember to only answer the questions that are asked. Do not elaborate too much or volunteer information which wasn't explicitly requested. Follow those golden rules and you should be OK.

crg

That's somewhat true, but it depends on under which sections of law the person appears inadmissible.

A person with a visa can see the immigration judge if, at entry, they appear to be inadmissible under certain sections of law. For example, if it is alleged they are inadmissible for criminal history, mental/medical issue or a prior long overstay, they are supposed to be able to seek a review before an immigation judge. Of course the person is likely to be detained while the process is completed and the burden of proof is on them.

If the person with the visa is allleged to be inadmissible because they have the wrong visa for their purpose, appear to be an immigrant, have a short overstay that voided the visa they are attempting to use (222(g)), have committed fraud/misrep for any immigration benefit in the past, or falsely claimed to be a USC at any time, that person can be ordered removed and not permitted to have an immigration judge review the question of admissibility.

The kicker is, the border guard doesn't have to charge all of the grounds that apply so someone who would normally be permitted to see a judge to sort out a criminal inadmissibility could still be ordered removed on the spot if the border guard opts to just charge the person with misrepresenting their criminal history on the visa application or at the border.

Such removal orders carry at least a 5 year bar where it is a felony for the person to come back to the US without authorization when seeking entry with a visa. A VWP person is normally VWP refused and there is no bar, and they may only need to get a visa to seek entry again.