Tired And Discouraged

I am a US citizen married to an immigrant from the UK. For reasons that I will
not go into I am not happy with my marriage. He has a Green Card with
conditional status. Next year we are due to send in the paperwork (to prove we
are married and living together) to get his conditional status lifted.

If we get divorced well he be able to stay in the US? We have a child together.

Also he was still married to another woman (in the UK) when we got married.
Could I get this marriage annulled and if so would that be easier then getting a
divorce?

Noorah101

Wow. You have issues. If he was still married to another woman in the UK when he married you, that could mean his entire immigration status is at risk....since his USA marriage to you would be unacceptable to USCIS. My advice? See an immigration attorney, and a divorce attorney, ASAP!

Rene

anabella

I can't help you with any of your questions but my heart goes out to you. I wish you all the best for the future

Poppy girl

Would I be correct in assuming that if T & D knew that her husband was married and she married him regardless would this not be Visa Fraud which would make T &D equally responsible and guilty to mis-information on the 1-485 filing.

Alex Clark

Hi,

I may be wrong but I suspect him not having terminated his previous marriage
may get more than just the marriage annulled....


<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > I am a US citizen married to an immigrant from the UK. For reasons that I
    > will
    > not go into I am not happy with my marriage. He has a Green Card with
    > conditional status. Next year we are due to send in the paperwork (to
    > prove we
    > are married and living together) to get his conditional status lifted.
    > If we get divorced well he be able to stay in the US? We have a child
    > together.
    > Also he was still married to another woman (in the UK) when we got
    > married.
    > Could I get this marriage annulled and if so would that be easier then
    > getting a
    > divorce?

ian-mstm

You, personally, are not a party to this prior marriage, so *you* have no standing to do anything about it. That said, it is your marriage to him that will likely be invalid - and, as others have said, your "husband's" immigration status is at risk, since his GC is likely based on a non-existant marriage to a US citizen. Although your child is a USC, he can not derive any immigration benefit through the child. I recommend that *you* get a divorce attorney, and that *he* get an immigration attorney. If you knew he was already married prior to you "marrying" this guy... you're in deep, serious shit. If this is the reason you want to get out of the marriage, then run - don't walk - to an attorney!

I'm willing to bet, based on what you've written, that the I-864 is unenforceable since the basis for his GC is likely invalid. Count your lucky stars... because divorce does not release you from financial accountability under the terms of the I-864.

Ian

lpdiver

And you cannot "ANNUL" the child. Think long and hard and get some professional councilin
t

DallasCPL

Don't we have something in the I-485 app that says we are not going to
practise polygamy or soemthing liek that? I am not sure but i remember
seeing that question in one of the applications a long time back.

I think this is polygamy and that could get him a lot of trouble as I
dont think its legal in any way. Probably more experienced folks can
shed more info on this but in my opinion i think polygamy is a crime in
more than just immigration matters.

Poppy girl wrote:
    > > Wow. You have issues. If he was still married to another woman in
    > > the UK when he married you, that could mean his entire immigration
    > > status is at risk....since his USA marriage to you would be
    > > unacceptable to USCIS. My advice? See an immigration attorney, and a
    > > divorce attorney, ASAP!
    > >
    > > Rene
    > Would I be correct in assuming that if T & D knew that her husband was
    > married and she married him regardless would this not be Visa Fraud
    > which would make T &D equally responsible and guilty to mis-information
    > on the 1-485 filing.
    >
    > --
    > Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Just Jenney

Yes, there most definitely is. Remember that list of questions that asks things like, "Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?" and "Have you ever or will you ever engage in prostitution?" It's question #14 of that list of what most of us consider pretty ridiculous questions: "Do you plan to practice polygamy in the United States?"

In any case, I think this person is a troll. This is the first time I have ever come across a Usenet post that begins with: "Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Nov 19, 6:55 pm)."

Why would someone who asks such a complicated question ask that it be deleted by a certain date? What if people are still discussing it and providing suggestions and recommendations -- wouldn't she want to know what those suggestions and recommendations are?? It makes no sense.

~ Jenney

Rete

Thanks, Jenney, that says it all.

Noorah101

Yep, that message doesn't show up in BE.

Rene

Elvira

Hm. Could it be that she is merely aware that what she and her husband have done is illegal, and therefore does not want to create a permanent record of her post, in case it is traceable?

Rete

Guess what? It is now on BE and other sites, i.e. visa4you. Wonder if it is now in our archives?

anglogerman

Yes, that's the first thought that occurred to me.

Squire

In message <[email protected]> , Jenney &
Mark <member2595@british_expats.com> writes
    >In any case, I think this person is a troll. This is the first time I
    >have ever come across a Usenet post that begins with: "Note: The author
    >of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be
    >removed from Groups in 6 days (Nov 19, 6:55 pm)."

Except that it doesn't! The original posting on Usenet, read by me on
Usenet, does NOT include the words you quote. I can only guess that this
phrase was added by british_expats.com and indicates THEIR intention to
eventually remove the message. Alternatively the phrase may have been
inserted by the Usenet server(s) from which british_expats.com obtain
their news feeds.

On examination of the headers of the original posting I see that she has
used the "X-No-Archive: yes" sub-header. This is a perfectly valid
sub-header and I include it in all my usenet posts. The purpose is to
inform google.groups and their forerunner Deja Vu NOT to archive the
posting in perpetuity - the main reason being to avoid spam harvesting.
Please examine my posting headers and see if a similar phrase has been
added.

    >Why would someone who asks such a complicated question ask that it be
    >deleted by a certain date?

She didn't

    > What if people are still discussing it and
    >providing suggestions and recommendations -- wouldn't she want to know
    >what those suggestions and recommendations are?? It makes no sense.

How would non-archiving the original posting on google.com (and any
other Usenet servers honouring the instruction) prevent follow-up
postings from being visible?

--
squire