SUPERSTARDJ01

Me too, what I need to know is obtaining money by deception as a minor (13) at time of crime 18 at time of court appearance but found not guilty, classed as moral turpitude? it was 16 yrs ago at time of crime.


edit These posts seperated from this thread as they are really a seperate discussion of one individials case http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=559272

SUPERSTARDJ01

Just reading this http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86942.pdf it would appear that because the crime was committed before my 15th b/day it doesn't count.

crg

Was it an arrest for a crime involving moral turpitude: Yes.

Did you complete the ESTA properly: No.

Would this incident classify you as being an inadmissible criminal alien: No.

Would you require a waiver to travel: No.

Would they have denied the ESTA and required you to seek a visa if you had answered accurately: Yes.

Should you travel anyway?: That's your decision to make.

SUPERSTARDJ01

On http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86942.pdf it clearly state:

9 FAM 40.21(a) N9.4-1 Under Age 15
(TL:VISA-46; 08-26-1991)
Juveniles, who were under the age of 15 at the time of omission of acts constituting a delinquency, are not to be considered as having been convicted of a crime. Therefore, no alien may be found ineligible under INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) by reason of any offense committed prior to the alien’s 15th birthday.
9

So that to me says it is not counted.

crg

It doesn't count as a conviction. It does count as an arrest. The question on the ESTA asks about arrests or convictions. I stand behind my previous post.

SUPERSTARDJ01

It may ask about arrests but as I was a minor it states it doesn't count and therefore should not be considered.

ian-mstm

The "conviction" doesn't count... you were still arrested. You can stamp your feet, throw a tantrum if you want, and wail about the inequities of the US immigration system... but you *were* arrested.

Ian

SUPERSTARDJ01

I'm not having a tantrum, just after some advise, and it's not just the US this applies to the UK also have started to do this, I've been admitted to the US 4 times previous with no problems and I don't think the US government have either the resources or time/money to investigate every single person from the UK, OZ or New Zealand entering their shores and will either do random checks or keep an eye out known terrerists, peodophiles or drug trafficers.

Either way I go soon and don't have time to get a Visa as the US immigration drag their heels and take months to issue them, so I will have to risk it.

Optimus Prime

I had an arrest in the UK for a CIMT that was 19 years before I applied for my visa. The fact that I had to produce a Police record from Scotland yard showing all previous dealing with the rozzers grassed me up to the USCIS staff in London. I was initially denied a visa but filed for a waiver of ineligibility and it was granted 8 weeks later. Obviously this "waiver of ineligibility cost me dosh, about $120 as I recall.

crg

The incident at the age of 13 would not make you inadmissible. However, they only want squeaky clean people without incidents to use the VWP. They want everyone else screened by the consulate to make sure. They ask a broad question about arrests to filter people towards the consulate just to be on the safe side because CIMTs and the other immigration laws are tricky at times. It's their country, their rules, and their right.

So you can do what you want/have to do. However, if you're looking for agreement from this forum so you can feel better about your decision and rationalize the false statement on the ESTA and the I-94W, that's not going to happen.

On another note:

Optimus Prime:

When you got the visa, did it say anything about 212(d)(3)(A) or have a waiver notation on it?

DeanUK2US

You're not the wisest person I've come across!

Judging by the fact that you've already been to the US several times tells me that you wish to make visiting the US a regular thing. Taking into account all of the times that you've already visited I reckon that the sum total would not be longer from you first visit to this latest visit than the time taken to properly make an application and get a visa. This tells me that you wish to continually enter the US dishonestly but bending the truth on your I-94.

Now, I'm not a POE officer (nor even American) and I find this wilful behaviour repulsive. You could well be okay if you did the wise thing and chose to be honest, but you chose to risk a ban to the US?!

I won't wish you luck because I don't condone such behaviour. On the other hand, should you decide to be honest, all the very best!

Optimus Prime

212(d)(3)(A)(2)(A)(i)(I) and 212(H) which I presume means I was a little bit of a rascal in my youth but Im a good egg now kinda thing?

crg

212(d)(3)(A) is the waiver.

2(A)(i)(I) is the ground being waived. In this case, it was a CIMT.

The 212(h) is:

INA § 212(h)(1)(A) allows for a waiver of certain criminal grounds of inadmissibility if:

* The applicant is inadmissible only under INA § 212(a)(2)(D)(i) or (D)(ii); or
* The crime(s) for which the applicant is inadmissible occurred more than 15 years before the date of his or her application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status;
* The applicant's admission to the U.S. would not be contrary to the national welfare, safety, or security of the United States; and
* The applicant has been rehabilitated.

Optimus Prime

MMWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

SUPERSTARDJ01

Actually I went to the us in september 08, book another holiday in october 08 and I believe this law came into affect in January 09 I was told to fill out the ESTA form which we have done but only recently I have only just found out about the holiday visa and what moral turpitude means, so therefore i can not get a visa in time.

I am not dishonest at all, and was only after some FRIENDLY advise which I see you are incapable of supplying.