ian-mstm

Feel free to ignore anything johnnybrown532 says. He can barely get himself out of bed some days, let alone respond to immigration questions.


Again, ignore him. I'm surprised that the moderator allows him to keep posting - because, more often than not, his comments are completely without merit.

Ian

johnnybrown532

So how would the government prove that burden then?

Why did they not tick yes to that question and allow the CPB officers to determine if they had the cimt or not and could enter the USA with or without needing a visa? Because they knew they would get sent back if they ticked yes and they would have been sent back? After all is cimt is what they say it is not what the traveller says? Correct?

johnnybrown532

And who will admit they caused serious damage to property? You always speak of CPB having that wide latitude as you call it we even agree there could be some merit to invoking felony and misdemeanor standings for uk/other country offences. These new questions seem to be designed to make it far easier for people to get through with a criminal background?

InnerFish

Thank you everyone for your responses. We are probably going to arrange a consultation with an immigration lawyer for some legal advice on how best to proceed. I would not be surprised if the consulate, or whomever, decided he had misrepresented himself on the VWP form, but there isn't much we can do about that now. It was done in good faith (or ignorance) and any amount of wishing another box had been ticked 16 years later will do no good!

ian-mstm

I've no idea. Fortunately, I don't need to know.


Have you actually read what the OP wrote? I ask because you seem to be misinterpreting.


Who? Someone who has integrity and honor. Someone who believes that a person's word should mean something.


I agree... but it was the US government's choice to alter the wording on ESTA. No one forced that decision on them. If it happens to work out to someone's benefit, so be it.

Ian

johnnybrown532

Someone's benefit? Everyone in this country will tick no to that question now. The drugs question is very firm and to the point but that first question really opens the floodgates for me. No one in this country gives a hoot about how their victims are feeling and all thefts, frauds, counterfit money, burglaries,drunk driving, arson are all victimless crimes in the eyes of people who do it and domestic abuse isn't serious not in the eyes of those who do it. All rapists will tell you their victims wanted it and nonces will tell they love children they don't hurt them. So ain't no one declaring squat is there?

I can't believe the have changed it like this why would they do that and leave it upto a person wishing to travel and not upto them to determine what something is or is not?

ian-mstm

I suspect there's something more going on here. I'm not big on conspiracy theories, but I wouldn't be surprised if US immigration is making (or has already made) arrangements to have access to foreign criminal databases... with the express purpose of catching someone in a lie after completing ESTA. Many people don't realize that if they lie to US immigration and get caught, they could face a lifetime ban from the US.

Bottom line: I think honest people will remain honest... and liars will ultimately get what's coming to them!

Ian

johnnybrown532

I agree they must have something or they lunatics have well and truly taken over the asylum. They have taken out the maximum sentence provisions and cimt which cover a large amount of violent, dishonesty, sexual and firearms offences from either the cimt or the jail angle and medical for drink related situations could be gone as well. That is pretty much the whole thing on criminal offences gone right there in my mind. I am frankly dumbfounded by the whole thing.