spanishfly

I understand this, and i understand that i should not go into the interview mouthing off about things that i have read and seen on the internet. Its just nice to know that there are people out there that are willing to help me understand the process and supply me with relevant information.

I also think that by doing this kind of research and talking to people and being aware of information and legislation such as the info posted by crg14624 increases my chances of knowing what to say and also where i stand with regards to the law.

What i do not see the need for is people posting comments and remarks that have no bearing on what i am saying or even offering any kind of advice or information, instead just attempting to wind me and other posters up with sarky comments and silly posts.

spanishfly

Thankyou again.

fatbrit

Advice like you should get counsel off of an immigration lawyer?

ian-mstm

A lie of omission is still a lie.

Ian

crg

I'm not saying the OP should prance into the embassy waiving regulations in their face. However, having the information available can be useful if it ispresented in a respectful manner.

It's refreshing that the OP has the integrity to fill out the application honestly and navigate the system. Many people come on here essentially looking to pull a fast one and try to get info on how to do it. It's a nice change to see an honest person who admits their prior mistakes and decides not to compound them by making new ones. Recent adult mistakes are harder to overcome than youthful indiscetions.

fatbrit

You forget he's taking his aunt who's a solicitor, no less! (I don't think they'll let her in, though!)

crg

Hopefully he's uses some tact. :P

You're right though. The consular officer doesn't have to let the attorney participate in the interview or even allow the attorney to be present if they don't feel like it.

spanishfly

Hi,

Yes I have decided to utilise the system put in place, there were lots of people even family and friends telling me to simply risk it and attempt to gain entry and lie on the DS 156 form.

This seemed like the worst idea as it if it were to be caught in the net it would cause me more problems in the future.

I do believe that the system is put in place to catch people that genuinely pose a threat to the security of the USA and that if this process is fairr and just then i should have no problems.. I do not agree with the process, I do not think that this kind of intrusion into my history and my character is really necessary. But i do have a little faith in systems that are put in place to weed out the true criminals and threat posers as apposed to those that made a stupid mistake as a JUVENILE and have lived the last 11 years of their lives with no run ins with the police.

Thanks crg14624 for the acknowledgement that i am trying to do this correctly and by the book as it were.

spanishfly

She offered to accompany me to something that will probably turn out to be a very stressful experience, I was not about to say no.

The fact that she is a solicitor is not the point, she is coming more for moral support than anything else. If she is able to give any advice at all to me it would be gladly taken.

If they do not let her in thats fine by me, if thats the case i am sure that iwould not beable to take any other legal representation with me either.

Or by legal counsel you mean calling a lawyer thats going to charge me hundreds of pounds to tell me about the application process? Surely I could just call you FATBRIT seeing as you know everything about the process? Correct?

fatbrit

They'll ask for a G-28. Doubt she qualifies.

fatbrit

She most probably won't be allowed in as your "counsel". But yes, you could take wise counsel of a qualified US immigration lawyer, and I would suggest it for your particular case. Surprisingly enough, I don't recommend counsel in every immigration case. But you don't seem to have got it into your head that drugs are a serious offense when connected with US immigration. If you go back and look at the start of this post, a qualified, experienced and wise (though oft cantankerous) US immigration attorney both capitalized and bolded the word DRUGS to try and call your attention to the gravity of your situation.

How ever much you prattle on here on the board, it really doesn't change your situation. If you'd like a recommend for a lawyer, please ask.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

What makes you think she is not a qualified solicitor in the UK -- just curious. I always like to know the basis of some of the assertions made in this forum. Don't worry, I do to DHS all the time. But I have this belief that the outgoing administration does not, that the provisions of the Immigration & Nationality Act actually mean something.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

I will repeat the suggestion I often make to you -- "Be nice."

You have no idea what the solicitor relative is doing. If she is giving serious advice, she is at least making some serious telephone calls on a "professional courtesy" basis.

fatbrit

So she qualifies under "4. Others (Explain Fully.)" on the form? You live and learn! Can aunty fill it out at the door?

Are you going to help the distressed OP out here or not? I've been drumming up business for lawyers and you come to carp!

crg

Of course the G-28 only means that the officer *can* discuss the case with the person's attorney. It doesn't mean that the officer *has* to discuss it with the attorney. The G-28 does allow them to make formal inquiries and applications but being present at the visa interview is not automatic.