iamtheeggman84

Hello i 1st would just like to say i love this site as i have used it for oz and Canada.

I have a criminal record from 7 years ago which is nothing major

Entering a sports ground under the influence of alcohol

and section 5(was or could cause distress to the general public)


Just silly little things from football when i was younger

Now i have my police cert from UK and oz( Ozzy is clear as iv been running around here for 3 years)

I expect to be in Canada and wish to go new york in september and also take me mate to Vegas for his 30th.

Will my record be a problem do you think? i know lying on visa is not the way to go but iv heard of people doing this and getting in.Iv never lied on me ozzy or Canadian but if its the difference of getting in or not...

well.....

ian-mstm

What visa? You can visit the US for up to 90 days on the VWP. You will need to complete ESTA first... and the only relevant question on ESTA is: "Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude...?" So, the question you need to answer is: Was your crime a CIMT? Do some research on CIMT.


Don't lie... ever. You could face a lifetime ban from the US if you're caught!

Ian

iamtheeggman84

Will do....

To be honest not even looked at visa yet

Im just thinking ahead down the line and love this site

civilservant

The Visa Waiver Programme is not a visa, just to be clear.

On the face of what you have said, neither IMO seem to be CMITs, which would suggest you could use the VWP is otherwise eligible. However, since you have given little information about the circumstances of either its impossible to give a good answer. It's incumbent upon you when attempting to visit the US that any past criminal behaviour is not dismissed as 'nothing major' since it can render you ineligible in itself.

ian-mstm

My point exactly. What visa? If you're a UK citizen, you don't need a visa. You can visit the US without a visa... but you must be able to answer the questions on ESTA.

Ian

christmasoompa

Just checking, but you've got criminal rehab for Canada? Canada's tougher on convictions than the US is.

BritishExpatriate

In what way is Canada stricter than the US in regard to criminal records? I know Canada treats DUI more seriously than the US but generally speaking, I tend to see them as different but both with the potential to be equally as harsh as the other, depending on the nature of the criminal record in question...

For example, someone with two summary offences would be inadmissible to Canada but not inadmissible to the US providing the summary offences were not CIMTs and they didn't go to prison for five years.
But then another person who's committed, lets say, minor theft could find themselves inadmissible to the US as it's a CIMT but not inadmissible to Canada because the minor theft amounts only to a single summary offence and therefore doesn't cause render them inadmissible to Canada...

christmasoompa

Without wanting to get into another of your rambling diatribes, I'd say it's stricter for two reasons - one, because it's only CIMT's that are a problem for the US whereas in Canada far more crimes render people inadmissible.

And two, because at least with the US people have the option of applying for a visa anytime after the crime, whereas with Canada they are completely inadmissible (even for a holiday) until at least five years have passed from the end of sentence and even then, can only enter if they've gone through the lengthy process of criminal rehab.

BritishExpatriate

I'm not even going to read the rest of your answer because that's just rude!

ian-mstm

... it is, however, accurate.

Ian

BritishExpatriate

Ok fine I read your answer in the end! I'd say most with criminal records have only committed a summary offence and a single of these doesn't cause inadmissibility to Canada. Inadmissibility to Canada can be based on a wider range of offences but at the same time theft is a great example of very common CIMT offence that regularly causes those with a single summary offence to be inadmissible to the US.

Also, unless you've committed an indictable offence there's no need for criminal rehab with Canada as you'll be deemed rehabilitated after five years. It's true the five year wait to overcome inadmissibility doesn't apply with the US. However, an advantage of Canada is that one only has to overcome inadmissibility once, whereas with the US, I think the waiver needs to be applied for every time one applies for a visa for the rest of the applicant's life.

Finally, doesn't criminal inadmissibility to the US cause a permanent ban on obtaining permanent residence there? Whereas in Canada I think once you've overcome the inadmissibility you're free to obtain PR?

I guess I personally tend to see the US as quite a punishing system because of the lifelong effects a conviction can have upon an applicant and because the whole CIMT idea seems to go against its own purpose by failing to take into consideration the severity (or lack thereof) of a given CIMT committed and therefore failing in turn to keep away only those who most would agree are the worst offenders. I think Canada is strict too, but on the whole a much fairer system than that of the US.

materialcontroller

Nope.

BritishExpatriate

If you're relating her comment to previous lengthy posts of mine that have been criticised on this forum, such as one you once referred to as a treatise, there are a couple of things.

-The first and most important is that I've had numerous OPs thank me profusely for my help.

-The second being that none of these critics ever put up a decent (or any!) argument to challenge the relevancy or applicability of laws and regulations cited by me.

-Also, advice given on this forum is occasionally completely wrong and the purpose of the discussion forum is that everyone can see it and people can therefore be corrected. In particular, people advising on juvenile convictions almost ALWAYS fail to pick up pages 23 and 24 here on juvenile delinquency and instead mistakenly apply the statutory exception for a single CIMT committed under 18 [INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)] to offences committed under 18. The statutory offence only applies if someone committed the offence under 18 but was convicted after 18 for that same offence.
No offence committed by a minor is considered a CIMT under US law unless they were convicted as an adult.(Which is very rare) It is therefore completely correct and fortunate that I'm here to shed light on the error to ensure those with juvenile convictions are properly advised on this forum in the future!

-One can also observe the fact that most critics are people who come on here for their own personal enjoyment and therefore if it's too much effort for them to understand my posts, it's neither here nor there for me that they may be complaining as I'm posting to help the OP and not for their entertainment.

That said, I am always open to constructive criticism regarding my posts as I do not claim to be the perfect, or even a particularly experienced, poster.

BritishExpatriate

That's not a very informative answer and if I was claiming to know the answer I wouldn't have put a question mark in my post!

evil-homer

could well be that you can indeed travel under the VWP, the only thing i would worry about if doing so would be if you have other visa,s in your passport for say Canada or oz

That could lead them to question you as to why you have them