paulpur

all 3 of them should apply for ESTA , just as long as they are answering the questions properly...its just that when friend 1 and 2 answer yes to the question, they should be prepared for a negative response from the ESTA application and also be prepared to have to goto the embassy to apply for a visa

Glover

Right ok I understand now. So all 3 apply for ESTA yet 1 & 2 will be ticking yes due to moral turpitude and 3 ticking no as there is no moral turpitude.

Jeez the stress of getting married...

Thanks!

DavidLemon

Why would person 2 tick yes to Moral Turpitude if his offense does not fall under this category? If his rap sheet does not show an offense covered by CIMT for purposes of a VWP, then i fail to understand why he would make such a declaration.

Breaking and entering (requiring no specific or implicit intent to commit a crime involving moral turpitude) is not considered a CIMT. If this was the offense for which he was arrested and charged, then there is no reason to tick yes.

Again this is something a lawyer is best suited to answer. If you apply for esta and tick yes to that question and it gets denied, you have to declare said denial on all other applications. Why risk a denial if it is not required. It might be quicker for now, but in years to come it could be a massive pain in the arse.

Glover

David you make a good point thank you. It was indeed breaking and entering, it was an arrest and no conviction as it was not pursued by the 'victim'. Maybe he should tick no then as it's not a moral turpitude arrest. Does the ESTA not search through criminal record databases? Not that it'll be there as it would just be stored in presumably the police national computer as a non conviction.

ian-mstm

Congratulations... but I suggest that only 17 will actually be attending. One will definitely not (as he won't have time to get a visa), and the other might get lucky.

Ian

Glover

Yeah I'm a bit of a fool for not checking entry requirements. So you think 1 should tick yes and presumably cancel as no time to get a visa, 2 should tick no and see what ESTA says and 3 should tick no and should have no issues?

DavidLemon

TBF you guys have wasted an entire day so far when you could have been getting it sorted.

Person 1. Apply for esta, answer the truth and expect denial. This will cost $4. If denial occurs they have two options. Apply for B2, but again expect denial, but possibility of waiver. No chance in hell that this will happen in time. Based on circumstances you could avoid esta all together and go straight for B2 option.

Person 2. Apply for esta, answer the truth and await outcome. Having all ready mentioned that person 2 has circumstances that may or may not fall outside of CIMT, of which person 2 will require legal advice. If Denied quickly apply for B2 and cross everything in the hopes that you get it in time. That gets denied same boat as person 1, and therefore may be they can skype you one evening and toast your celebrations that way.

Person 3. Apply for esta, tick no based on what you have told us. Goes to Las Vegas and enjoys the gambling and hookers with you all.

Simples

fatbrit

If you tick yes to the crime question on ESTA, it will be denied. No ifs ands or buts.

Really no point in not going straight for the visa if you're going to tick yes there.

DavidLemon

I agree with you, hence i did state

That was pertinent to person 1.

In regards to person 2, he may well not fall into the CIMT category, and may not have to tick yes. He needs to quickly get that defined. We can not just say yes he does as we have no facts, and guidelines to CIMT seem to point to the conclusion that he can tick no.
Person 2 needs to get on it like yesterday to stand any chance of getting in on the Stag.

lansbury

Since when has burglary not been a CIMT - I don't see how else you can describe breaking and entering as anything but burglary and for that the sentence for the first offence can be 5 years or more. The US judge these things by the maximum allowed sentence.

Glover

Ok thank you. I'll have to break the new's to guy one, not a good outcome, guy 2 I will tell him to get into gear and tell him he needs a visa quickly if he thinks it's moral turpitude and guy 3, haha, well I'll tell him to tick no, he will fine and as you say he can have as much booze and hookers he wants!

Havnfun

According to the US Department of State:

Crimes against property which DO NOT fall withing the definition of moral turpitude include:

Breaking and entering (requiring no specific or implicit intent to commit a crime involving moral turpitude).

Does this mean as long as you don't steal anything when you break and enter it is not moral turpitude

lansbury

While breaking and entering is a crime in the US, I am not aware it is a crime in the UK. In the UK it is burglary. Burglary in the US is a CIMT.

paulpur

sounds like the guy needs to find out exactly what he was charged with quickly,either getting an ACPO certificate or getting the information from the police station where he was arrested, then can proceed on that information

DavidLemon

Whilst this may be true, i can only go by what the OP stated in the opening Thread. My response was purely based on that.

I agree with you entirely and stated this in the very beginning and on numerous occasions though out this thread.