Z3usx

Hi

I was wondering if someone could provide some advice.

I applied for an ESTA in June 2013 and have travelled to the states a few times since then, however I have a police caution for common assault. At the time of application I assumed that what I was cautioned for was not a CIMT, selected No and got the ESTA.

Only now have I seen the video by the UK US embassy and numerous forums posts about having to apply for a visa, I realise that I should of ticked no and applied for a visa. I had no intention of travelling to the states fraudulently.

I am not sure what I should do next, should I seek legal help or apply for a visa and explain my circumstances or something else?

Any help is much appreciated

Thanks

materialcontroller

Your offence doesn't sound like CIMT to me, so what specifically makes you think that it is?

Noorah101

From what I've heard, the questions on ESTA have recently changed. So go look at the new ESTA form and see how you would answer the new questions. I don't think they mention CIMT anymore.

Rene

materialcontroller

They still do mention CIMT. Not in the question itself, but in the accompanying explanatory notes.

Z3usx

thank you for the replies.

I'm concerned because from what the informational video from the embassy implies - I should of applied for a visa regardless if it was a CIMT or not, it's a police caution

materialcontroller

The embassy advice is wrong and misleading. This is well known on here and you shouldn't be relying on it.

Noorah101

The embassy instructions don't match up with the ESTA instructions, just so you know. The embassy website (and seems this video, too) say you need a visa if you've ever been arrested or cautioned...does not mention CIMT. The ESTA instructions are the correct source to get information, not the embassy.

Rene

md95065

As has already been pointed out, an "informational video" is just that - "informational" - it is not necessarily accurate and it certainly does not constitute legal advice (and, least of all, legal advice appropriate to your specific situation).

If you want a legal opinion on this then you should consult an experienced immigration attorney.

If you want my opinion, then, based on the information that you have given, I think that you should stop worrying and just forget about it.

ian-mstm

Common assault is not a CIMT. You've done nothing wrong and you have nothing to worry about.

Ian

johnnybrown532

Unless the common assault was racially or religiously aggravated. In this case it is not but if it was that would be CIMT wouldn't it?

ian-mstm

In which case it wouldn't be "common assault" would it? Do you actually think about what you're writing in the moment prior to posting?

Ian

johnnybrown532

No it would be "common assault" actually. There is a different offence of "racially aggravated" "common assault".

Pulaski

So it would be "racially aggravated common assault" which is different from "common assault", but Ian has already pointed that out.

Z3usx

Thanks for the responses.

Do you think this would cause any issues if I was to apply for a work visa?

Potentially I may have the opportunity to relocate to the states and work for my company's US offices.

Pulaski

Probably not much, just a minor bump in the road.

BTW Your employer will be applying for a work visa for you, you cannot apply for your own.