Listener 4842 For Me And You By...
Crosswords2 mins ago
help
have booked a trip to vegas and miami for my boyfrineds birthday next year. when i booked it i didnt know anythink about getting a visa. end of last year he got done for aggravated twoc. now im worried and because he dont know about the trip i dunno if i should get him to apply for a visa or chance it anyhelp please.
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by kayeemma. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don;t think you need a VISa just a ESTA. You apply online - see if there's info here about convictions.
http://www.visabureau...ica/tourist-visa.aspx
http://www.visabureau...ica/tourist-visa.aspx
The offence would seem to fall into the category of 'moral turpitude' which, under the terms of the US Immigration and Nationality Act, automatically places a lifetime ban on your boyfriend entering the USA. So, in the first instance, the US Embassy MUST refuse him a visa. (Embassy staff have no discretion in the matter; it's their law).
However they could then forward the application to Washington as an application for a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility' to enter the USA. If that waiver is granted, the application can then be reconsidered. The process is extremely lengthy. (It typically takes around 5 or 6 months but I've seen a report, on this site, from someone who waited 15 months before being told that no 'waiver of permanent ineligibility' could be given, so he couldn't have a visa. He had two convictions for driving without insurance). With such a recent conviction, it's probably extremely unlikely that a waiver (and hence a visa) would be granted.
That leaves him with having to 'chance it' by 'forgetting' about his conviction and attempting to enter the USA under the Visa Waiver Program (with an 'ESTA'). The US authorities have no direct access to UK criminal records and many people seem to have got in under the Visa Waiver Program, without any problems. However the UK will make criminal records known to the US immigration service if they receive a specific request for information about any particular individual. Because security matters are shrouded in secrecy, nobody knows just how such requests are made, but there have been quite a few people who've been turned back on arrival in the USA because they'd failed to declare criminal convictions.
There can be no definitive answer to your question. I'd regard a visa application as unlikely to succeed but nobody can guarantee that 'chancing it' will succeed either.
Chris
However they could then forward the application to Washington as an application for a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility' to enter the USA. If that waiver is granted, the application can then be reconsidered. The process is extremely lengthy. (It typically takes around 5 or 6 months but I've seen a report, on this site, from someone who waited 15 months before being told that no 'waiver of permanent ineligibility' could be given, so he couldn't have a visa. He had two convictions for driving without insurance). With such a recent conviction, it's probably extremely unlikely that a waiver (and hence a visa) would be granted.
That leaves him with having to 'chance it' by 'forgetting' about his conviction and attempting to enter the USA under the Visa Waiver Program (with an 'ESTA'). The US authorities have no direct access to UK criminal records and many people seem to have got in under the Visa Waiver Program, without any problems. However the UK will make criminal records known to the US immigration service if they receive a specific request for information about any particular individual. Because security matters are shrouded in secrecy, nobody knows just how such requests are made, but there have been quite a few people who've been turned back on arrival in the USA because they'd failed to declare criminal convictions.
There can be no definitive answer to your question. I'd regard a visa application as unlikely to succeed but nobody can guarantee that 'chancing it' will succeed either.
Chris
For Maidup:
Anyone who has ever been convicted of an offence of 'moral turpitude' (which could be for something as nicking a single sweet off a 'pick & mix' display) is barred for life from entering the USA unless they can obtain a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility'. As explained in my post above, that's an incredibly lengthy process!
Further, the rules on the US Embassy website clearly state that anyone who has ever been arrested (even if totally innocent) or convicted of any offence (other than very minor motoring matters) is ineligible to travel under the Visa Waiver Program. They must go through the full visa application process (which includes attending an interview at the embassy).
Chris
Anyone who has ever been convicted of an offence of 'moral turpitude' (which could be for something as nicking a single sweet off a 'pick & mix' display) is barred for life from entering the USA unless they can obtain a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility'. As explained in my post above, that's an incredibly lengthy process!
Further, the rules on the US Embassy website clearly state that anyone who has ever been arrested (even if totally innocent) or convicted of any offence (other than very minor motoring matters) is ineligible to travel under the Visa Waiver Program. They must go through the full visa application process (which includes attending an interview at the embassy).
Chris
Thanks for your reply.
US seems rather odd to us. Beating someone up, however seriously, is (in most cases) not an offence of 'moral turpitude', whereas stealing something (even if it's only worth a penny) always is. It's 'moral turpitude' which automatically bans someone from entering the USA, so (unless he could get a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility') your boyfriend is barred from entering the USA for the rest of his life. (The USA does not recognise our Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, so offences can never become 'spent' as far as the US immigration authorities are concerned).
People who have tried to get a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility' have occasionally posted on here to indicate that the US Embassy has told them that they'll have to wait until at least 5 years after the end of any court sentence (whether that be a prison sentence, a Community Order or anything else) before they can be considered for the waiver (and that there will still be no guarantee of getting one).
I can't guarantee that your boyfriend wouldn't be able to get a visa. (I doubt that even the American ambassador would want to give you a definite answer). But everything I've read suggests that he'd meet with a refusal.
Chris
US seems rather odd to us. Beating someone up, however seriously, is (in most cases) not an offence of 'moral turpitude', whereas stealing something (even if it's only worth a penny) always is. It's 'moral turpitude' which automatically bans someone from entering the USA, so (unless he could get a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility') your boyfriend is barred from entering the USA for the rest of his life. (The USA does not recognise our Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, so offences can never become 'spent' as far as the US immigration authorities are concerned).
People who have tried to get a 'waiver of permanent ineligibility' have occasionally posted on here to indicate that the US Embassy has told them that they'll have to wait until at least 5 years after the end of any court sentence (whether that be a prison sentence, a Community Order or anything else) before they can be considered for the waiver (and that there will still be no guarantee of getting one).
I can't guarantee that your boyfriend wouldn't be able to get a visa. (I doubt that even the American ambassador would want to give you a definite answer). But everything I've read suggests that he'd meet with a refusal.
Chris
Dzug2 has pointed out the difficulty of translating between UK law and US law.
The circumstances which led to the 'aggravated' part of the charge being added might be relevant. If they relate to damage to the vehicle (or to other property), rather than to personal injuries, my opinion is that the US authorities might regard that as equivalent to 'malicious damage to property' (which is moral turpitude) but, as Dzug2 indicates, it would probably need an American lawyer to make a definite decision.
The circumstances which led to the 'aggravated' part of the charge being added might be relevant. If they relate to damage to the vehicle (or to other property), rather than to personal injuries, my opinion is that the US authorities might regard that as equivalent to 'malicious damage to property' (which is moral turpitude) but, as Dzug2 indicates, it would probably need an American lawyer to make a definite decision.
1 to 9 of 9
Latest Posts
Trump/Ukraine, What Will He Do?
News3 mins ago
News6 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Technology15 mins ago
