How do I stop her immigration?

[mox 298]

I do suggest that detractors offer their own suggestions to the OP rather than objecting to legitimate posts by others. I've already done so, and my response mentioned the potential of an abuse claim too.

My own suggestion to the OP was also to protect himself. That just makes sense. Be prepared for anything. Again, this isn't just advice pertinent to a USC/immigrant marriage, this is just good advice in general.

Tito is not offering advice. He's just taking advantage of the opportunity to once again advance his anti-immigrant agenda. Do a search on his posts. He says the same thing over and over and over. He twists topics to shoe-horn his "she will claim abuse just you watch and see" argument, often under the guise of his so-called "professional" experience in the matter, which is always nebulous and ill-defined. (at one time he claimed not to work with immigration cases, and now we see that his "office" sees these cases all the time) He does not contribute to the conversation, and he has no interest in helping the OP or anyone else. He is simply using VJ as a platform to advance his own anti-immigrant agenda.

Your response on the other hand was helpful and pertinent to the OP's situation. Furthermore, if I were to do a search on your posts I would see a variety of opinions on various topics that are often objective, and almost always helpful. You have built credibility through integrity and demonstrating through the years that you are not a johnny-come-lately with an agenda. So when I see a post from you that says "protect yourself," it holds very different weight and subtext than when tito says "protect yourself."

[mox 298]

Dont be naive....the USCIS case files are full of exactly what Tito describes...I have read similar reports here on VJ....marriage fraud is the biggest visa fraud that USCIS faces..something like 8%, the stories of which you will never read here, as no one is going to lay out here what they are planning.

Taking your 8% figure at face-value, that leaves 92% of cases non-fraudulent.

Again, nobody is saying these cases don't exist. But scare-mongering is completely unhelpful.

[pushbrk 13,076]

I do suggest that detractors offer their own suggestions to the OP rather than objecting to legitimate posts by others. I've already done so, and my response mentioned the potential of an abuse claim too.

My own suggestion to the OP was also to protect himself. That just makes sense. Be prepared for anything. Again, this isn't just advice pertinent to a USC/immigrant marriage, this is just good advice in general.

Tito is not offering advice. He's just taking advantage of the opportunity to once again advance his anti-immigrant agenda. Do a search on his posts. He says the same thing over and over and over. He twists topics to shoe-horn his "she will claim abuse just you watch and see" argument, often under the guise of his so-called "professional" experience in the matter, which is always nebulous and ill-defined. (at one time he claimed not to work with immigration cases, and now we see that his "office" sees these cases all the time) He does not contribute to the conversation, and he has no interest in helping the OP or anyone else. He is simply using VJ as a platform to advance his own anti-immigrant agenda.

Your response on the other hand was helpful and pertinent to the OP's situation. Furthermore, if I were to do a search on your posts I would see a variety of opinions on various topics that are often objective, and almost always helpful. You have built credibility through integrity and demonstrating through the years that you are not a johnny-come-lately with an agenda. So when I see a post from you that says "protect yourself," it holds very different weight and subtext than when tito says "protect yourself."

Thank you. I'm suggesting we keep our posts on the topic instead of on the poster and let the readers take their own value from what they read.

[KimandRuss 0]

But scare-mongering is completely unhelpful

agreed.

To the OP... I would think a good lawyer would be the best course of action in order to protect yourself. I am so sorry you're having to endure this.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Dont be naive....the USCIS case files are full of exactly what Tito describes...I have read similar reports here on VJ....marriage fraud is the biggest visa fraud that USCIS faces..something like 8%, the stories of which you will never read here, as no one is going to lay out here what they are planning.

Taking your 8% figure at face-value, that leaves 92% of cases non-fraudulent.

Again, nobody is saying these cases don't exist. But scare-mongering is completely unhelpful.

I agree that the average person has no idea how many fraud situations there are. Most people think of fraud as two individuals, complicit in a scheme "pretending" marriage so that the alien can gain residency, and the USC gets a fad wad of money for doing so. But there is a whole other type of fraud, where one party in none the wiser and is blindsided by reality when the alien selects the time to make his or her agenda known.

Perhaps tito is trying to drill home that fact......

[mnieto 2]

Dont be naive....the USCIS case files are full of exactly what Tito describes...I have read similar reports here on VJ....marriage fraud is the biggest visa fraud that USCIS faces..something like 8%, the stories of which you will never read here, as no one is going to lay out here what they are planning.

Some ppl petition for their K-1, that K-1 (from countries I wont mention here) come to the US, buy a ticket to a third destination to be with their families or relatives....the poor petitioner never had a clue.

Maybe that's true, and that's why I think that the rules for bringing a foreign beneficiary into the country should be stricter ( FYI, I'm a foreign beneficiary/immigrant). Some of the stories about the transcontinental relationships are just scary.

Some people bring their fiances/spouses over to the US after having met only once or twice in person, and then they are stunned when the immigrants turn out to be completely different than what they had expected. What did they expect in the first place? How could they think that they knew the other one at all, after having met a handful of times, and what are they complaining about later, when reality hits them?

The same is applicable for the immigrant. Marrying somebody on the basis of having met once and having exchanged emails is pretty adventurous.

Having met once or twice is a tough basis for a marriage and soil which can breed a lot of disappointment and bitterness. That's why I think that the requirement of having met in person once within two years should maybe be a little stricter, maybe that would spare many couples a lot of heartache.

It is not easy to make a marriage work even for people who have spent quite a while with each other before they got married, and who knew each other's quirks and habits before. It must be even harder for folks who don't know each other at all.

But assuming that not all of the K1/K3 beneficiaries are GC-scammers, why do so many USC's scream "FRAUD" if things go wrong in the marriage? Why do most of them seem to be so eager to have the beneficiary's b&6%tt kicked out of the country ASAP?

I doubt that all of beneficiaries ( and please note that I am talking about those immigrants who came to the US for love and not for a Green Card - which is not even green, by the way ) will always necessarily pull the "hey...the USC has signed an Affidavit of Support! " card and will go pursue that route.

To the OP: you have every right to withdraw your Affidavit of Support and you should do so, no doubt. But if you don't

necessarily think that you have been a victim of a GC-scammer but rather that your marriage did not work out because of other reasons, why not let her stay in the US if that's what she wants and let her move on with her life?

Here's what I don't understand when it comes to these discussions whether the immigrant should leave the country after a divorce, or not: if it has been a bona fide relationship (I'm not talking about GC-crime) - why not live and let live???

Why necessarily destroy each other's lives? It's a more than valid point that once the immigrant leaves his/her home-country it's not easy to go back and start all over again from zero. Even more if kids are involved.

And from a human point of view: " So, the marriage to a foreigner doesn't work? No problem, send them back home!"

That sounds to me like shopping at Target: " Not happy with our product? No problem, you'll get your money back!"

In my opinion the problem begins with the fact that many people start the adventure called marriage without knowing each other, at all.

Best of luck to you, Habilus!

[Jasman0717 9]

At this point I would seek consultation with both a divorce and immigration attorney.

[tito 1]

"why do so many USC's scream "FRAUD" if things go wrong in the marriage?"

Great question...usually it's when the immigrant runs to authorities and claims ABUSE! As I've said here and elsewhere, either the immigrant wants things on their terms, and might have a particular agenda in mind, and if things don't work out, no matter their responsibility for the situation or relationship, they cry 'foul' because the USC didn't satisfy their expectations by delivering them on a silver platter...; or, the immigrant has a hard time adjusting to the pace, economics, and social aspect of life in the US (especially if they're from a place that is so different), and perceives the attempts on the part of the USC to help out the best they can as they have to deal with all the pressures of life with work, car payments, insurance payments, traffic, mortgage, and so on and so forth, as abuse, as being controlling, or something like that.

Truth of the matter is...the immigrant has a significant responsibility for the relationship, too, and if, in the eyes of the USC, they aren't pulling their weight, the USC comes to the conclusion that all the promises, all the emotion, all the sacrifice, all the work, was just a bunch of BS on the part of the immigrant so that the immigrant could come to the US. THAT is why the USC looks at the situation as "fraudulent". The situation is compounded when the immigrant runs to authorities and claims abuse as a way to get his or her green card regardless, and that leaves the USC even MORE confused as to the intentions of the immigrant in the first place.

[tito 1]

"Tito is not offering advice. He's just taking advantage of the opportunity to once again advance his anti-immigrant agenda. Do a search on his posts. He says the same thing over and over and over. He twists topics to shoe-horn his "she will claim abuse just you watch and see" argument, often under the guise of his so-called "professional" experience in the matter, which is always nebulous and ill-defined. (at one time he claimed not to work with immigration cases, and now we see that his "office" sees these cases all the time) He does not contribute to the conversation, and he has no interest in helping the OP or anyone else. He is simply using VJ as a platform to advance his own anti-immigrant agenda."

This is absurd. You are melding a bunch of different things together to create your OWN agenda. And I repeat the question: is it that you get your jollies seeing others suffer in failed relationshps? Or are you just anticipating what best to do in the event your relationship doesn't work out? Not clear about your agenda.

My advice is sound. Quit putting words and ideas and sentiments into my mouth because of your own agenda. To clarify: I am not an immigration attorney, but the immigration issues are prevalent in my office. I am participating here because all this warm-fuzzy "advice" about the poor defenseless immigrant running from a vicious monster that is the USC fails to take into consideration other options; also, there are stories here that repeat from people that come from the same certain places, and the places and fact patterns are remarkably similar. In such circumstances, the USC needs to understand the situation and the reasonably probable consequences of the actions of the immigrant who is often willing to do and say anything to stay in the US. If things are so bad, indeed, going home should be the first option, not levying some undefined claim of abuse against the USC.

Sorry - but that's just the reality, no matter your particular fantasy - and that certainly manifests repeatedly. Thanks for following me around and paying so much attention to what I'm saying - I AM truly flattered - but enough already.

[tito 1]

"Tito - how come you have so much knowledge on this topic?"

I see it every...single...day...in the course of my practice. Do you have a different experience? This isn't 'scare mongering'. It's reality for those who come here wanting to know the situation. In cases of failed relationships where immigration is an issue, this is important information for a USC. And when the failed relationships stem from immigrants from certain countries or parts of the world, the likelihood of a particular course of action is tried and true. But...not every relationship from a particular part of the world is destined for failure...on the other hand, IF the relationship fails soon out of the gate, AND the immigrant is from this or that place, THEN the likelihood is that such claims will be made in order to secure the green card. The immigrants are well coached in advance, and know exactly what to do.

Edited March 3, 2008 by tito

[diadromous mermaid 36]

"Tito - how come you have so much knowledge on this topic?"

I see it every...single...day...in the course of my practice. Do you have a different experience?

I have knowledge and experience, but hopefully the information that is delivered, is done so in such a way that people might be willing to accept it

[mox 298]

This is absurd. You are melding a bunch of different things together to create your OWN agenda. And I repeat the question: is it that you get your jollies seeing others suffer in failed relationshps? Or are you just anticipating what best to do in the event your relationship doesn't work out? Not clear about your agenda.

My "agenda" is to participate in discussions, and to do what little I can to help people who share the international relationship connection with me. One of the things I think I can help with is to point out a shyster when I see one.

My advice is sound. Quit putting words and ideas and sentiments into my mouth because of your own agenda.

Nobody's putting words in your mouth. As I've said, one only needs to do a search on your posts to see the pattern. Single-minded hijacking of threads to advance your anti-immigrant rantings. The "New Life" thread is a perfect example. The OP wanted to know how people were coping with their new life, never mentioned abuse, and in fact nobody else mentioned abuse until you brought it up. You had to really shoe-horn it into that thread.

Again, you post only in this forum, and you post only your tirade about immigrants who take advantage of USC's. If that's not an agenda then someone please call the guy in charge of the English language and tell him it's broken.

To clarify: I am not an immigration attorney, but the immigration issues are prevalent in my office.

Maybe you could be a little more specific if anyone were to take you seriously. The other attornies and legal secretaries who post on these forums have never had a problem discussing exactly what their jobs are and what kinds of cases they work on. You, however, seem to think you're Batman, lurking in the shadows, promising us that you have all this "professional experience." My intarweb-radar identifies you as a possible intern punk who's trying to leech onto some professional cred before he's ready, but then I suppose it's possible to be a full-fledged attorney and be maliciously incompetent too. Either way, very few here are impressed.

Sorry - but that's just the reality, no matter your particular fantasy - and that certainly manifests repeatedly. Thanks for following me around and paying so much attention to what I'm saying - I AM truly flattered - but enough already.

I agree, enough already. Stop your blathering and become a true participant in these forums instead of spewing ####### all over them. You're not helping anybody except your small following of mouth-breathing minions.

Edited March 3, 2008 by mox

[tito 1]

Whether the truth is something palatable or not is something people simply need to get over. There are certain things in these discussions that can't be sugarcoated. Some people have some significantly thin skin and take comments personally for whatever reason when they are not directed at them and do not deal with their particular experience. But taken in the manner intended, you will note that there is nothing misleading. People do what they do, say what they say, and the circumstances are something I see regularly, like it or not. If people want to live a different reality, that's fine. I'm sharing my experience and background because they do offer a perspective that DOESN'T sugarcoat things.

I'm not here to render legal advice to complete strangers, and I am extremely careful not to do so. Instead, I participate in order to share the experience of my practice, so I absolutely will not get into any specifics beyond that. This is an internet forum where people come to share experiences or seek opinions and perspective from others. The bases for my perspective are both personal and professional experience, and there's nothing more I can, will, want, or need to state. I'm not going to go around in circles and play that game as I mentioned when you first popped off. If you look at the comments I make, they are consistent, they are based on experience and practice, and are, for better or worse, accurate. This spin-doctoring of yours reflects that you are not interested in the MESSAGE, but rather the person posting. Again, I'm flattered, but stick to the message...

[mox 298]

Whether the truth is something palatable or not is something people simply need to get over. There are certain things in these discussions that can't be sugarcoated. [blah-de-blah-blah-blah deleted]

Whenever someone gets a little too close to the truth, misdirection is an important tool in the shyster's arsenal. Nobody ever said sugarcoat, nobody *has* sugarcoated, and nobody has insisted it (whatever "it" is) be sugarcoated. But hey, don't let that stop you from trying.

I'm not here to render legal advice to complete strangers, and I am extremely careful not to do so. Instead, I participate in order to share the experience of my practice, so I absolutely will not get into any specifics beyond that.

Ah yes, intern punk trying to go for the "mysterious cred" as I thought. Not that you brought any credibility to the table in the first place. I believe it was a legal secretary who managed to throw you to the mat in the space of about 5 posts, and another very credible attorney who has no problem telling the rest of the community exactly what it is they do to seal the deal. You are not Batman, you are just some guy who is almost certainly not an attorney pretending to be one.

This is an internet forum where people come to share experiences or seek opinions and perspective from others. The bases for my perspective are both personal and professional experience, and there's nothing more I can, will, want, or need to state. I'm not going to go around in circles and play that game as I mentioned when you first popped off. If you look at the comments I make, they are consistent, they are based on experience and practice, and are, for better or worse, accurate. This spin-doctoring of yours reflects that you are not interested in the MESSAGE, but rather the person posting. Again, I'm flattered, but stick to the message...

LOL you better believe I'm interested in the message. Because your MESSAGE is one that's just this side of skinhead neo-gtfo-of-my-country-ism. And let me tell you something about *my* personal experience. I had a very close relative who found himself up to his neck in people who liked to spout how immigrants need to just go home. I did a lot of research and worked actively against those monsters. Some of them had eerily similar arguments to yours. I'm not ready to proclaim your agenda as quite that insidious yet, because quite frankly I haven't made up my mind if you're just willfully clueless or maliciously clueless. But don't make the mistake that I'm posting against the person, although I'm sure you're just as repugnant in real life as your words make you sound. You've definitely got a message and you certainly have my attention, as well as others.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Whether the truth is something palatable or not is something people simply need to get over. There are certain things in these discussions that can't be sugarcoated. Some people have some significantly thin skin and take comments personally for whatever reason when they are not directed at them and do not deal with their particular experience. But taken in the manner intended, you will note that there is nothing misleading. People do what they do, say what they say, and the circumstances are something I see regularly, like it or not. If people want to live a different reality, that's fine. I'm sharing my experience and background because they do offer a perspective that DOESN'T sugarcoat things.

I'm not here to render legal advice to complete strangers, and I am extremely careful not to do so. Instead, I participate in order to share the experience of my practice, so I absolutely will not get into any specifics beyond that. This is an internet forum where people come to share experiences or seek opinions and perspective from others. The bases for my perspective are both personal and professional experience, and there's nothing more I can, will, want, or need to state. I'm not going to go around in circles and play that game as I mentioned when you first popped off. If you look at the comments I make, they are consistent, they are based on experience and practice, and are, for better or worse, accurate. This spin-doctoring of yours reflects that you are not interested in the MESSAGE, but rather the person posting. Again, I'm flattered, but stick to the message...

tito,

For the most part I have read what you've written with an open mind. Your comments above are all well and good, and I don't for one moment question the fact that you have both professional experience and personal experience that forms the basis for what you have declared.

That being said, you do appear to do a disservice to your cause by being so quick to consider others' as being unqualified to comment and to suggest that a vast number of aliens will follow the steps you have clearly defined. Well, let me say that in another way. I sense that you believe your experience gives you the best insight into the minds of a would-be con-artist and you are suggesting that this is a widespread issue. Frankly, I take exception to that. There's is no doubt in my mind that you may have been played by an immigrant. However, to paint all immigrants with the same brush, claiming that "this is what he or she will do" sends a very inaccurate message of the real dynamics involved when an alien uses a marriage to a USC for his or her immigration benefit.

The fact is that aliens that defraud US citizens into marriage typically don't do it by way of claiming abuse before they have adjusted status. For one thing, the bar is raised in such circumstances, and the "gold at the end of the rainbow" a fleeting and distant prize. Many abuse claims never get past the prima facie determination.

No, the alien that is "in it" for immigration benefit is a calculated individual. He has his route planned from the outset, and only under rare circumstances would he play his hand before he has accomplished his quest. To mix that individual in with a whole bevvy of others that are neither well-schooled in the art of conning another person, nor driven by a prime motivation to gain residency in America is unjust to those of us that know better.