Advice I Gave My Husband ...

[verde 0]

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

The advice could be summed up in two short sentences.

1. Make sure you understand a question before answering.

2. Tell the truth.

True, but the brief pause to allow yourself to clear your head, focus, pay attention, and think before you speak is necessary for both. I don't think most applicants willfully lie - I think they feel pressured, intimidated, interrogated, scared, and feel like they have to give a new answer when the Officer keeps asking the same question over and over again. These techniques are used in the legal field, and they are very effective. If an attorney ever prepares you for a deposition or trial, you'll go over all of these techniques - and any immigration attorney would have you practice these too, as well as answers to sensitive or complicated questions. BTW, are you an attorney? Just curious.

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

Thanks. Best wishes to you too!

Yes, truth tellers generally understand the mechanics of the activity, which include taking time to actually attend to "truth telling".

What do you mean by this? What are you implying? Even honest people can get flustered and intimidated by interrogation and a barrage of questions. If you are trying to say that the only people who should follow standard legal practice for testimony are "liars" then just say that. Don't beat around the bush. My husband is honest, as am I. I don't understand your attitude. I asked before, are you an attorney, or are you just pretending to be one?

I don't mean anything of the kind. I'm saying if it were me offering advice about an immigration related interview I would boil it down to the two items I mentioned. For people accustomed to giving accurate and truthful answers to questions, the mechanics of item 1 are practiced daily in everyday life and item two follows naturally. My comments were in response to somebody else suggesting your more extensive "instruction" was a lot to remember. No need to read anything else into it.

In everyday life, people aren't used to being "interrogated, accused, barraged by questions where they are given no opportunity to respond, etc. These "interviews" are not anything like normal, everyday experience. Why do you think attorneys spend hours or even days/weeks preparing their clients for depositions and trials? These interviews are essentially depositions or trials. The Consular Officer verbally attacks you, interrogates you, makes assumptions and insinuations, asks the same question over and over (hoping you'll mess up under pressure and give a different answer), and essentially intimidates you. You have stated to other posters that you are an "immigration expert", so I assumed you were an attorney. I am not sure what other kind of "immigration expert" there is. However, the advice you gave me that i can't obtain a K3 visa with a CRI packet in Embassy receipt was wrong. If you want to actually QUOTE an actual law, rule, or regulation, do so. If you want to state your own experience, on which everyone is truly their own expert witness, do so. But to put your opinion out there as if it were law is not fair to other readers. Some people may take it at face value, and end up making mistakes with their own immigration cases. And I stand by my position that these interviews are not something most people used to normal interpersonal communication are used to or prepared for. It can be quite shocking, intimidating, and confusing. You can be rushed, not allowed to respond, not allowed to present evidence or refute allegations, etc. You might get lucky and get a kind, understanding, polite, respectful officer who treats you with dignity and actually looks at your documents and listens to your answers - or you might get an officer who for whatever reason acts like a criminal prosecutor or police interrogator. I say the better prepared you are, the less likely you'll mess up. I'm not an attorney, I'm not an "immigration expert". I am a paralegal and law student. I do have graduate degrees. I do read immigration law and carefully follow all immigration related instructions (that come from the USCIS, DOS, NVC, or Embassy). Whatever I say here is from my own personal first hand experience in our case, and advice I give are things that helped/hurt me or things I wish I had done differently (like expect the worse, in order to be prepared for the best or worse).

[TBoneTX 45,287]

OP: What is it that you want that (1) anyone here can provide and (2) hasn't been provided already? Just curious.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

OP: What is it that you want that (1) anyone here can provide and (2) hasn't been provided already? Just curious.

Good question, si man

[pushbrk 12,882]

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

The advice could be summed up in two short sentences.

1. Make sure you understand a question before answering.

2. Tell the truth.

True, but the brief pause to allow yourself to clear your head, focus, pay attention, and think before you speak is necessary for both. I don't think most applicants willfully lie - I think they feel pressured, intimidated, interrogated, scared, and feel like they have to give a new answer when the Officer keeps asking the same question over and over again. These techniques are used in the legal field, and they are very effective. If an attorney ever prepares you for a deposition or trial, you'll go over all of these techniques - and any immigration attorney would have you practice these too, as well as answers to sensitive or complicated questions. BTW, are you an attorney? Just curious.

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

Thanks. Best wishes to you too!

Yes, truth tellers generally understand the mechanics of the activity, which include taking time to actually attend to "truth telling".

What do you mean by this? What are you implying? Even honest people can get flustered and intimidated by interrogation and a barrage of questions. If you are trying to say that the only people who should follow standard legal practice for testimony are "liars" then just say that. Don't beat around the bush. My husband is honest, as am I. I don't understand your attitude. I asked before, are you an attorney, or are you just pretending to be one?

I don't mean anything of the kind. I'm saying if it were me offering advice about an immigration related interview I would boil it down to the two items I mentioned. For people accustomed to giving accurate and truthful answers to questions, the mechanics of item 1 are practiced daily in everyday life and item two follows naturally. My comments were in response to somebody else suggesting your more extensive "instruction" was a lot to remember. No need to read anything else into it.

In everyday life, people aren't used to being "interrogated, accused, barraged by questions where they are given no opportunity to respond, etc. These "interviews" are not anything like normal, everyday experience. Why do you think attorneys spend hours or even days/weeks preparing their clients for depositions and trials? These interviews are essentially depositions or trials. The Consular Officer verbally attacks you, interrogates you, makes assumptions and insinuations, asks the same question over and over (hoping you'll mess up under pressure and give a different answer), and essentially intimidates you. You have stated to other posters that you are an "immigration expert", so I assumed you were an attorney. I am not sure what other kind of "immigration expert" there is. However, the advice you gave me that i can't obtain a K3 visa with a CRI packet in Embassy receipt was wrong. If you want to actually QUOTE an actual law, rule, or regulation, do so. If you want to state your own experience, on which everyone is truly their own expert witness, do so. But to put your opinion out there as if it were law is not fair to other readers. Some people may take it at face value, and end up making mistakes with their own immigration cases. And I stand by my position that these interviews are not something most people used to normal interpersonal communication are used to or prepared for. It can be quite shocking, intimidating, and confusing. You can be rushed, not allowed to respond, not allowed to present evidence or refute allegations, etc. You might get lucky and get a kind, understanding, polite, respectful officer who treats you with dignity and actually looks at your documents and listens to your answers - or you might get an officer who for whatever reason acts like a criminal prosecutor or police interrogator. I say the better prepared you are, the less likely you'll mess up. I'm not an attorney, I'm not an "immigration expert". I am a paralegal and law student. I do have graduate degrees. I do read immigration law and carefully follow all immigration related instructions (that come from the USCIS, DOS, NVC, or Embassy). Whatever I say here is from my own personal first hand experience in our case, and advice I give are things that helped/hurt me or things I wish I had done differently (like expect the worse, in order to be prepared for the best or worse).

It's ok to have a different opinion. Most of yours I agree with and frankly most of what you just wrote in no way conflicts with my own assertions.

With respect to the State Department's official definition of "immediately available" I am 100% certain I'm correct. I also indicated the official policy is not always known or followed. I'll join with others in stating I'm completely baffled at why you continue such an argumentative exchange. Your case is in a wait and see mode. You've done everything that can be done at this point. No additional assistance or answers can help you at this time.

[verde 0]

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

The advice could be summed up in two short sentences.

1. Make sure you understand a question before answering.

2. Tell the truth.

True, but the brief pause to allow yourself to clear your head, focus, pay attention, and think before you speak is necessary for both. I don't think most applicants willfully lie - I think they feel pressured, intimidated, interrogated, scared, and feel like they have to give a new answer when the Officer keeps asking the same question over and over again. These techniques are used in the legal field, and they are very effective. If an attorney ever prepares you for a deposition or trial, you'll go over all of these techniques - and any immigration attorney would have you practice these too, as well as answers to sensitive or complicated questions. BTW, are you an attorney? Just curious.

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

Thanks. Best wishes to you too!

Yes, truth tellers generally understand the mechanics of the activity, which include taking time to actually attend to "truth telling".

What do you mean by this? What are you implying? Even honest people can get flustered and intimidated by interrogation and a barrage of questions. If you are trying to say that the only people who should follow standard legal practice for testimony are "liars" then just say that. Don't beat around the bush. My husband is honest, as am I. I don't understand your attitude. I asked before, are you an attorney, or are you just pretending to be one?

I don't mean anything of the kind. I'm saying if it were me offering advice about an immigration related interview I would boil it down to the two items I mentioned. For people accustomed to giving accurate and truthful answers to questions, the mechanics of item 1 are practiced daily in everyday life and item two follows naturally. My comments were in response to somebody else suggesting your more extensive "instruction" was a lot to remember. No need to read anything else into it.

In everyday life, people aren't used to being "interrogated, accused, barraged by questions where they are given no opportunity to respond, etc. These "interviews" are not anything like normal, everyday experience. Why do you think attorneys spend hours or even days/weeks preparing their clients for depositions and trials? These interviews are essentially depositions or trials. The Consular Officer verbally attacks you, interrogates you, makes assumptions and insinuations, asks the same question over and over (hoping you'll mess up under pressure and give a different answer), and essentially intimidates you. You have stated to other posters that you are an "immigration expert", so I assumed you were an attorney. I am not sure what other kind of "immigration expert" there is. However, the advice you gave me that i can't obtain a K3 visa with a CRI packet in Embassy receipt was wrong. If you want to actually QUOTE an actual law, rule, or regulation, do so. If you want to state your own experience, on which everyone is truly their own expert witness, do so. But to put your opinion out there as if it were law is not fair to other readers. Some people may take it at face value, and end up making mistakes with their own immigration cases. And I stand by my position that these interviews are not something most people used to normal interpersonal communication are used to or prepared for. It can be quite shocking, intimidating, and confusing. You can be rushed, not allowed to respond, not allowed to present evidence or refute allegations, etc. You might get lucky and get a kind, understanding, polite, respectful officer who treats you with dignity and actually looks at your documents and listens to your answers - or you might get an officer who for whatever reason acts like a criminal prosecutor or police interrogator. I say the better prepared you are, the less likely you'll mess up. I'm not an attorney, I'm not an "immigration expert". I am a paralegal and law student. I do have graduate degrees. I do read immigration law and carefully follow all immigration related instructions (that come from the USCIS, DOS, NVC, or Embassy). Whatever I say here is from my own personal first hand experience in our case, and advice I give are things that helped/hurt me or things I wish I had done differently (like expect the worse, in order to be prepared for the best or worse).

It's ok to have a different opinion. Most of yours I agree with and frankly most of what you just wrote in no way conflicts with my own assertions.

With respect to the State Department's official definition of "immediately available" I am 100% certain I'm correct. I also indicated the official policy is not always known or followed. I'll join with others in stating I'm completely baffled at why you continue such an argumentative exchange. Your case is in a wait and see mode. You've done everything that can be done at this point. No additional assistance or answers can help you at this time.

I want what everyone wants. To be heard (not just listened to), to be understood, to be given sincere and good faith suggestions, without being told you are ignorant or being told you have not done things that you have clearly done and stated so in previous posts (or vice versa). I want empathy, encouragement, support ... to hear from other who have been through the same. I don't want "expert" opinions from non-experts (you get enough of that in court, only they get paid for it). I don't want to be told to bend over and take it. want to give good faith suggestions and have them shot down when I gave no specific directions just advice based on my experience and regret. And I hate all of these contradictions. One doesn't know who to listen to. You insist that we can't get a K3 with a CR1 on file, the NVC says we can, some people only chime in with snide comments. I appreciate your last posts. The snide people comments must be really really bored and really really angry or insecure or whatever. People here post to express themselves, update others on their cases, and respond to other people's posts. Every single post doesn't have a clear, specific motive. Not mine, not anyones. I feel helpless, I'm stuck in bed today with MS, and am frustrated at having followed the instructions only to be given different instructions at the interview. That's all. That's all.

Edited November 19, 2009 by verde

[pushbrk 12,882]

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

The advice could be summed up in two short sentences.

1. Make sure you understand a question before answering.

2. Tell the truth.

True, but the brief pause to allow yourself to clear your head, focus, pay attention, and think before you speak is necessary for both. I don't think most applicants willfully lie - I think they feel pressured, intimidated, interrogated, scared, and feel like they have to give a new answer when the Officer keeps asking the same question over and over again. These techniques are used in the legal field, and they are very effective. If an attorney ever prepares you for a deposition or trial, you'll go over all of these techniques - and any immigration attorney would have you practice these too, as well as answers to sensitive or complicated questions. BTW, are you an attorney? Just curious.

I think the OP's post can be useful for those people out there who are going to have an interview in the future. Good share Hope everything will be in place and finally live happily with your husband

Thanks. Best wishes to you too!

Yes, truth tellers generally understand the mechanics of the activity, which include taking time to actually attend to "truth telling".

What do you mean by this? What are you implying? Even honest people can get flustered and intimidated by interrogation and a barrage of questions. If you are trying to say that the only people who should follow standard legal practice for testimony are "liars" then just say that. Don't beat around the bush. My husband is honest, as am I. I don't understand your attitude. I asked before, are you an attorney, or are you just pretending to be one?

I don't mean anything of the kind. I'm saying if it were me offering advice about an immigration related interview I would boil it down to the two items I mentioned. For people accustomed to giving accurate and truthful answers to questions, the mechanics of item 1 are practiced daily in everyday life and item two follows naturally. My comments were in response to somebody else suggesting your more extensive "instruction" was a lot to remember. No need to read anything else into it.

In everyday life, people aren't used to being "interrogated, accused, barraged by questions where they are given no opportunity to respond, etc. These "interviews" are not anything like normal, everyday experience. Why do you think attorneys spend hours or even days/weeks preparing their clients for depositions and trials? These interviews are essentially depositions or trials. The Consular Officer verbally attacks you, interrogates you, makes assumptions and insinuations, asks the same question over and over (hoping you'll mess up under pressure and give a different answer), and essentially intimidates you. You have stated to other posters that you are an "immigration expert", so I assumed you were an attorney. I am not sure what other kind of "immigration expert" there is. However, the advice you gave me that i can't obtain a K3 visa with a CRI packet in Embassy receipt was wrong. If you want to actually QUOTE an actual law, rule, or regulation, do so. If you want to state your own experience, on which everyone is truly their own expert witness, do so. But to put your opinion out there as if it were law is not fair to other readers. Some people may take it at face value, and end up making mistakes with their own immigration cases. And I stand by my position that these interviews are not something most people used to normal interpersonal communication are used to or prepared for. It can be quite shocking, intimidating, and confusing. You can be rushed, not allowed to respond, not allowed to present evidence or refute allegations, etc. You might get lucky and get a kind, understanding, polite, respectful officer who treats you with dignity and actually looks at your documents and listens to your answers - or you might get an officer who for whatever reason acts like a criminal prosecutor or police interrogator. I say the better prepared you are, the less likely you'll mess up. I'm not an attorney, I'm not an "immigration expert". I am a paralegal and law student. I do have graduate degrees. I do read immigration law and carefully follow all immigration related instructions (that come from the USCIS, DOS, NVC, or Embassy). Whatever I say here is from my own personal first hand experience in our case, and advice I give are things that helped/hurt me or things I wish I had done differently (like expect the worse, in order to be prepared for the best or worse).

It's ok to have a different opinion. Most of yours I agree with and frankly most of what you just wrote in no way conflicts with my own assertions.

With respect to the State Department's official definition of "immediately available" I am 100% certain I'm correct. I also indicated the official policy is not always known or followed. I'll join with others in stating I'm completely baffled at why you continue such an argumentative exchange. Your case is in a wait and see mode. You've done everything that can be done at this point. No additional assistance or answers can help you at this time.

I want what everyone wants. To be heard (not just listened to), to be understood, to be given sincere and good faith suggestions, without being told you are ignorant or being told you have not done things that you have clearly done and stated so in previous posts (or vice versa). I want empathy, encouragement, support ... to hear from other who have been through the same. I don't want "expert" opinions from non-experts (you get enough of that in court, only they get paid for it). I don't want to be told to bend over and take it. want to give good faith suggestions and have them shot down when I gave no specific directions just advice based on my experience and regret. And I hate all of these contradictions. One doesn't know who to listen to. You insist that we can't get a K3 with a CR1 on file, the NVC says we can, some people only chime in with snide comments. I appreciate your last posts. The snide people comments must be really really bored and really really angry or insecure or whatever. People here post to express themselves, update others on their cases, and respond to other people's posts. Every single post doesn't have a clear, specific motive. Not mine, not anyones. I feel helpless, I'm stuck in bed today with MS, and am frustrated at having followed the instructions only to be given different instructions at the interview. That's all. That's all.

If you think you're getting too much of what you don't want and not enough of what you do, perhaps it would be more productive to have your discussions elsewhere or pivot to a less combative approach. Again for the record, if I have made a firm assertion in our discussion, you may rest assured it is the opinion of an actual expert on the specific subject.

[TBoneTX 45,287]

If you think you're getting too much of what you don't want and not enough of what you do, perhaps it would be more productive to have your discussions elsewhere or pivot to a less combative approach. Again for the record, if I have made a firm assertion in our discussion, you may rest assured it is the opinion of an actual expert on the specific subject.

This is the most concise, objective, straight advice that anyone could receive on the subject. OP, I hope that your bedbound status improves soon.

[verde 0]

What expert? Can you refer me to the rule, law, regulation, or expert you are obtaining this information from? Because I'm relaying information straight from the NCV and Embassy, and if it's not from them, I quote the law or state that it is my opinion. I will find the post where you say you are an "immigration expert" and repost it. Good evening.

[William33 110]

What expert? Can you refer me to the rule, law, regulation, or expert you are obtaining this information from? Because I'm relaying information straight from the NCV and Embassy, and if it's not from them, I quote the law or state that it is my opinion. I will find the post where you say you are an "immigration expert" and repost it. Good evening.

Relax Verde...The advice offered by others here is spot on, particularly the info provided by pushbrk. You need to step back, evaluate and re-engage. The cycle of questions, response, followed by challenge and attack needs to end.

If you are not satisfied with the responses from Visa Journey, well, we understand that and suggest you seek guidance elsewhere. That said, please stop attacking the members that are trying to help you....

Thanks,

William, VJ Moderation.

[belinda63 3,038]

Time for my two cents. Wait, wait, and wait some more.

Nothing you do can speed up the process, no one, no attorney, no senator, no congressman, no one can speed up the process. Send emails all you want, call 10 times a day to the embassy and DOS, it will not speed up the process.

Take up knitting, walking, buy a dog, do anything you can to take your mind off of it because at this point all you can do is wait.

Good luck

[pushbrk 12,882]

What expert? Can you refer me to the rule, law, regulation, or expert you are obtaining this information from? Because I'm relaying information straight from the NCV and Embassy, and if it's not from them, I quote the law or state that it is my opinion. I will find the post where you say you are an "immigration expert" and repost it. Good evening.

Here's the link with regard to CR1 issuance when I-130 is on station. Note the telegram to Consulates refers to IR1 but the same rules apply to CR1 as the only distinction is the duration of the marriage prior to interview.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...ost&id=6408

And here is the relevant statment in the document in section 30.

If the I-130 petition is at post, or the applicant has already been interviewed and denied the IR1 by a consular officer, perhaps due to lack of the I-864 AOS, that applicant must proceed with IR1 processing and may not choose to apply instead for the K3

[verde 0]

It might have been given too late, but it is GREAT advice. If the relationship is real, remembering all the details of it shouldn't be an overload to the memory, but putting on your game face is important especially in certain countries...

Thanks. It is a game, and I appreciate your appreciating my suggestions.

[verde 0]

What expert? Can you refer me to the rule, law, regulation, or expert you are obtaining this information from? Because I'm relaying information straight from the NCV and Embassy, and if it's not from them, I quote the law or state that it is my opinion. I will find the post where you say you are an "immigration expert" and repost it. Good evening.

Here's the link with regard to CR1 issuance when I-130 is on station. Note the telegram to Consulates refers to IR1 but the same rules apply to CR1 as the only distinction is the duration of the marriage prior to interview.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...ost&id=6408

And here is the relevant statment in the document in section 30.

If the I-130 petition is at post, or the applicant has already been interviewed and denied the IR1 by a consular officer, perhaps due to lack of the I-864 AOS, that applicant must proceed with IR1 processing and may not choose to apply instead for the K3

Thanks, this is great information. It actually supports almost everything I have been claiming. It states that an interview with a consular officer is not required for a non-immigrant (k3) visa. It states that I-864s are NOT required for a K3 petition, and that even I-134s are not required but can be requested at Embassy discretion. It also states that if a K3 visa is already in process when the I-130/CR1 visa petitin/application arrives from the NVC at the Embassy, the applicant can choose to move forward with the K3 or switch to the CR1. It also states that K3s are to be processed rapidly, because their purpose IS to reunify families pending immigration visa processing and approval.

[pushbrk 12,882]

What expert? Can you refer me to the rule, law, regulation, or expert you are obtaining this information from? Because I'm relaying information straight from the NCV and Embassy, and if it's not from them, I quote the law or state that it is my opinion. I will find the post where you say you are an "immigration expert" and repost it. Good evening.

Here's the link with regard to CR1 issuance when I-130 is on station. Note the telegram to Consulates refers to IR1 but the same rules apply to CR1 as the only distinction is the duration of the marriage prior to interview.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...ost&id=6408

And here is the relevant statment in the document in section 30.

If the I-130 petition is at post, or the applicant has already been interviewed and denied the IR1 by a consular officer, perhaps due to lack of the I-864 AOS, that applicant must proceed with IR1 processing and may not choose to apply instead for the K3

Thanks, this is great information. It actually supports almost everything I have been claiming. It states that an interview with a consular officer is not required for a non-immigrant (k3) visa. It states that I-864s are NOT required for a K3 petition, and that even I-134s are not required but can be requested at Embassy discretion. It also states that if a K3 visa is already in process when the I-130/CR1 visa petitin/application arrives from the NVC at the Embassy, the applicant can choose to move forward with the K3 or switch to the CR1. It also states that K3s are to be processed rapidly, because their purpose IS to reunify families pending immigration visa processing and approval.

I think you are engaging in some convenient and creative misinterpretation. Let me boil it down for you by taking out the parts that don't apply to your case. "If the I-130 petition is at post, that applicant must proceed with IR1 process and may not choose to apply instead for the K3." That's the assertion I firmly made probably in another thread. The parts I removed from the sentence don't apply to your case.

Remember, it really doesn't matter at this stage what you think about how the Consulate has handled your case. The bottom line will be their judgment as to whether your relationship is bona fide. You must clear that hurdle to obtain either visa. Apparently, you've done all you can on that score and must simply wait and see what their decision is. All your other concerns will be rendered moot whether the outcome is positive or negative. If the outcome is possitive, you can expect the CR1 visa, a far better outcome than the K3 anyway.

Edited November 19, 2009 by pushbrk

[Malrothien 6]

Verde - you are sick, as you have posted a number of times. Why are you creating stress for yourself by continuing to argue with the members of this site?