Abuse of Vawa Discussion - split off from specific case

[BBCC 16]

This simply is not true and demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of how restraining orders work.

Sure, a temporary protective order can be based solely on with word of the person requesting it. However, it is only temporary. Both parties must appear before the judge within a short timeframe to present evidence on making it permanent for some length of time.

No, it does not. You so state but then in your very next sentence, state what I do with regard to the order being based solely with the word requesting it.

And are you suggesting that the petitioner cannot again return to court and repeat the same statements that were used to file the petition to begin with and make it permanent?

This is, by far, how these proceedings work. Clearly, you have a vested interest in suggesting otherwise. Debating the matter is pointless.

[verysadguy 170]

The official doctrine is that they need to err on the side of caution.

If something happens to the victim after declining any kind of petition under VAWA, it also impacts career or reputation of the reviewing officer (of the court, police, or any other reviewing agent) as having failed to protect the victim.

You stand far, far more to lose than just the attempt to block her acquisition of a green card if she decides to envoke the local courts to create the paper trail.

But from some have suggested here, VAWA claims may be an indepedent matter with the USCIS/VSC. But if they want to see evidence of local petitions to establish genuine concern, then, , hide, run. Absolutely no contact with this person whatsoever, as many have also mentioned.

Many have stated VAWA is difficult. If you are from a destitute background from a foreign country does proving bonafide marriage, abuse, and good moral character really seem all that difficult? I have been trying for months to actually figure out how 20% of applicants are denied. This system is so corrupt and full of holes it ludicrous. The protections given, the weak standards of evidence, the lowering of definitions of extreme cruelty are so completely anti-jurisprudence that it is mind boggling.

Again, if you are the victim of DV I feel for you, but the fraudsters MUST be dealt with swiftly and publicly. The system is out of control. Billions of US Taxpayer dollars wasted on scumbag liars.

Might I remind everyone reading this my ex was screwing a guy while she was pregnant. Performing pornography while pregnant. Lying to every single person in her sphere of influence daily for months. A sociopath. And our dear US Gov't has given her a free pass to money, and she is already cheating on her taxes. Disgusting. And that my dear readers is the mother of my child. A lying cheating tax evader. Nice...all thanks to VAWA adjudicators and some bleeding heart Catholics who don't think finding out the truth is important. VAWA protection makes sense, bending the rules of judicial fairness makes ZERO damn sense.

[BBCC 16]

VAWA protection makes sense, bending the rules of judicial fairness makes ZERO damn sense.

It is hearbreaking to the core when learning of those who have been put through abuse by someone close to them. For them, the protections of VAWA are most necessary and I am grateful they are there.

But in an increasingly alarming rate, the law is being used by family members as a nuclear option to prevail in a domestic dispute by nefarious means. These well-funded social service agencies are being used to fabricate and then encase in the accusation in a credible petition with the court. It's when these protected individuals then turn and abuse the children, it becomes an impossible situation with no solution as the adult abuser becomes protected by VAWA. This has happened because the law has introduced a complete lack of due process.

[novedsac 355]

No, it does not. You so state but then in your very next sentence, state what I do with regard to the order being based solely with the word requesting it.

And are you suggesting that the petitioner cannot again return to court and repeat the same statements that were used to file the petition to begin with and make it permanent?

This is, by far, how these proceedings work. Clearly, you have a vested interest in suggesting otherwise. Debating the matter is pointless.

Sure, the petitioner can tell the court all they want. So what. The accused as the opportunity to defend themselve's against the TPO being made permanent - those who are unprepared to do so will lose.

I had a TPO on me when I first split from my ex, but two days later I presented a vigorous defense and the judge vacated the protective order.

A DV charge in court and a VAWA petition are two very different things. The two primary differences are:

1) The accused has the right to understand the charges, see the evidence and present a defense to a DV charge. A DV charge can be an issue for the accused if they are found guilty.

2) The accused has no right to information regarding a VAWA petition and the outcome of the petition, by itself, has absolutely no impact on the accused. VAWA is not a legal charge or court case.

OP definitely needs to protect themself against false charges being made to police and the court. Never be alone with the person. Always communicate through a third party intermediary. Seek the first opportunity to secure a protective order keeping her away from him and the home. But OP will not have an opportunity to protest a VAWA claim or even confirm there is a VAWA claim filed. Don't focus on the VAWA - focus on protecting his legal record.

Edited June 20, 2014 by novedsac

[verysadguy 170]

You believed her story at one time, didn't you?

good point sac! Many convincing sociopaths out there. They survived childhood and early adulthood to become very good liars remember?

Here is an even more compelling link to how these scammers pull it off.

http://www.asistahelp.org/documents/resources/Extreme_Cruelty_NOA_89F81BDEFBD41.pdf

Simply get an attorney, a psychologist, and your charitable sponsor to write you a letter for your VAWA submission. In the letter just paraphrase the hints from VSC.

"I walked on eggshells every day. I had to watch every word I used or he/she would berate me, belittle me, and disparage me. I couldn't sleep. I couldn't eat. I lived every moment with him/her in fear of being struck at either verbally or physically."

Folks this is a simple template that gets inserted in a long story that VAWA claimants use for their affidavits. And the VSC has basically put these coaching materials out for public use.

[BBCC 16]

Sure, the petitioner can tell the court all they want. So what. The accused as the opportunity to defend themselve's against the TPO being made permanent - those who are unprepared to do so will lose.

I had a TPO on me when I first split from my ex, but two days later I presented a vigorous defense and the judge vacated the protective order.

While I have never been a subject to such an order, some of what I know about them comes from sitting during the morning rollcall during my divorce 15 years ago. While waiting for our case to come up to the judge, the judge often rolled through the morning's restraining order petitions. This puzzles me when someone claims that such hearings are merely administrative. If that is the case, why is the divorce judge hearing the petitions in the same morning as my divorce petition. I would listen to the some arguements lack of criminal charge. Some were even stand alone restraining order petitions without any divorce case attached to it. The same judge presiding over the petition was the same judge hearing our (civil, family court) case. So this administrative hearing is not llke a separation of church and state. There seems to be a very blurred line betwen this administrative hearing and a civil/criminal court hearing. This is in stark contrast to, say, an administrative hearing for a business or other subject matter.

After my case ended, I landed a job as a property manager at one point. Again, I was in the local municipal court filing petitions for eviction of tenants. A competely different area of law altogether. Yet, again, I found myself waiting in the rollcall to have my case heard while the judge went though a series of restraining order petitions.

I can only conclude from these observations that the claim that administrative hearings are differnent is merely the standards of evidence, procedure and rulings involved and not the court or presiding officer.

I can also imagine that a TRO hearing you speak of is very much like an visa interview with a CBP officer. It could go either way, depending on the mood and comprehension skills of the hearing officer. While I am glad you were successful, from what hearings I've listened to, that is not always the case.

A DV charge in court and a VAWA petition are two very different things. The two primary differences are:

1) The accused has the right to understand the charges, see the evidence and present a defense to a DV charge. A DV charge can be an issue for the accused if they are found guilty.

2) The accused has no right to information regarding a VAWA petition and the outcome of the petition, by itself, has absolutely no impact on the accused. VAWA is not a legal charge or court case.

OP definitely needs to protect themself against false charges being made to police and the court. Never be alone with the person. Always communicate through a third party intermediary. Seek the first opportunity to secure a protective order keeping her away from him and the home. But OP will not have an opportunity to protest a VAWA claim or even confirm there is a VAWA claim filed. Don't focus on the VAWA - focus on protecting his legal record.

This is an interesting contrast. When you refer to a VAWA claim, are you referring to the I-360 petition with USCIS or are you referring to VAWA claims in local courts (the administrative hearings).

As I wade through the legal advice being offered by agencies in the VAWA 5 thread, I do not see any distinction between the two. People are being trained on how to draft evidentiary documents, file them with local courts and then feed them into their I-360 petition.

Wow. I have been lurking on this web site for a few years working to get our own green card petitions through to which I am most grateful. I had not noticed this subject matter was being handled as well. Seeing all of this being handled here as well is stunning.

Edited June 20, 2014 by BBCC

[Caryh 5,206]

You're confused because you keep referring to and thinking of VAWA and domestic violence protection orders as the same thing. VAWA as being discussed on VJ is a process of getting a green card because you've found yourself being abuse by a spouse. One is done through USCIS and one is done through the local courts. They are not even close to being the same thing, other than abuse is alleged to have happened under both. While a DV protection order is evidence of abuse for VAWA, the process is still completely separate. VAWA cannot order someone to stay away from another person. In fact the alleged abuser will not be told anything about a VAWA case. A domestic violence protection order will notify the alleged abuser they are to stay away, and the alleged abuse can defend themselves against those charges.

While I have never been a subject to such an order, some of what I know about them comes from sitting during the morning rollcall during my divorce 15 years ago. While waiting for our case to come up to the judge, the judge often rolled through the morning's restraining order petitions. This puzzles me when someone claims that such hearings are merely administrative.

[novedsac 355]

I can also imagine that a TRO hearing you speak of is very much like an visa interview with a CBP officer. It could go either way, depending on the mood and comprehension skills of the hearing officer. While I am glad you were successful, from what hearings I've listened to, that is not always the case.

This is an interesting contrast. When you refer to a VAWA claim, are you referring to the I-360 petition with USCIS or are you referring to VAWA claims in local courts (the administrative hearings).

As I wade through the legal advice being offered by agencies in the VAWA 5 thread, I do not see any distinction between the two. People are being trained on how to draft evidentiary documents, file them with local courts and then feed them into their I-360 petition.

VAWA, at least in the context of immigration, refers to an I-360 petition filed by an abused spouse (can file the I-360 under other premises as well).

Perhaps I got my terms confused, but a 'hearing' is what you are engaged in when you're before a judge or magistrate, either by yourself or with representation. In the context of allegations of abuse, this would most likely be a DV charge or request for a permanent protective order. These charges also come up in the context of a divorce as well, like mine. In court you have the right to hear the charge, review the evidence and present a defense.

These claims are also used to support a VAWA petition, but VAWA petitions (in the context of immigration) are never presented in court or decided by a judge. They are administrative in nature and decided by (specially) trained adjudicators. It's not a 'hearing' in the way I described above for Court.

CBP Officers do not conduct visa interviews. Visa interviews are conducted by consular officers who work for the Department of State. Even so, I don't believe you can bring legal representation to a visa interview or have the right to litigate the decision. This is very different from a TRO hearing where you have every ability to argue against the TRO becoming permanent, or perhaps modifying the conditions if it is made permanent.

[BBCC 16]

One is done through USCIS and one is done through the local courts. They are not even close to being the same thing,

Nothing could be further from the truth. Spend anytime at all perusing the general VAWA thread and you learn that a paper trail in the latter is being used as fuel for the I-360 petition in the former.

While they differ in setting, procedure and intent in the hearing, the two processes are clearly and tightly correlated. As an example, the same social service agencies that assist with creating the DV paper trail are doing so in the immigration VAWA context for the filing and pursuing relief under the I-130. I just don't see your distinction. Sorry if that offends you.

[BBCC 16]

CBP Officers do not conduct visa interviews. Visa interviews are conducted by consular officers who work for the Department of State. Even so, I don't believe you can bring legal representation to a visa interview or have the right to litigate the decision. This is very different from a TRO hearing where you have every ability to argue against the TRO becoming permanent, or perhaps modifying the conditions if it is made permanent.

I see your point. My impressions based on what observations of hearings I've seen, while the presiding office of the court is listening to the argument against the TRO, they usually have not ruled in favor of the respondant no matter how compelling the arguement. This observation chilled me to the bone. It motivates me to be a very good boy in my own family relations as I would never want to be served with one of those things. I have seen, at times, criminal intent on on the part of the court. A problem, rather than the solution. Just my opinion. Never meant to present these views as fact.

[Caryh 5,206]

Nothing could be further from the truth. Spend anytime at all perusing the general VAWA thread and you learn that a paper trail in the latter is being used as fuel for the I-360 petition in the former.

While they differ in setting, procedure and intent in the hearing, the two processes are clearly and tightly correlated. As an example, the same social service agencies that assist with creating the DV paper trail are doing so in the immigration VAWA context for the filing and pursuing relief under the I-130. I just don't see your distinction. Sorry if that offends you.

So when a USC beats up his USC spouse, and she goes to the local woman's shelter and they help her get a restraining order against her husband, its all about the I-130 she's gonna file for that VAWA green card?

Edited June 20, 2014 by Caryh

[belinda63 3,038]

No, it's the ones who make up false allegations and get a restraining order, even if temporary, and some affidavits from their friends, and proof they were in a shelter (which is not in and of itself proof of anything) and file for VAWA that are frauds.

Remember the lady on here who said she was being abused because her husband spent time upstairs with his parents instead of with her. And she didn't have a TV. And he ate his meals upstairs with his parents instead of in the basement.

[Caryh 5,206]

No, it's the ones who make up false allegations and get a restraining order, even if temporary, and some affidavits from their friends, and proof they were in a shelter (which is not in and of itself proof of anything) and file for VAWA that are frauds.

Remember the lady on here who said she was being abused because her husband spent time upstairs with his parents instead of with her. And she didn't have a TV. And he ate his meals upstairs with his parents instead of in the basement.

Yes, she refused to eat with them or watch TV with them. Basically refused to do anything with them, yet it was wrong of them to leave her alone during the day when they went to work. Very strange case, had she been in the same situation back in her home country there would have been no way to hide away as she did, as most homes are pretty darn small and people live practically on top of one another. I think her dreams of America, fed by Hollywood images, were far from the reality she was faced with and she reacted very badly to it. I wonder what ever became of her?

[Villanelle 4,122]

And here in lies the rub-

Just my opinion. Never meant to present these views as fact.

When you post something as opinion and not clear cut facts on an immigration/legal advice board you should disclose so in each post not after 4 run on argumentative pages. Esp when it comes to something as serious as the topic of DV where victims come to read because they are seeking guidance and need to make educated decisions based in unbiased factual truth not opinionated observations.

Is it possible to pursue cover under VAWA with VSC without having filed any relief under VAWA as a victim with a local court? Enlighten me, please. I don't see how though.

And yes.(even though this should read can one purse VAWA w/o having filing for relief under DV as a victim in a local court- because you incorrectly juxtaposed the words VAWA and DV) the answer is still a resounding yes.

You can file for VAWA as a victim of physical or mental abuse. They have different burdens of proof the adjudicator would be looking for so to speak. For physical abuse you would need to show things like a police report of an incident of physical violence, hospital records, photographs, a RO is most likely included. After all after the police arrest someone on DV and they are brought up on charges the victim does have an ideal opportunity to present a case for a RO.

I mean you just had your head bashed in by the person you love- who promised to take of you, for the umpteenth time- who is most likely significantly larger then you- and now you got them thrown in jail. You dont think they are going to come out severely pissed off?

But mental abuse- totally different story. There are no photographs. Rarely a police report of a dispute is found on the adjudicators desk or a RO. Sometimes there are police reports for noise complaints but thats not a court/DV matter where one party is charged with anything. Try getting a RO because you allege the person told you a lot of mean things and you have high anxiety because of it. So some of the evidence used to prove mental abuse is Dr reports, psch evals, affidavits, proof of medications and treatments. There could be a police report where the police removed the victim from the home at the victims request and transported them to safety (a DV shelter) but again that has no court action against the perpetrator.

Which is why the advice is and has always been to those like the OP to avoid being alone with someone who may be seeking a way to file VAWA because they came on a K1 and failed to adjust and the marriage didnt work out. While they can file a false VAWA based in either physical or mental there is a mentality and I wont comment on whether it is a correct assumption or not.

But the theory is (from a scammers POV) if you have something physical- like a police report where your spouse was charged with DV- hauled off in handcuffs- you have a picture of a bruise or injuries are documented on the report- the whole 9 yards- and then you subsequently obtained the RO. Well then you must surely have a strong iron clad case. You must surely be more of a victim then the person who claims their spouse locked them in the basement and restricted their food and human contact and mentally tormented them for the last 10 years ala the poor women in Ohio (anyone remember that) Those women couldve walked out but didnt because they were afraid to.

Sure thats an extreme example but you get the point. People that are scammers and illegitimate (liars) do not understand the mental going ons that occur in abusive situations. So you get things like you got going on here in a way. People making 'facts' based on observations that arent really true. How that applies to a someone potentially being falsely accused of VAWA? Well like I said above the scammers figure the way to get a sure dunk case is to have a physical case.

So someone like the OP wants to make sure they dont put themselves in that position because having to fight false charges like that can cause a lot of grief.

--------

Edited June 23, 2014 by Kathryn41

[URgreat 0]

Do you think they hand green cards out like confetti at VSC? They just take people's words for it that they were abused, and be on their merry way? That's complete nonsense, and I question whether you actually believe what you're saying or are just trying to stir up trouble.

Any VAWA claim requires documentary evidence that the alien was abused. Police reports, restraining orders, photographs documenting physical injuries, psychiatrist reports documenting mental trauma, medical records, arrest records, etc.

Does VAWA fraud occur? Absolutely, as do many other types of immigration fraud within USCIS. They do not simply rubber-stamp every VAWA application with a green card though, and to suggest they do is infantile.

Agreed Hypnos !

Some People just want to vent even if doesn't make any sense.

They try to paint like if govt or USCIS is no good.