Sexual Exploitation

[Dean iWait 0]

I should also probably call USCIS about it, too

Just keeping you up-to-date. I called USCIS. My God! After all the automated menues I've encountered over the past two weeks, even or things outside my visa stuff, it was good to actually talk to a real person without an long wait.

I told her my circumstance, my criminal conviction, and it falling under the IMBR Act. She corrected me and told me about a correlation with the Adam Walsh Act. This is preposterous the Adam Walsh Act protects CHILDREN. My conviction didn't involve any children, and my fiancee nor I have any children, so why would it be flagged through the Adam Walsh Act? She said what everyone else around here is saying: the Adam Walsh Act is new so its still being worked out as time unfolds. But she told me because of the nature of my crime, even with certified court docket submissions and disclosure to my fiancee, my fiancee petition could still be barred. HOW!!! I talked to a lady at an immigration lawyer's. She said they can't ar me from marrying someone because of my criminal conviction. She told me that the US just wants to make sure I disclose my criminal conviction to my fiancee, which I have done. So as you can see, a little more apprehension and anxiety has been added to my list of nurosis.

Thats why I think its a good idea to get married legally in the Philippines- they wont check my criminal record, I can marry her, it will be legitimate, that has expedite our case more successfully?!?!?!

All US Citizens and LPR petioners will be and have been undergoing criminal background checks regardless of whether you marry here (K1) or in the benficiary's country (K3).

[chrisepic 0]

All US Citizens and LPR petioners will be and have been undergoing criminal background checks regardless of whether you marry here (K1) or in the benficiary's country (K3).

So when I go to the Philippines for the wedding, should I bring my certified court docket and police record with me along with my fiancee's affidavit of disclosure, stating that she is aware of my criminal record?

[Dean iWait 0]

All US Citizens and LPR petioners will be and have been undergoing criminal background checks regardless of whether you marry here (K1) or in the benficiary's country (K3).

So when I go to the Philippines for the wedding, should I bring my certified court docket and police record with me along with my fiancee's affidavit of disclosure, stating that she is aware of my criminal record?

You don't have to worry about it at that stage. But you will want to address it when you come back to the states and get ready to file.

[chrisepic 0]

You don't have to worry about it at that stage. But you will want to address it when you come back to the states and get ready to file.

Okay, I see, so my criminal record wont interfere with my marriage in the Philippines

[Turboguy 6]

First off it has nothing to do with the Adam - Walsh act. It has to do with IMBRA. You will face the same things with either a K-1 or a K-3. It should not make any difference if you marry here or there. You really should face no problems with it.

[Dean iWait 0]

First off it has nothing to do with the Adam - Walsh act. It has to do with IMBRA. You will face the same things with either a K-1 or a K-3. It should not make any difference if you marry here or there. You really should face no problems with it.

Agreed, don't let some idiot at the USCIS customer service line let you think you will be denied for any offense other than one that was committed against a minor. Since your case did not involve a minor they don't have any grounds to deny you based on your criminal record. I have received more than my fair share of BS answers/non-answers from that phone line.

[MidnightinMoscow 0]

Although the Adam Walsh Act only applies to marrying women with children when one has a child-related sex offense, there are government workers who have an agenda and who are using IMBRA or Adam Walsh (whatever they feel like) to deny visas to anyone with a criminal record to women without children. The only remedy is a lawsuit in these cases, but, from what I am hearing, those effected are waiting for the existing IMBRA court case to be decided by Judge Cooper in Georgia first.

So, should I save for the lawyer fee? This puts my application process probably 6 months behind, because I'm also saving for all the fees and future travel

Argh- stupid youthful indiscretion.

I was assured however that its not the embassy's job to punish me again for my crime, or even judge me. They just want to protect my fiance and I understand that.

1) Any European male can get his Russian or Asian girlfriend to come visit on a tourist visa for 30 days for a fee of about 100 Euros, and that is without the man vouching for her or needing to state a relationship to her. If he is willing to vouch for her financially, she can stay for 90 days with a one week application process (one week from application to approval).

So no American needs to pretend that 6 months is a "normal" wait to bring someone into the country to meet the parents and siblings and get an idea of what the USA is like BEFORE marrying the American citizen.

2) Prostitution is legal in 90% of the first world. Prosecuting the clients is even more rare. Entrapment of clients is bizarre and, until recently, never before practiced by a civilized country in the history of the world.

So, no American needs to pretend that it is some kind of normal government he lives under in that brands him a criminal for something that is not criminal in most other countries and then takes the liberty to mess with his personal life going forward, in a manner unprecedented in the history of the world (outside fiction).

Speaking of fiction, in the book 1984, Winston and Julia were messed with by the government. When Winston, under torture, said "Do it to her, not me"...the government felt that they needed to share this "information" with Julia. One can say that it was very helpful to Julia that she found out her man was the kind of coward who would break under torture and ask that they torture her instead.

But George Orwell wrote the entire book to state that it really was none of the government's business to 1) manipulate or entrap Winston to get the desired response or 2) give information to Julia for whatever reason to manipulate her feelings over a social relationship with another person, because it will only be done to fulfill a political agenda anyway, not Julia's welfare. If someone has an argument with that, please read "1984" and take it up on an Orwell forum.

VJ is a place to discuss the effects of the law as practiced in the absence of court restraining orders. Nobody needs to think it is politically correct to say "I understand that" when their pursuit of happiness has just been delayed by six months by the government they pay taxes to.

Edited March 16, 2007 by MidnightinMoscow

[chrisepic 0]

Here here! And agreed! Love the "198" referrence. See my jacket???