Running Out of Time

[JVKn'CVO 11]

AWESOME NEWS!!!

congratulations on the touch.

[no name 1]

There's NOTHING TO HIDE if you aren't actually getting married. But that shouldn't be confused with a license to be a bonehead when presenting oneself at an interview or the POE.

Well, there IS though, as one cannot show wedding pics, etc. It has to be hidden from any immigration official.

The CBP will say are you married & (perhaps) the fiance says, No, but we had a ceremony & I wore the white dress & all of my family was there to witness it, but don't worry, it was non-binding...

Edited May 1, 2007 by devilette

[TimsDaisy 0]

There's NOTHING TO HIDE if you aren't actually getting married. But that shouldn't be confused with a license to be a bonehead when presenting oneself at an interview or the POE.

Well, there IS though, as one cannot show wedding pics, etc. It has to be hidden from any immigration official.

The CBP will say are you married & (perhaps) the fiance says, No, but we had a ceremony & I wore the white dress & all of my family was there to witness it, but don't worry, it was non-binding...

How is it "hidden" exactly?

I have like a bazillion photos of me and my fiance. I'm not taking all of them! You don't have to show photos-of-the-day. Just don't be a bonehead when showing your evidence. Don't wear a wedding dress to the embassy.

Seriously - this is just not rocket science. The implication that you'd be required, legally, via regulation, or ethically to show THOSE particular photos is just not accurate.

But maybe you're right. Afterall, since the file numbers on my digital photos come out numerically ordered, what if the CBP sees the break in order and then holds his passport until he receives a complete accounting of every photo snapped with my camera since we met! Gosh, better not chance it.

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be an a@@ about this, but this is just the kind of example that drives me up the wall. You aren't HIDING something if you don't show them ALL The photos of the couple together since the I-129F was first submitted as proof of the ongoing relationship.

And if the CBP says "are you married," the fiance answers "NO" because IT IS THE TRUTH. No "buts." No extra info. they. are. not. married.

This is where we seem to be having a conceptual breakdown. There is NO requirement to add the "but" information on the end of that answer. The question was "Are you married." The answer is no. period. There's no other part of that question that was asked. End of story.

Edited May 2, 2007 by TimsDaisy

[no name 1]

There's NOTHING TO HIDE if you aren't actually getting married. But that shouldn't be confused with a license to be a bonehead when presenting oneself at an interview or the POE.

Well, there IS though, as one cannot show wedding pics, etc. It has to be hidden from any immigration official.

The CBP will say are you married & (perhaps) the fiance says, No, but we had a ceremony & I wore the white dress & all of my family was there to witness it, but don't worry, it was non-binding...

How is it "hidden" exactly?

I have like a bazillion photos of me and my fiance. I'm not taking all of them! You don't have to show photos-of-the-day. Just don't be a bonehead when showing your evidence. Don't wear a wedding dress to the embassy.

Seriously - this is just not rocket science. The implication that you'd be required, legally, via regulation, or ethically to show THOSE particular photos is just not accurate.

First off, I said 'perhaps'. Secondly, I never implied you legally had to do anything. But you are hiding the fact you had a 'wedding' if you don't mention it at your interview. I'd rather have a clean conscience myself.

We've been thru it already, and my hubby didn't have to show any pics. He had nothing to hide or omit, if you will....

[TimsDaisy 0]

First off, I said 'perhaps'. Secondly, I never implied you legally had to do anything. But you are hiding the fact you had a 'wedding' if you don't mention it at your interview. I'd rather have a clean conscience myself.

We've been thru it already, and my hubby didn't have to show any pics. He had nothing to hide or omit, if you will....

OMG - WHAT are you hiding? You had a party that meant something to your family? I had a BBQ last Saturday, should I disclose that at the interview? Find me the requirement to disclose that you had a wedding party? Really, I'd love to see it. If you did not legally marry then you are simply not hiding a thing. You're asking for trouble and are a fool if you volunteer the info for the reasons we've agreed upon - there are tired, unthoughtful, disinterested, probably burnt out people who will just LOVE the chance to make their day more exciting by probing more.

This isn't a matter of conscience. There's JUST NOTHING TO HIDE!

"See Mr. Interviewer, we had a party and I just had to wear the white dress and I'm oh so sorry, please don't deny us, we never signed a thing, we aren't married, I can't use his medical insurance, and I won't get spousal support if he leaves me now, but you see we had a party!" Doesn't make sense!!!!!!

[no name 1]

First off, I said 'perhaps'. Secondly, I never implied you legally had to do anything. But you are hiding the fact you had a 'wedding' if you don't mention it at your interview. I'd rather have a clean conscience myself.

We've been thru it already, and my hubby didn't have to show any pics. He had nothing to hide or omit, if you will....

OMG - WHAT are you hiding? You had a party that meant something to your family? I had a BBQ last Saturday, should I disclose that at the interview? Find me the requirement to disclose that you had a wedding party? Really, I'd love to see it. If you did not legally marry then you are simply not hiding a thing. You're asking for trouble and are a fool if you volunteer the info for the reasons we've agreed upon - there are tired, unthoughtful, disinterested, probably burnt out people who will just LOVE the chance to make their day more exciting by probing more.

This isn't a matter of conscience. There's JUST NOTHING TO HIDE!

"See Mr. Interviewer, we had a party and I just had to wear the white dress and I'm oh so sorry, please don't deny us, we never signed a thing, we aren't married, I can't use his medical insurance, and I won't get spousal support if he leaves me now, but you see we had a party!" Doesn't make sense!!!!!!

Why don't you try it & report back to us!

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...24206&st=15

post #19.

Edited May 2, 2007 by devilette

[tmma 467]

removed

[tmma 467]

First off, I said 'perhaps'. Secondly, I never implied you legally had to do anything. But you are hiding the fact you had a 'wedding' if you don't mention it at your interview. I'd rather have a clean conscience myself.

We've been thru it already, and my hubby didn't have to show any pics. He had nothing to hide or omit, if you will....

OMG - WHAT are you hiding? You had a party that meant something to your family? I had a BBQ last Saturday, should I disclose that at the interview? Find me the requirement to disclose that you had a wedding party? Really, I'd love to see it. If you did not legally marry then you are simply not hiding a thing. You're asking for trouble and are a fool if you volunteer the info for the reasons we've agreed upon - there are tired, unthoughtful, disinterested, probably burnt out people who will just LOVE the chance to make their day more exciting by probing more.

This isn't a matter of conscience. There's JUST NOTHING TO HIDE!

"See Mr. Interviewer, we had a party and I just had to wear the white dress and I'm oh so sorry, please don't deny us, we never signed a thing, we aren't married, I can't use his medical insurance, and I won't get spousal support if he leaves me now, but you see we had a party!" Doesn't make sense!!!!!!

Probing is the job of both the CO and the CBP...They are looking for fraud, and do not seem to assume innocence if something does not seem quite right.

Older VJ members will surely remember the sad story of one VJ member [ can't remember name]and her fiance's passage through immigration.....I won't elaborate-but it's a sad story that started because of a misunderstanding coming through immigration. The officer did not believe they were not already married and sent him back!!!!! I think we should all learn from this.

Don't place yourself in a position where you have to or need to " be careful " about what you say or how you say it to the CO/CBP or govt. Setting yourself up for a possible clusterfluff later...imo.

EDIT_Apologies, I think I got the name wrong..

[Dan+Nikki 0]

Any way, I just got touched by a big hairy USCIS worker. SO it appears something is at least happening!

I never had a touch after the first few days after my NOA1. Found out by Email! Good luck with that touch. PS Change your plans now while you have plenty of time. Dont rely on the USCIS. Thats just plain silly. Thats like trusting the government with your social security payments. They'll get you the money one day. If they can find it.

[rebeccajo 14]

I think what 'concerns' me about this - if anything - is the lack of knowledge of adjudicators and border officers regarding cultural custom.

Step into the MENA forum and you read debates all the time about Muslim wedding ceremonies (of which I believe there are at least a couple of different kinds) vs. a wedding in the States, and whether or not the Muslim ceremonies are legally binding in the US.

I believe several Asian nations have engagement or pre-nuptial ceremonies which border upon the US definition of a legal marriage.

In both cases, there are stories on VJ of interview difficulties because of these ceremonies - even though (or perhaps because) the CO's should be versed in the cultural customs of the beneficiaries whose petitions they are adjudicating.

As a lifelong resident of the USA, I think I can safely say it's not a cultural custom for us to have a pre-wedding party wherein our future union is blessed by an officiant, the guests are treated to a lavish sit down meal, and the female guest of honor is dressed in a $5000 white gown.

It's from this standpoint only that I made my earlier comment about 'wanting to scream' if I read another reply suggesting such a celebration. I can somewhat understand the CO's and border officers have difficulty discerning the legalities of ceremonies performed overseas. But as American citizens themselves, they aren't going to easily buy the story that a woman in a bridal gown and a man in a tux were just 'celebrating'.

It may be the legal truth they aren't married. But it's not a judge or an attorney you are standing before at the consulate or the border. It's a well-meaning civil servant who has a job to do - who gets paid a decent wage for doing it - and who damn sure doesn't want to lose that job because they didn't follow their understanding of the rules.

Oh well. I've said before that the 'big ceremony' before the 'legal ceremony' wouldn't work personally for me simply because I'd feel let down at the end of my big ceremonial day. But that's strictly me and really has nothing to do with my perspective.

Daisy had an unpleasant experience with the Border officials already. I've had an unpleasant experience with my husband's AOS. I regard matters of immigration as something not worth taking risks over. I'm sure she does too, and I've enjoyed this conversation and her perspective. Thank you, Daisy.

I may at times be overly cautious. Perhaps during nearly 18 months of waiting for a greencard I've become paranoid. On the other hand I've had a lot of time to research and read. It's not lost on me that my marital happiness hinges on the perspective and opinion of civil servants.

I'm aware if one must take the next steps of legal representation to explain the law to these civil servants, one might prevail. For me though, I have a life and really don't want to spend anymore of my time or money on immigration than I have too. Thus my pragmatic approach - K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, sister.

[no name 1]

Daisy had an unpleasant experience with the Border officials already. I've had an unpleasant experience with my husband's AOS.

RJ, Daisy's experience is unpleasant becuz of an overstay. Yours was thru no fault of your own. Very different situations.

For me though, I have a life and really don't want to spend anymore of my time or money on immigration than I have too. Thus my pragmatic approach - K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, sister.

[TimsDaisy 0]

Why don't you try it & report back to us!

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...24206&st=15

post #19.

Oh christalmighty . . . .

Because my fiance can't come to this country until we get his K1. And we have the opposite problem of this poster - we're likely going to have a HUGE delay (potentially 12-14 months) between our government mandated within-90 day legal marriage and what I will consider the "Real Marriage Ceremony" at my church (and the church angle has also been brought up in the thread - a lot of denominations WON'T do a non-legal ceremony, so that moots the OPs option to go that route from the start). Which is a huge, giant, problematic, pain-in-the-### problem for us. Which is something I've mentioned around VJ and, I think, during this thread already.

But thanks for the advice.

(and that link seems to be to a discussion of legal-marriage before a K1, which I have never and will never dispute is the Dumbest Thing To Do because it voids the K1 and kicks you back to square one - or worse)

[rebeccajo 14]

Daisy had an unpleasant experience with the Border officials already. I've had an unpleasant experience with my husband's AOS.

RJ, Daisy's experience is unpleasant becuz of an overstay. Yours was thru no fault of your own. Very different situations.

For me though, I have a life and really don't want to spend anymore of my time or money on immigration than I have too. Thus my pragmatic approach - K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, sister.

I appreciate your kind concern, my friend. But I think the analogy is still there. Many of the things that cause 'hiccups' in immigration are real-life, real-time minor infractions. Yet our system requires explanations, security checks, and waivers. The 'punishment' - so to speak - often does not fit the crime.

As players in a game we know to be fraught with these kind of problems, I can't see the reasoning in pushing any foreseeable envelopes.

[TimsDaisy 0]

As a lifelong resident of the USA, I think I can safely say it's not a cultural custom for us to have a pre-wedding party wherein our future union is blessed by an officiant, the guests are treated to a lavish sit down meal, and the female guest of honor is dressed in a $5000 white gown.

Nor is it a general custom to have to get the federal government's permission to marry, nor to have to figure out how to fit in the other fun American customs into a 90-day window! Does anyone in FianceVisaLand enjoy the Average American Wedding without any modifications?

If Americans generally suddenly had to go through this process, they'd ###### more than they do about the injustice of paying more than $0.99 for a gallon of gas!

[TimsDaisy 0]

Daisy had an unpleasant experience with the Border officials already. I've had an unpleasant experience with my husband's AOS.

RJ, Daisy's experience is unpleasant becuz of an overstay. Yours was thru no fault of your own. Very different situations.

For me though, I have a life and really don't want to spend anymore of my time or money on immigration than I have too. Thus my pragmatic approach - K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, sister.

I appreciate your kind concern, my friend. But I think the analogy is still there. Many of the things that cause 'hiccups' in immigration are real-life, real-time minor infractions. Yet our system requires explanations, security checks, and waivers. The 'punishment' - so to speak - often does not fit the crime.

As players in a game we know to be fraught with these kind of problems, I can't see the reasoning in pushing any foreseeable envelopes.

Thank you, rebeccajo.

(And we do agree that K.I.S.S is the best policy. But sometimes what falls in there may be broader for some people than for others. That's all I'm saying. And I really am trying to advocate for all of our right to preserve some semblence of normal cultural traditions in the face of frequently asinine federal requirements. No one should push it. But we also can't really know what would be "pushing it" for other couples.)