Arrest after receiving police certificate

[Crazy Cat 42,512]

10 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

I’ll submit the police certificate I currently have

Looks like you are knowingly submitting a inaccurate document......I wouldn't.  All documents must be accurate and current when submitting.........don't play games with immigration.

Edited October 14, 2019 by missileman

[Lemonslice 4,986]

20 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

 

Also as it stands my wife is released under investigation for a very minor crime, if she’s charged will I have to stay until my court date before I can leave? Or is that none of the embassies concern? Thank you all once again!

Who was arrested?  Who's going to court?

 

The embassy might want to wait until the investigation is over, otherwise, how would they know she was only arrested and not charged?

[Dustin725 72]

1 minute ago, Lemonslice said:

Who was arrested?  Who's going to court?

 

The embassy might want to wait until the investigation is over, otherwise, how would they know she was only arrested and not charged?

Sorry I got my words wrong, I’m talking about my wife, it was only her who was arrested. She was arrested for intoxication while in charge of a vehicle. I read that it’s no grounds for denial, so if it’s no grounds for denial why would the results of the investigation be their concern?

[JFH 12,191]

26 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

 

 

Also as it stands my wife is released under investigation for a very minor crime, if she’s charged will I have to stay until my court date before I can leave? Or is that none of the embassies concern? Thank you all once again!

You said she was released without charges. Now she’s under investigation. So she was bailed? Not released? Or is this a different case? Or is this hypothetical in case she finds herself being arrested again?

[Dustin725 72]

17 minutes ago, missileman said:

Looks like you are knowingly submitting a inaccurate document......I wouldn't.  All documents must be accurate and current when submitting.........don't play games with immigration.

Just thought it wouldn’t be important as long as she gives the current up to date document at the interview, they’ll know I’m not trying to hide anything. 

[JFH 12,191]

1 minute ago, Dustin725 said:

Sorry I got my words wrong, I’m talking about my wife, it was only her who was arrested. She was arrested for intoxication while in charge of a vehicle. I read that it’s no grounds for denial, so if it’s no grounds for denial why would the results of the investigation be their concern?

Anything involving alcohol is a huge concern, especially for the medical.

 

[Dustin725 72]

1 minute ago, JFH said:

You said she was released without charges. Now she’s under investigation. So she was bailed? Not released? Or is this a different case? Or is this hypothetical in case she finds herself being arrested again?

Here in the uk there is a difference between released under investigation and bail. She currently has no charges against her until the evidence has gone through which is a blood sample.

[Dustin725 72]

1 minute ago, JFH said:

Anything involving alcohol is a huge concern, especially for the medical.

 

Can you elaborate on this? How’s it a concern for the medical?

[Lemonslice 4,986]

Just now, Dustin725 said:

Just thought it wouldn’t be important as long as she gives the current up to date document at the interview, they’ll know I’m not trying to hide anything. 

She fills the 260, she's the one who has to be truthful. A

 

Alcohol and arrest might be seen has abusing substances

 

[Lemonslice 4,986]

3 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

Here in the uk there is a difference between released under investigation and bail. She currently has no charges against her until the evidence has gone through which is a blood sample.

... Still, they'll want to know what happened next.

 

Might be useful for her to get legal representation. 

Edited October 14, 2019 by Lemonslice

[JFH 12,191]

2 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

Here in the uk there is a difference between released under investigation and bail. She currently has no charges against her until the evidence has gone through which is a blood sample.

I’m aware of the difference. I’m from the U.K. “Released without charge” is what you said. Released under investigation is essentially bail but with the provision that the police can have longer than the previously allowed 28 days. She was not released without charge. The case is by no means over. 

[JFH 12,191]

4 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

Can you elaborate on this? How’s it a concern for the medical?

If you have an alcohol incident that involved the law enforcement (drunk and disorderly, drunk driving, drunk in charge of... etc) you must declare it at the medical in London. It may suggest substance abuse. 

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

19 minutes ago, Dustin725 said:

Sorry I got my words wrong, I’m talking about my wife, it was only her who was arrested. She was arrested for intoxication while in charge of a vehicle. I read that it’s no grounds for denial, so if it’s no grounds for denial why would the results of the investigation be their 

Read that what is no grounds for denial? US does not take DWI lightly.  It probably won’t make her inadmissible by itself, but agree that if there is still an investigation ongoing that will need to be completed before a decision is made on the visa.

Edited October 14, 2019 by SusieQQQ

[Dustin725 72]

5 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

Read that what is no grounds for denial? US does not take DWI lightly.  It probably won’t make her inadmissible by itself, but agree that if there is still an investigation ongoing that will need to be completed before a decision is made on the visa.

I’ve seen from multiple sources online suggesting a single DUI offence is not at all grounds for denial, you're treated as any one else. If you can give me sources of where this is untrue I’d appreciate it. Just don’t see how it would be of their concern unless it was on a very serious charge such as murder or theft. If the conviction itself wouldn’t let them deny then why wait for the investigation to conclude? 

[Lemonslice 4,986]

See:

https://fam.state.gov/FAM/09FAM/09FAM030203.html

 

 

[...]

 

 

f.  (U) Convictions Relating To Pre-Trial Actions:

(1)  (U) An applicant has not been convicted of a crime if he or she merely:

(a)  (U) Is under investigation;

(b)  (U) Has been arrested or detained;

(c)  (U) Has been charged with a crime; or

(d)  (U) Is under indictment.

(2)  (U) However, such facts may indicate that some other basis of ineligibility may exist (e.g., INA 212(a)(2)(C)(i), INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii), etc.).  At your discretion, you may refuse any applicant under INA 221(g) which involves an applicant who has been charged with, but not convicted of, a crime in order to await the outcome of the proceedings (if the outcome is reasonably imminent) or to permit local authorities in appropriate cases to take steps to prevent the departure of the alien from their jurisdiction.  Where applicable, in the case of a nonimmigrant visa applicant charged with a crime, you should also consider how the pending charge may affect the applicant’s intention to return to his or her place of residence, for purposes of INA 214(b)