Search the Community

Hello Everyone, I assume that since I met my wife through an Internet site that we will now have to list that site on the new I-129F form, is that right? Thanks, Rick

I got what appears to be a duplciate RFE for the IMBRA today in the mail. I previously received one on 7/3/2006 and returned it via priority mail with proof of delivery on 7/5/2006. Proof of delivery shows 7/10/2006. The first RFE was dated 6/28/2006 and the second one is dated 7/10/2006. The file number and A# are the same and the RFE is the standard IMBRA questionaire that was previously completed, signed and returned? I did not receive another email regarding this mailing and there hasn't been any change in my status which shows a RFE on 7/3/2006. Anybody have this happen to them? Any guesses why?

I couldn't remember when a K3 received the "A" number in the process. When would it have been assigned if these RFE's hadn't come?

I was doing a search of IMBRA on the internet and CFL came up !! Although it's nice to see that we get some exposure from the 'bots', it did give me some pause about this issue... I would like to remind everyone that CFL is not legal advice on this issue and I dare say that we even understand any part of it very much.. however strongly we comment on parts of it. I for one will say that the more I read about it the less sure I am of the entire ramifications. Be informed, but aware of your sources. Even some sources on the internet are strongly against the law, and you have to be careful that the legal sounding jargon isn't too bias to their position as well... PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do not depend on CFL for legal advice and to understand the full implications of this law for your case...

There has to be something better than IMBRA to protect women. And before anyone jumps to any conclusions, let me state that I totally agree that a man should disclose his background checks. What I disagree about IMBRA, is a man has to disclose it everytime he says HI to a woman online. It should be disclose at marriage or visa time. IMBRA is over the line. I found an online petition to repeal the new law: http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?imbra05

Here is a draft of the new I-129F I-129F Draft

Here is a start to links about IMBRA... Feel free to add links as you like, but please do not editorialize a position or comment on the issue.. just give the title or brief background to the link for reference purposes... --------- IMBRA Document: http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/images/IMBRA2005.pdf USA Immigration Attorney comments: http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=2 Murthy Law Firm comments: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_vicdom.html IMBRA Forum: http://www.online-dating-rights.com/index.php IMBRA sites: http://www.internationalmarriagebrokers.com/ http://www.internationalmarriagebrokers.org/ Repeal petition http://new.petitiononline.com/imbra05/petition.html http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/...?ltl=1149219793 CFL search for IMBRA: http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?...&highlite=imbra ------- The links provided in this thread do not endorse any particular opinion by CFL about the IMBRA law and are for reference only. While much of the initial reaction is negative and anti-IMBRA, the links that will make up this thread should not be considered as adhering to any side. Users should use their own discretion.

I was reading about the "International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005" and it seems that its effective date is March 6, 2006. If I am correct (not very often), it is delaying K-1 visa applications with additional checks. Even to those already approved. It seems that at least some of the applications are being returned to the center that originally approved them if that approval date was after March 6. Has anybody heard anything about this and its effect?

I have asked this question of a couple of our old timers, but wanted to get other members opinions on the topic. For these questions, it's assumed that the marriage-based Visa Petitioner is a US Citizen. Question? The USCIS carefully publishes the reasons by which a Beneficiary could be denied a marriage based Visa. Some of the reasons the Beneficiary would be denied are: 1. HIV positive 2. Previous Visa violation (like an overstay) 3. Committed a crime of moral turpitude 4. Convicted for prostitution.... 5. Mental health history ...and a few others.... While there is a list for the Beneficiary, there appears to be NO published information that stipulates any reason whatsoever that a US Citizen would be denied a marriage based Visa for having any of these same things in their history. In other words an American Citizen with a criminal history, previous incarceration, convicted felon, HIV positive, Mental Health history, etc. Now, of course if the US Citizen is fleeing an active warrant, or otherwise wanted by US authorities they will probably get a knock on the door. Has anyone seen or experienced otherwise?

Dear Ms. Hartwell: Thank you for your letter regarding background checks for individuals seeking to sponsor finace's and their children. I welcome the opportunity to respond. What you write about is certainly disconcerting. In the 108th Congress, Senator Cantwell introduced the "International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005," which among other things, would require fiance visa petitioners to undergo a criminal background check so that cases like the you mention do not occur. Please know that I will keep your letter in mind should this legislation be reintroduced. Again, thanks for writing. If you have any further comments regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841 Best Regards, Diane Feinstein This is good news but I think we need to keep making noise about this issue. If you haven't sent your letter to your representatives in Congress and Senate, please do so. A nicely drafted letter posted by Bruce is pasted in below. It is really easy to send it to all of your reps at this website: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/...code=&plusfour= Dear Congressman ______ , I am writing because of my concern over a very alarming case of child abuse that was recently in the news, and because I would like your help in ensuring that such a thing cannot happen again. Last year, a man by the name of Harold Baird, a resident of Danville, New Hampshire, sponsored two immigrants from China. One was a woman who had agreed to marry him after her arrival; the other was her 5 year-old daughter. Unknown to the woman was the fact that Mr. Baird had served time for sexual assault on a child under the age of 13, and was on the state~{!/~}s Child Sex Offender Registry. Although, in order to obtain a visa, she had been required to produce a certification from the police in each place she had lived that she had no criminal record, no such proof was required from Mr. Baird. Naturally, no loving mother of a 5 year old girl would move her into a house with a convicted child molester, especially given what we know about the rate of recidivism for this type of offender. But she knew nothing of his record, because no one had told her, and no one had any duty to tell her. Tragically, the inevitable happened. In January of this year, she called the Danville Police to report that she had caught Mr. Baird in the act of sexually assaulting her child. He was arrested and is currently being held in jail pending trial. The police believe this was not the first time this had happened. Since that time the woman and her daughter have been staying in shelters and hoping they will be able to begin a new life with the assistance of sympathetic people who have offered help after hearing the story. Currently the process for obtaining a visa for an alien fiance or wife, and any alien minor children, can be a long one, requiring the submission of numerous applications, documents, and financial statements, but at no time is a petitioner who is seeking to sponsor a child ever asked whether he is a convicted child molester. Certainly neither our government (nor any other) would allow such a person to adopt a child, but this loophole is tantamount to permitting such a thing. Many of the people in Danville knew about Mr. Baird, and so could protect their children from him. This woman and her daughter had no way of knowing. Mr. Baird was no doubt aware that this was a way that he could get a young child into his house, without the child's parents being aware of his conviction for child molestation. What I am suggesting is a revision or amendment to the current law that would require any petitioner seeking to sponsor a minor child, as part of the application process, to provide certification from the local police department that he has no convictions for this type of offense, and would require that the petition of anyone who does have such a conviction be denied. As this revision would only apply to persons seeking to sponsor children, and would only require certification with regard to sexual crimes against children, it would not create a major burden on either the government or most petitioners. Much time and effort has been expended in enacting laws (such as Megan's law) to protect children from predators, and I firmly believe that our children are safer because of these laws. People in a community can know that such predators will not be allowed to work in schools or other settings where they will have access to children, and the people (and the police) can know where such predators live and work, and use this information to protect their children. I urge you to help make sure that child sexual offenders cannot use this oversight in our immigration laws to prey upon children who come from outside of the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me at any time in regard to this. Sincerely, Name Address Phone P.S. I am attaching a copy of the news article about this case. ________________________________________________________ Man Accused Of Molesting Stepdaughter From China Woman Marries Man After Meeting Online POSTED: 4:50 pm EST January 13, 2005 DANVILLE, N.H. -- Police said a convicted sex offender molested the young daughter of a woman who came from China to marry him. Woman Turns To Neighbor For Help Harold Baird, 68, of Danville, was accused of molesting his 5-year-old stepdaughter. Neighbors said they had their suspicions about Baird's relationship with his new family from the beginning. "At first he said he was going to marry a woman," neighbor Gary Forcier said. "Then when he showed up with a woman and a little girl, everyone started saying, 'Oh, there's something wrong here.'" Forcier said he's convinced Baird didn't have good intentions when he brought his bride and her young daughter over to the United States from China. Investigators said Baird met the woman online. "I think it was perfect that he married a woman from China because she would say nothing, and her daughter would say nothing. She hardly spoke English," Forcier said. "So, he was hoping she would maybe shut her mouth and not say anything." Police said Baird may have assaulted the girl more than once. "It's very disturbing, especially in our community," Chief Wade Parsons said. "It's a bedroom community with approximately 4,500 people. These things happen, but when they do, it's very upsetting to the community as a whole." Baird is on the state's sex offender registry list, convicted of a similar offense in 1990. Police said Baird's new wife probably had no idea of his previous conviction. They said she was disturbed, scared and confused when she allegedly caught Baird molesting her child. With her family and friends far away, the woman turned to a neighbor for help. That neighbor called police. Forcier, who was not the neighbor the woman approached, said Baird's wife and the young girl are now staying at a women's shelter, but they have nowhere else to go. "And she's got nothing and her daughter with her," he said. "They must feel terrible. Everything is odd over here. You come from China, and this is what happens to you." In court Thursday, Baird's lawyer asked a judge to lower his bail. The judge refused, saying that he's a threat to the community. Bail remained set at $100,000. Copyright 2005 by TheWMURChannel. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

I saw a very disturbing story on the local news this evening. A 68 yr old man from Danville, NH by the name of Harold Baird was arrested and charged with sexual abuse of a minor. The man was a convicted sex offender who had had to register with local authorities after he was released from jail, and apparently many people in the community knew about him. But he found a Chinese woman online and apparently went thru the same process we are all going through, and not long ago his wife and her 5 year old daughter came here and began living with him. Neighbors said neither of them could speak much English I believe it was this morning that she caught him in the act of sexually assaulting her 5 yr old daughter. Not knowing what to do, she went to a neighbor's house and managed to explain to them what had happened, and they called the police. He is now being held in the county jail, where he will stay until his trial, unless he raises $100,000 bail. Police speculated that he may have chosen the woman because she had a young daughter, and perhaps he thought they would be unwilling or unable to protect themselves because of the language barrier and the visa situation. I'm not sure what will happen to them now... Obviously they will be kept here until the trial as witnesses, and hopefully the girl can get some counseling in the meantime. But as far as whether they will be able to stay (if they still want to) I don't know. I just fel very bad for them, after so many months of waiting and dreaming how wonderful their new life in America would be...and then this. I feel very strongly that most of the people on CFL and good, kind, decent people who truly love their souses or fiancees, but it scares me that situations like this can happen, where people are marrying people who they don't really know. And they know nothing about the person's background other than what that person wants them to know. Obviously, no woman with a 5 year old daughter would marry a man who had been convicted and jailed for sexual assault on a minor, but there was no way for her to know about that. It's very upsetting. As a practical matter, thoguh, I don't know what women can do to find out about the man's background. I told Ying I'd be glad to get her letters from my mminister, the chief of police in my town, etc., but she aid she's not worried. It's strange that this woman had to submit a certificate from the police showing that she had no criminal record and was therefore allowed to go with her 5 yr old daughter into the clutches of that man...