Randy W Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 I was quoting part of Item #1 of the Supporting Statement. How would one go about getting a criminal history, or, in my case, a no criminal history? Also, and I know we talked about this in previous threads, what if we didn't use a "Marriage Broker?"222507[/snapback] The intent of the law is to get criminal background checks of some kind into the hands of the Chinese SO, so I think the definition of "Marriage Broker" may be a little broadened when the DHS gets to it somewhat beyond what we have been thinking here. However, those who met their SO's prior to March 5, whether through a "Marriage Broker" or not, did not supply a criminal background history. You are blazing new territory, Ron. Let us know. I don't think we'll really know anything until some post-March 6 cases hit their interview. ANY case can be blue-slipped for a criminal background check. Link to comment
Guest pushbrk Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 "IMBRA requires a petitioner to submit a criminal history to USCIS in connection with a petition for a fiance(e)." What if you don't have a criminal history? What do they mean when they say the form has been designated for e-filing?222462[/snapback]What's your reference for drawing this conclusion, Ron?222470[/snapback]I was quoting part of Item #1 of the Supporting Statement. How would one go about getting a criminal history, or, in my case, a no criminal history? Also, and I know we talked about this in previous threads, what if we didn't use a "Marriage Broker?"222507[/snapback]I can't find a link to the supporting statement in order to read the quote in context. If you have one, please provide it. My understanding of the context is that some people will be required to provide criminal background information but only if they have been convicted of certain violent crimes. I suspect there is a clarifying sentence or paragraph that would make it possible to answer you completely. You are NOT required to prove you don't have a record. Link to comment
david_dawei Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 What's misleading in the form is that the questions about criminal background are in section C.2 , and don't suggest (unless I'm missing it somewhere) that you only fill it out IF IF IF you used a IMB.. that's another question (19)... It may be that the IMBRA is requiring the collection of all, and only disclosure if a IMB is involved... I guess I see problems with it either way... 1) Asking a select few to fill it out (what if you don't use an IMB and do indeed have a criminal background ! So no disclosure)2) Asking everyone, but then only applying it to a select few (again, what if the petition truly has a criminal background but didn't use an IMB, so USCIS doesn't have to disclose it !?) Both ways [above] make absolutely no sense and self-defeat the spirit of protecting women... To continue just one [of many] holes I am reading.. the IMBs are required to search a crime database, and it appears they search for 'arrests' or 'convictions'.. that 'arrest' part is conveniently lacking comment in the form... So, while you might not disclose on the form an arrest that was later dropped, how do we know if that arrest isn't still in some database... Link to comment
RLS Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 (edited) "IMBRA requires a petitioner to submit a criminal history to USCIS in connection with a petition for a fiance(e)." What if you don't have a criminal history? What do they mean when they say the form has been designated for e-filing?222462[/snapback]What's your reference for drawing this conclusion, Ron?222470[/snapback]I was quoting part of Item #1 of the Supporting Statement. How would one go about getting a criminal history, or, in my case, a no criminal history? Also, and I know we talked about this in previous threads, what if we didn't use a "Marriage Broker?"222507[/snapback]I can't find a link to the supporting statement in order to read the quote in context. If you have one, please provide it. My understanding of the context is that some people will be required to provide criminal background information but only if they have been convicted of certain violent crimes. I suspect there is a clarifying sentence or paragraph that would make it possible to answer you completely. You are NOT required to prove you don't have a record.222529[/snapback]Oh, sorry Mike. I was reading the link that Mike of MikeandRong posted. http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/for.../i-129fsupp.pdf Edited June 8, 2006 by RLS (see edit history) Link to comment
Guest pushbrk Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 "IMBRA requires a petitioner to submit a criminal history to USCIS in connection with a petition for a fiance(e)." What if you don't have a criminal history? What do they mean when they say the form has been designated for e-filing?222462[/snapback]What's your reference for drawing this conclusion, Ron?222470[/snapback]I was quoting part of Item #1 of the Supporting Statement. How would one go about getting a criminal history, or, in my case, a no criminal history? Also, and I know we talked about this in previous threads, what if we didn't use a "Marriage Broker?"222507[/snapback]I can't find a link to the supporting statement in order to read the quote in context. If you have one, please provide it. My understanding of the context is that some people will be required to provide criminal background information but only if they have been convicted of certain violent crimes. I suspect there is a clarifying sentence or paragraph that would make it possible to answer you completely. You are NOT required to prove you don't have a record.222529[/snapback]Oh, sorry Mike. I was reading the link that Mike of MikeandRong posted. http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/for.../i-129fsupp.pdf222532[/snapback]Ok. They are referring to the flawed question in part three that is supposed to be answered yes or no or at least by default, not checking that certain criminal background DOES apply, you are stating that it DOES NOT apply. If it DOES NOT apply, the only thing you provide is the signed indication that you don't have any of those convictions in your background. Link to comment
Randy W Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 Any interpretation is subject to revision by the DHS, regardless of how clear the wording may seem to us. Link to comment
david_dawei Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 Any interpretation is subject to revision by the DHS, regardless of how clear the wording may seem to us.222537[/snapback]good point. Just as the IMBs have theirs and everyone is attempting to do what their part is... DHS probably would not have jurisdiction over IMB violations, probably the justice department must enforce those issues. But DHS is going to do what they feel they are required to do. problem is, why are both DHS and IMB doing criminal database checks, both informing the beneficiary, etc... didn't someone realize that one side could (or should) be responsible for it... Throw in the mix of the petitioner who must submit documents if he checks YES (if criminal record applies)... I guess if you are not caught at the beginning, your caught at the end with the consular interview informing the beneficiary... now that's four parties involved... Link to comment
Kalli and Greg Oveson Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 (edited) II would like to invite your attention to two paragraphs of the Draft I-129F form, paragraphs 2 and 3. This form has presumably been written and examined by several people, and approved by their superiors for public publication on this site as a proposal for the new I-129F. Paragraph 2. There are notable problems with this proposed paragraph. The first is trying to figure out what they mean by the opening sentence: Have you ever been by a court of law (civil or criminal) or court martialed by a military tribunal for any of the following crimes. Now I know we can all guess at what they mean, but government directives should not require the reader to guess what they mean. It just indicates that this is a poorly prepared document that has not been adequately reviewed at the management level. Then they say you must report it, ...even if your records were sealed or otherwise cleared.... And then: Using a separate sheet(s) of paper, attach information relating to the conviction(s), such as crime involved, date of conviction and sentence. I don't see how "cleared" and "convicted" fit into the same sentence the way it is written. Does it mean if I was cleared I only have to report it but an explanation is required onlyif I was convicted? How quick do you think a checked block without other information would generate an RFE? The remaining problem is the serious one, The use of a single check box for the petitioner's response not only unsatisfactory, it is a pitiful method of collecting data. The petitioner must be required to state unequivocally whether s/he has ever been convicted/(accused?) of any of these offenses. The person working the petition at USCIS should never have to wonder about the meaning of the response. To collect accurate and usable information, there must be both a YES box and a NO box for each item. Paragraph 3. I do not question the right of USCIS to collect whatever information they deem necessary or enlightening. But does anybody want to guess why they want this information? It doesn't look like anything required by IMBRA to me. Edited June 8, 2006 by Travelers (see edit history) Link to comment
RLS Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 To me, it's not rocket science. Ask the question: Have you ever been arrested or convicted of one or more of these crimes? List the crimes. The answer is going to be yes or no. There is no "in between" on this one. If you check no, they can punch your s.s.# up and find out in a minute if you lied. If you did lie, then you pay the consequences. If you did not lie, then, approve the petition and send it on to the next phase. If you did not lie and checked yes, then, you must produce whatever they ask for. JMO Link to comment
Kalli and Greg Oveson Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 To me, it's not rocket science. Ask the question: Have you ever been arrested or convicted of one or more of these crimes? List the crimes. The answer is going to be yes or no. There is no "in between" on this one. If you check no, they can punch your s.s.# up and find out in a minute if you lied. If you did lie, then you pay the consequences. If you did not lie, then, approve the petition and send it on to the next phase. If you did not lie and checked yes, then, you must produce whatever they ask for. JMO 222578[/snapback]Sorta makes you wonder why they didn't ask it that way, doesn't it? Link to comment
LeeFisher3 Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 It's a DRAFTThat means many other people will examine it and create extremely long reports shredding the entire text. Link to comment
frank1538 Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 What's misleading in the form is that the questions about criminal background are in section C.2 , and don't suggest (unless I'm missing it somewhere) that you only fill it out IF IF IF you used a IMB.. that's another question (19)...222530[/snapback]My read of the law is that criminal conviction information (Part C) and IMB information (question 19) are separate. It seems to me that EVERYBODY has to provide the criminal conviction information whether or not an international marriage broker was used. But, as Lee says, we're dealing with a draft that may be revised before implementation. Link to comment
LeeFisher3 Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 What's misleading in the form is that the questions about criminal background are in section C.2 , and don't suggest (unless I'm missing it somewhere) that you only fill it out IF IF IF you used a IMB.. that's another question (19)...222530[/snapback]My read of the law is that criminal conviction information (Part C) and IMB information (question 19) are separate. It seems to me that EVERYBODY has to provide the criminal conviction information whether or not an international marriage broker was used. But, as Lee says, we're dealing with a draft that may be revised before implementation.222592[/snapback]Yeah, if they don't do a bit of revising we will see some extremely interesting K-3 filings, if you follow the instructions. Link to comment
david_dawei Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 What's misleading in the form is that the questions about criminal background are in section C.2 , and don't suggest (unless I'm missing it somewhere) that you only fill it out IF IF IF you used a IMB.. that's another question (19)...222530[/snapback]My read of the law is that criminal conviction information (Part C) and IMB information (question 19) are separate. It seems to me that EVERYBODY has to provide the criminal conviction information whether or not an international marriage broker was used. But, as Lee says, we're dealing with a draft that may be revised before implementation.222592[/snapback]I agree. that's my read too... This makes sense if their idea is to verify their own criminal name checks against the petitioner supplied info.. any discprency could be used to deny a form (?).. meaning you did not disclose sometime (?) Seems a backdoor way to stop some of those with criminal past.. but this is just my idea not suggesting they are doing this. BUt if they collect it from everyone, then the [ethical] dilemma that a person did not use an IMB.. but has a criminal past... are they NOT required to disclose that to the beneficiary? (Insane if they don't... would go to show that policy--letter of the law--is more important than spirit of the law--protecting women). Link to comment
LeeFisher3 Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 What's misleading in the form is that the questions about criminal background are in section C.2 , and don't suggest (unless I'm missing it somewhere) that you only fill it out IF IF IF you used a IMB.. that's another question (19)...222530[/snapback]My read of the law is that criminal conviction information (Part C) and IMB information (question 19) are separate. It seems to me that EVERYBODY has to provide the criminal conviction information whether or not an international marriage broker was used. But, as Lee says, we're dealing with a draft that may be revised before implementation.222592[/snapback]I agree. that's my read too... This makes sense if their idea is to verify their own criminal name checks against the petitioner supplied info.. any discprency could be used to deny a form (?).. meaning you did not disclose sometime (?) Seems a backdoor way to stop some of those with criminal past.. but this is just my idea not suggesting they are doing this. BUt if they collect it from everyone, then the [ethical] dilemma that a person did not use an IMB.. but has a criminal past... are they NOT required to disclose that to the beneficiary? (Insane if they don't... would go to show that policy--letter of the law--is more important than spirit of the law--protecting women).222619[/snapback]Either way the VO has the obligation to verify that the beneficiary is aware of the record. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now