US Visa waiver programme...

omelette451

dontdoit wrote: »

visas usually last 1 to 10 years.
Seriously consider professional help on this one, due to the recentness of the arrest. I'm not one for giving lawyers money, but sometimes they actually do know what they are doing.

I would agree. Whatever you do though, don't just assume you won't get a visa: defeatism is not the way forward. While it seems fairly safe to assume you won't qualify for entry under the VWP, that absolutely does not mean you don't qualify for entry to the US under any circumstances. All it means is that you'll (probably) have to go to a consulate for an interview, at which it will (hopefully) be apparent that you're not a threat to American society and they'll grant you the visa. Very few people are refused and it'd have to be pretty serious for them to say no. Yes the fact that the caution was recent means something, but bad things can happen to anybody and they know that. Don't give up until it's over!

Marty_J

robb2002 wrote: »

I shall make an appointment for the Citizen's advice Bueraux and see what they have to say.

I doubt the CAB, much as I respect it, will be able to tell you much. US Immigration Law is hardly their speciality.

Under the U.S. Department of State's Foreign Affairs Manual, Volume 9, section 40.21(a) N2.3-1(b)(1), Arson is listed as a crime against property which involves moral turpitude and "an inherently evil intent".

If you want to apply for a visa, you're probably going to need a lawyer on this one.

robb2002

I'm just going to have to see how it goes and see what my CRB says. I am thinking about applying for a visa next year so I will let you know what they say.

Does anyone know if it is the same process for Canada, Oz, NZ and South Africa etc?
Thanks

Cherry1

Thought I'd throw in that I have a friend and know some of their acquaintences who actually have firearm offences plus other heavy things like major fraud and have spent a long time away and they just don't declare. They've never been found out and one of them has even bought a house out there.
Firearm offences were within 7 years incase that rehabilitation act thing would mean it's wiped from their CRB in this country.
Anyways, you seem like you'd want to do it properly so much better to get proper advice.

Cherry1

I'm sure there's a few people that's going to inconvenience. Until he told me I always assumed that borders spoke to each other or had mutual records. Too much watching James Bond etc.

headpin

Cherry1 wrote: »

Thought I'd throw in that I have a friend and know some of their acquaintences who actually have firearm offences plus other heavy things like major fraud and have spent a long time away and they just don't declare. They've never been found out and one of them has even bought a house out there.
Firearm offences were within 7 years incase that rehabilitation act thing would mean it's wiped from their CRB in this country.
Anyways, you seem like you'd want to do it properly so much better to get proper advice.

I'm not sure this would apply to UK citizens entering the US. The only way the US could check when they take your prints on entry. They would then have to send them to the UKBA who would then have to put them through Ident1 and then feed back to US.

I think this new system is not suppose to root out people this way but in a more targetted way.

Only my thoughts and may be wrong. But often this information is all pie in the sky!!

lindsey_toffee_girl

I agree I think thy have suspisions and then are able to check it up surely unlimited access breaches the data protection act??

omelette451

dontdoit wrote: »

Australia, no problem. The concern is more than 1 years sentence, whether served or not.

The thing I learnt from the long time I've spent watching that TV show about the Australian border is that, generally speaking, those who are completely honest and upfront about their criminal histories are seen positively and let in while those who hide it or try to lie about it are always refused entry, so my advice would always be to be open about it. It rarely seems to matter what the crime (or the punishment) was, as long as it's declared.

Marty_J

That is about the UK Border Agency, not the Police, sharing fingerprints of non-UK citizens with authorities in other countries. If someone applies for a UK visa, or requests entry to the UK, they have their fingerprints taken which are then checked against foreign watch-lists.

It's not about the UK Police sharing their fingerprint records with anyone.

Marty_J

dontdoit wrote: »

Its about the US wanting IDENT1 to be part of the "server in the sky" programme.

The US have wanted access to the UK's criminal records for years now. At least this time they're proposing something on a more equitable footing; they used to want access to the UK's police records, without allowing the UK access to theirs.

EU countries don't even share their police records with one another as a matter of course, and that would be a whole lot easier with regard to data protection that sharing with the US.

Regardless, the Server in the Sky won't contain everyone's details, or even every criminal's details. The three classes of persons will be "known terrorists", "suspected terrorists", and those "subject to terrorism investigations". Countries already share watch-lists with one another; this is just a centralised way of doing that. It doesn't mean a CBP officer is going to know when he swipes your passport that you got a speeding ticket in 1973.