Travelling to US with a criminal record in the UK

>I'll be traveling under my tourist VISA and I know I'm going to get pulled to the side,

There's no way you can know for certain you'll be 'pulled aside'. You might, you might not. It's certainly not an automatic reaction to someone entering with a visa.

People are taken for secondary questioning for all sorts of reasons: they 'flag up' on the system, they have the same name as someone on the ''watch list', their behaviour is odd/nervous/aggressive...or simply at random for training/proof of non-profiling purposes.

>I'm just wondering if I need to travel with and documentation that I used at the embassy for my visa interview?

There's no point. They already have all relevant info about you on their system. If they do decide to take you for secondary questioning they'll be checking that what you say & do fits with their info about you.

Obviously take and present both your passports plus proof of where you'll be staying/sufficient funds/return ticket (can be digital and is a good idea for everyone, Esta or visa). Apart from that, any extra paperwork is purely for your own peace of mind.

Warn your family that they may have to wait for you. If you are taken for secondary questioning it might just a few minutes, it might be longer. Depends how busy they are.......

Quoting upnorth

Hi there,
long story short...
Had a drugs caution many moons ago, visited USA on esta, family situation came up and went down the route of getting a VISA.
Fortunately for me that was granted but unfortunately the travel I had planned didn't happen.

So this year I'm taking my family to the Florida and I'll be traveling under my tourist VISA and I know I'm going to get pulled to the side, I'm just wondering if I need to travel with and documentation that I used at the embassy for my visa interview? thinking police certificate etc or just the VISA in my old passport and my new Passport. Any pointers would be great. Thanks in advance

I've been 4 times and pulled everytime, 2007 pulled in waited about 20 mins ans they explained I had been granted a 1 entry 1 exit visa.
2019 very busy at MCO ans waited 30 mins, asked where I was staying, how much money I was bringing in
2022 pulled and asked where staying again,
2023 pulled and as I got to the desk told I was good to go.

Never been a mention of what or why, it always just seems like they want to check some details. I did notice that last year before I handed the passport over he said you know your going to the room, to which I said yeah I know.

With the very long wait times I think they could make some changes to their system especially as the new esta questions will have taken a lot of people out of the visa requirement.

If I were going to usa now for the first time and had not previously had a visa I could answer all the esta questions honestly and get an esta.

I did wonder wether to go down that route this time but the question on having had a visa previously refused stopped me. I have always had the visa refused but eventually allways got it with the waiver.

Why do they not let people in my category go down the esta route? they are just creating work for themselves and the wait times would drop dramatically.

[ Edit: Edited on 25 Jul 2024, 14:28 GMT by epcman ]

>I think they could make some changes to their system especially as the new esta questions will have taken a lot of people out of the visa requirement.

The questions have not 'taken people out of the visa requirement'. The US Embassy advice has not changed and is very clear:

>If you have ever been arrested, even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, have a criminal record..........we do not recommend that you attempt to travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program. (Esta)

https://uk.usembassy.gov/visas/ineligibilities-and-waivers-2/traveling-under-the-visa-waiver-program/

>Why do they not let people in my category go down the esta route?

Why should they? Why should they change their country's laws to suit you and people like you? Every country has the absolute right to set its own entry requirements. What citizens of other countries may think of those entry requirements is completely irrelevant.

US law makes it absolutely clear that anyone convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) is automatically barred from entry to the US unless he/she is granted a waiver of ineligibility. A person might not consider his/her offences 'serious' but if those offences are considered CIMT in the US that person is not eligible for entry without a waiver. It is as it is.

There is no benefit to the US in changing their laws just to make the process easier for UK citizens or anyone else. So why should they?

>If I were going to usa now for the first time and had not previously had a visa I could answer all the esta questions honestly and get an esta.

You say you have always had a visa refused and have always needed a 'waiver of ineligibility'. It is therefore clear that you are not eligible for an Esta and could not answer the questions 'honestly' in order to get one.

[ Edit: Edited on 25 Jul 2024, 19:01 GMT by leics2 ]

Hi folks,

Providing an update on my earlier comment asking if my relative with an arrest on their record would face any issues getting in.

I later found out that another relative (a young man) has visited the US multiple times with no issues in an ESTA, this despite multiple arrests. Incidentally, he got married in the US.

Needless to say, my other relative with only a single arrest faced no problems.

I’m really only providing this update to respond to the strange men who seem to be quite bent on telling everyone they need a VISA because the US are “very clear”. The opposite is actually true. The US embassy merely states that they recommend anyone with an arrest do not try to enter the country using A visa-waiver program. They are not explicitly stating that anyone who has been arrested necessarily needs a visa, they are just recommending it.

If anyone who has ever been arrested needed a visa as people state here, the ESTA application would not ask specifically about arrests or convictions that caused serious harm and so on. Instead it would just ask, “Have you been arrested for any reason? Yes? Application denied!”

There are no strange men here. Almost all the people posting advice are female.

You need to understand that when some authority says "we do not recomment" - they mean "Don't Do This". It isn't an option to ignore the recommendation. You do so at your own peril. Just because someone has not been caught does not mean that it is OK.

Larrycrowne:

The fact that your relative with multiple arrests has entered the US with an Esta is irrelevant. I'm sure many people with criminal records have also done so. Getting married there is also irrelevant.

The facts are:

1. Making a false declaration on the Esta is a US criminal offence.

2. If a US visa is ever required (e.g. to live or work in the US, or if the US removes the Esta option) the interviewing officer will know about previous Esta entries as well as the applicant's full criminal record. The previous Esta entries may adversely affect the chance of being granted a visa.

I agree that the Esta wording isn't as clear as it might be. 'Crimes involving moral turpitude' (CIMT) are usually an immediate bar to US entry without a waiver of ineligibility but CIMT is a US-specific legal concept. For that reason the term isn't used on the Esta.

In the UK (and elsewhere) some people might not think crimes such as benefit fraud, shoplifting, indecent exposure and petty theft cause 'serious harm'...but all are potentially CIMT. Only the interviewing officer can decide whether they are or not, working within US law + internal guidelines and regulations. It's not up to an individual criminal to decide whether his/her offences are CIMT. And that's why the Embassy advice is very clear.

https://unlock.org.uk/advice/identifying-whether-my-offence-is-a-crime-involving-moral-turpitude-cimt/

It's always down to the individual with a criminal record to decide whether to get an Esta or apply for a visa. He/she can only properly make that choice if he/she is aware of both the facts and the potential consequences.

When you ask for advice/info on a forum, don't insult those who reply....even if you don't like what they say.

[ Edit: Edited on 26 Jul 2024, 05:41 GMT by leics2 ]

Quoting greatgrandmaR

There are no strange men here. Almost all the people posting advice are female.

You need to understand that when some authority says "we do not recomment" - they mean "Don't Do This". It isn't an option to ignore the recommendation. You do so at your own peril. Just because someone has not been caught does not mean that it is OK.

And what you need to understand is that you are not a spokesperson for the US embassy. That’s your interpretation of what they mean, nothing more. So you have no business telling people with certainty that they need to go down the visa route. Perhaps instead you could recommend it.

My interpretation is that the US embassy do not recommend you try to enter using an ESTA if you are unsure if you meet the criteria outlined in the ESTA. In other words, to be safe rather than sorry if you are in doubt.

I am a little bit annoyed by the scaremongering from people who don’t know how to read or think going on in this thread, which is why I chose to provide an update contradicting their claims.