+xWhy is this question so subjective to who answers it? It would be so much easier if it was like the AUS method of "have you been to prison for more than 12 months".
So the new question for criminal records is has now changed to:
Have you ever been arrested or convicted for a crime that resulted in serious damage to property, or serious harm to another person or government authority?
i have a common assault charge from 10 years ago so I'm pretty sure this is going to be a NO. At the same time what are the chances of the immigration guy thinking otherwise in terms of seriousness/classification of the crime?
What do you think is the best plan for USA entry - i think i should be fine for a ESTA - do you agree?
Thank you
Well, if you answer the ESTA questions truthfully and honestly, wouldn't that be enough for you. If you're thinking of disclosing to the border control agent on arrival then you may as well apply for a visa. The ESTAs and visas are issued by the State Department, who revised the questions a few years ago. The border control is staffed by Homeland Security, who have a zero-tolerance approach to undisclosed cautions and convictions, so you would probably be sent back on the next flight, and that could well affect your ability to travel in the future. Common assault is not an offence that would stop you getting a visa, as it is the equivalent of their simple assault and is not a crime involving moral turpitude. On the other hand, if you don't disclose on arrival, there is no other way for the border control agent to know that you have a criminal record, as there is no routine sharing of criminal record information.
If you believe that your offence did not result in serious harm to a person, then you have the right to answer no and apply for an ESTA. If you do that, and you happen to be spot-checked on arrival for any reason then don't disclose anything you haven't already disclosed. Unless you're secretly involved in international organised crime, they won't know anything you don't tell them.