|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 719,
Visits: 5.3K
|
+x+x+x+xFor any kind of online sex offence I would tick no through the ESTA route. You will never get a visa if they see this kind of conviction, even if you have never been a threat to anyone. The only thing to bear in mind for anyone who is on the SOR and discloses travel to the US is that the police will work out that you haven't disclosed and might choose to issue an Interpol notice. That would almost certainly inspire the US authorities to cancel the ESTA. Agreed. For any RSO, I would say avoid the US until you no longer have any notification requirements. Once you can legally travel without need to tell anyone, go the ESTA "No" route, ideally through Ireland. I wonder if anyone on the SOR has disclosed travel to the US and got in on an ESTA. I have disclosed travel to Canada and got in under the eTA no problem. The PPO ought to have deduced that I was being economical with the truth on the Canadian immigration form but apparently didn't care, or it wasn't their paygrade to know. Well, a certain well-known musician got a caution for possession of indecent images about 10-15 years ago, which would have got him 2 years on the SOR. I'm guessing it didn't stop him travelling, but did he disclose? Regarding the police, it seems to be yet another postcode lottery, as some forces are more reasonable in allocating their resources than others. Some do proper risk assessments, while others have a one-size-fits-all approach. We can only hope that if we behave reasonably, we'll be treated reasonably. It seems that in some cases, that actually happens. A caution is not a conviction though is it? If it's the musician I think you are talking about (PT?) he didn't have any images on his device when the police seized it, therefore he was not in possession. He did admit to having downloaded some images "for research" in the past but had since deleted them. Given that plod had no evidence to put before the court, they couldn't see any chance of a successful prosecution, so he got a caution instead. He was not convicted of anything and I don't think he was ever placed on the SOR, since there was no evidence of him ever being in possession of any image, other than his word. He would therefore be allowed to travel to the US freely.
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 7K
|
+x+x+x+x+xFor any kind of online sex offence I would tick no through the ESTA route. You will never get a visa if they see this kind of conviction, even if you have never been a threat to anyone. The only thing to bear in mind for anyone who is on the SOR and discloses travel to the US is that the police will work out that you haven't disclosed and might choose to issue an Interpol notice. That would almost certainly inspire the US authorities to cancel the ESTA. Agreed. For any RSO, I would say avoid the US until you no longer have any notification requirements. Once you can legally travel without need to tell anyone, go the ESTA "No" route, ideally through Ireland. I wonder if anyone on the SOR has disclosed travel to the US and got in on an ESTA. I have disclosed travel to Canada and got in under the eTA no problem. The PPO ought to have deduced that I was being economical with the truth on the Canadian immigration form but apparently didn't care, or it wasn't their paygrade to know. Well, a certain well-known musician got a caution for possession of indecent images about 10-15 years ago, which would have got him 2 years on the SOR. I'm guessing it didn't stop him travelling, but did he disclose? Regarding the police, it seems to be yet another postcode lottery, as some forces are more reasonable in allocating their resources than others. Some do proper risk assessments, while others have a one-size-fits-all approach. We can only hope that if we behave reasonably, we'll be treated reasonably. It seems that in some cases, that actually happens. A caution is not a conviction though is it? If it's the musician I think you are talking about (PT?) he didn't have any images on his device when the police seized it, therefore he was not in possession. He did admit to having downloaded some images "for research" in the past but had since deleted them. Given that plod had no evidence to put before the court, they couldn't see any chance of a successful prosecution, so he got a caution instead. He was not convicted of anything and I don't think he was ever placed on the SOR, since there was no evidence of him ever being in possession of any image, other than his word. He would therefore be allowed to travel to the US freely. Actually, if you accept a caution for a sexual offence in Schedule 3 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, you get 2 years on the SOR. That is prescribed by law, so the police don't have the authority to let you off. After that, it's all about whether you have a good enough lawyer to get you accepted by the US. In this case, I'd imagine he might qualify for a business visa.
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
BenS
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 302,
Visits: 2.9K
|
+xI had plans to travel to US a few years ago but the police suggested that it might not be a good idea,I waited until my Sor was up and went via Dublin. Hi, so you're confirming that you successfully entered the US as a former SOR registrant by ticking no on the ESTA? This is very good if so - I have never seen anyone online confirming this before.
|
|
|
|
|
Alberto
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1,
Visits: 6
|
Hello all,
My situation is a little different. I was sentenced to 9 months for GBH in 2000 and shortly after getting released I applied for a visa to the us and got denied (mortal turpitude). Twenty years on and I’d like to go to the states. If I go for an ESTA what are my chances of them linking it to my old passport and visa application? If I go for a visa will it definitely get denied? Any help greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
|
|
scotboy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 29,
Visits: 134
|
+x+x[quote]I had plans to travel to US a few years ago but the police suggested that it might not be a good idea,I waited until my Sor was up and went via Dublin. Hi, so you're confirming that you successfully entered the US as a former SOR registrant by ticking no on the ESTA? This is very good if so - I have never seen anyone online confirming this b +x+x[quote]I had plans to travel to US a few years ago but the police suggested that it might not be a good idea,I waited until my Sor was up and went via Dublin. Hi, so you're confirming that you successfully entered the US as a former SOR registrant by ticking no on the ESTA? This is very good if so - I have never seen anyone online confirming this beforI Yes! I have seen posts where people say they will let the forum know how they get on but never do.
|
|
|
|
|
Harmless
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110,
Visits: 391
|
+xI have disclosed travel to Canada and got in under the eTA no problem. The PPO ought to have deduced that I was being economical with the truth on the Canadian immigration form but apparently didn't care, or it wasn't their paygrade to know. That's pretty interesting, because Canada-US is a lot of domestic flights. Can you expand, confirm , reiterate? You're on the SOR and you declared Canada as your first port of call, ticked "no" to the ESTA stuff and walked right in?
|
|
|
|
|
BenS
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 302,
Visits: 2.9K
|
+x+xI have disclosed travel to Canada and got in under the eTA no problem. The PPO ought to have deduced that I was being economical with the truth on the Canadian immigration form but apparently didn't care, or it wasn't their paygrade to know. That's pretty interesting, because Canada-US is a lot of domestic flights. Can you expand, confirm , reiterate? You're on the SOR and you declared Canada as your first port of call, ticked "no" to the ESTA stuff and walked right in? No, I never went to the US, just Canada. Sorry if I was unclear. I duly notified my travel to Canada, and did not visit any other countries on that trip. I flew directly from the UK (and returned directly to the UK).
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 7K
|
+x+x+xI have disclosed travel to Canada and got in under the eTA no problem. The PPO ought to have deduced that I was being economical with the truth on the Canadian immigration form but apparently didn't care, or it wasn't their paygrade to know. That's pretty interesting, because Canada-US is a lot of domestic flights. Can you expand, confirm , reiterate? You're on the SOR and you declared Canada as your first port of call, ticked "no" to the ESTA stuff and walked right in? No, I never went to the US, just Canada. Sorry if I was unclear. I duly notified my travel to Canada, and did not visit any other countries on that trip. I flew directly from the UK (and returned directly to the UK). I think there might be some confusion over who actually crossed the land border. Didn't you say your brother crossed the land border, which was quicker than it might have been because he already had an ESTA?
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
BenS
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 302,
Visits: 2.9K
|
+x+xNo, I never went to the US, just Canada. Sorry if I was unclear. I duly notified my travel to Canada, and did not visit any other countries on that trip. I flew directly from the UK (and returned directly to the UK). I think there might be some confusion over who actually crossed the land border. Didn't you say your brother crossed the land border, which was quicker than it might have been because he already had an ESTA? Yes, I mentioned that in a completely separate thread. As for this thread, in response to Harmless, I have notified a trip to Canada and got in no problems. Nothing whatsoever to do with the US. I can't comment on travelling to the US on the SOR as I have not done this. But it's nice to see Scotboy's account that he got in on an ESTA after the end of his time on the SOR.
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 1.6K
|
+x+x+xNo, I never went to the US, just Canada. Sorry if I was unclear. I duly notified my travel to Canada, and did not visit any other countries on that trip. I flew directly from the UK (and returned directly to the UK). I think there might be some confusion over who actually crossed the land border. Didn't you say your brother crossed the land border, which was quicker than it might have been because he already had an ESTA? Yes, I mentioned that in a completely separate thread. As for this thread, in response to Harmless, I have notified a trip to Canada and got in no problems. Nothing whatsoever to do with the US. I can't comment on travelling to the US on the SOR as I have not done this. But it's nice to see Scotboy's account that he got in on an ESTA after the end of his time on the SOR. Hi I am searching the site plus "The Record" as I am sure a person on the SOR obtained entry as they provided a detailed plan - points of stay etc- . I cannot remember their actual sex offence details but I will keep searching. Hopefully not confused with something else.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
|
|
|
|