Marriage Fraud: she disappeared with Permanent Residency (10 yrs.)

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Without mincing words, that right you are suggesting that the alien has without conditions was given, by USCIS, as a benefit to the USC so that he or she may live in marital bliss in the USA with a person who unfortunately is not native born and was offered to the alien, by USCIS, based upon certain assurances made by the parties that the intent upon entering the marriage was bonafide and that the marriage is not simply a means to evade immigration law. That right has contingencies....the status might not have conditions for the average alien...BUT ALL GREEN CARDS HAVE CONTINGENCIES that can come to haunt the occasional alien. You ask, what contingency? That the assurances offered by the alien, the US citizen, and/or both was the truth! Otherwise, the decision to award the alien a green card can be rescinded.

Evidence comes in all shapes and sizes. If written it is near impossible to refute. But even if there is no written evidence, there are always circumstances that demonstrate enough of a suspicion, and overcoming that suspicion is a burden the alien must bear.

Letters, emails, chat transcripts between the OP and his spouse illustrating a normal, healthy, loving relationship, created a matter of days prior to her disappearance coupled with evidence of her plans to disappear shortly upon entry would outweight a determination made by any consular officer. Bear in mind that the consular officer is only able tyo make a determination based upon the parties before him and a limited amount of commingled documentation. And comportment and composure at a consular interview can be well rehearsed by any would-be conartist. BUT the actions of an alien once he or she has determined that she has managed to fly under the radar speaks to intent as well.

However, suspicion is only sufficient for a Notice of Intent to Deny and possibly eventual visa denial. It is not enough for deportation after permanent resident status is achieved. The burden of proving a valid relationship doesn't carry any substancial time requirement. The service would be hard pressed to deport an alien based on abandonment alone, if they even cohobitated one day after entry. Whether that day or a couple weeks constitutes a valid marriage relationship that later "broke" isn't going to end in deportation if it boils down to nothing more than he said, she said.

This OP says only that the motives were suspect. That's not going to be good enough on its own to even get USCIS to investigate further beyond a note to the file, if that.

However, suspicion is only sufficient for a Notice of Intent to Deny and possibly eventual visa denial.

Really? Are you sure? USCIS' suspicion is enough to launch an investigation. A fraud investigation and if it turns out that the alien is alleged to have committed fraud, revocation of a green card can ensue.

[pushbrk 12,106]

Without mincing words, that right you are suggesting that the alien has without conditions was given, by USCIS, as a benefit to the USC so that he or she may live in marital bliss in the USA with a person who unfortunately is not native born and was offered to the alien, by USCIS, based upon certain assurances made by the parties that the intent upon entering the marriage was bonafide and that the marriage is not simply a means to evade immigration law. That right has contingencies....the status might not have conditions for the average alien...BUT ALL GREEN CARDS HAVE CONTINGENCIES that can come to haunt the occasional alien. You ask, what contingency? That the assurances offered by the alien, the US citizen, and/or both was the truth! Otherwise, the decision to award the alien a green card can be rescinded.

Evidence comes in all shapes and sizes. If written it is near impossible to refute. But even if there is no written evidence, there are always circumstances that demonstrate enough of a suspicion, and overcoming that suspicion is a burden the alien must bear.

Letters, emails, chat transcripts between the OP and his spouse illustrating a normal, healthy, loving relationship, created a matter of days prior to her disappearance coupled with evidence of her plans to disappear shortly upon entry would outweight a determination made by any consular officer. Bear in mind that the consular officer is only able tyo make a determination based upon the parties before him and a limited amount of commingled documentation. And comportment and composure at a consular interview can be well rehearsed by any would-be conartist. BUT the actions of an alien once he or she has determined that she has managed to fly under the radar speaks to intent as well.

However, suspicion is only sufficient for a Notice of Intent to Deny and possibly eventual visa denial. It is not enough for deportation after permanent resident status is achieved. The burden of proving a valid relationship doesn't carry any substancial time requirement. The service would be hard pressed to deport an alien based on abandonment alone, if they even cohobitated one day after entry. Whether that day or a couple weeks constitutes a valid marriage relationship that later "broke" isn't going to end in deportation if it boils down to nothing more than he said, she said.

This OP says only that the motives were suspect. That's not going to be good enough on its own to even get USCIS to investigate further beyond a note to the file, if that.

However, suspicion is only sufficient for a Notice of Intent to Deny and possibly eventual visa denial.

Really? Are you sure? USCIS' suspicion is enough to launch an investigation. A fraud investigation and if it turns out that the alien is alleged to have committed fraud, revocation of a green card can ensue.

We're talking apples and oranges. Both my statement and your first one are true. However your second on goes too far. An allegation isn't enough to result in a revocation. The immigrant has rights and USCIS has to prove the allegation in court. Suspicions and he said, she said evidence rarely results in a deportation order. The service knows this and so doesn't waste time on investigations and court costs unless there's far more to go on than one party's suspicion.

Now, that written evidence of an intent to abandon the spouse, something like a signed letter etc. would change things considerably.

You continue to refer to the USCIS benefit being for the USC, and during the process, it is. However, once that unconditional LPR status is in effect, it is both a benefit and right for the LPR. New ballgame.

[Emo 0]

If the original intentions of the spouse, who has already been granted the "unconditional" Permanent Residence for 10 years, is immediately suspect upon arrival in the US, and within 2 1/2 weeks has gone to live somewhere else, how can she have her Visa removed: only if it is proven to have been fraudulently obtained from the beginning upon entering into a marriage, or by divorcing her, by a combination of these things, and/or by some other means? (We're talking about New Jersey here.)

She also does not state her present whereabouts or address. At this point, since she is not living with her spouse, can she lbe liable for not having reported an address change? What role does of Affidavit Support by the US-citizen husband play in all of this?

Listen Man

Save yourself and your time!

Move on without Revenge, without Remorse, without Remembering!

“If the wife runs away it’s not clear who the lucky one is”

[Mags 112]

He said, she said. I understand that there is validity in correcting misinformation in threads here and of course I'm all for it as a rule. But in this particular case it is taking over the whole thread and, if I was the OP, I'd be thoroughly confused by now. I can see this discussion going on until the cows come home and still achieving nothing.

I'm going to ask that you both chill out and take a step away from this thread now. Thanks.

Edited December 30, 2007 by Mags

[diadromous mermaid 36]

He said, she said. I understand that there is validity in correcting misinformation in threads here and of course I'm all for it as a rule. But in this particular case it is taking over the whole thread and, if I was the OP, I'd be thoroughly confused by now. I can see this discussion going on until the cows come home and still achieving nothing.

I'm going to ask that you both chill out and take a step away from this thread now. Thanks.

Mags,

In all due respect, I think this discussion is germane to the OP's questions. Pushbrk's words "he said, she said" relate to the USC and the alien's version of why the marriage ended...it is not a reference to what I have said and what he is saying.

To ask us to step away from this thread is wholly inappropriate, firstly and doing the OP a disservice as well. We are discussing the likelihood that anything the OP would report to USCIS would bring about results.

[pushbrk 12,106]

He said, she said. I understand that there is validity in correcting misinformation in threads here and of course I'm all for it as a rule. But in this particular case it is taking over the whole thread and, if I was the OP, I'd be thoroughly confused by now. I can see this discussion going on until the cows come home and still achieving nothing.

I'm going to ask that you both chill out and take a step away from this thread now. Thanks.

Mags,

In all due respect, I think this discussion is germane to the OP's questions. Pushbrk's words "he said, she said" relate to the USC and the alien's version of why the marriage ended...it is not a reference to what I have said and what he is saying.

To ask us to step away from this thread is wholly inappropriate, firstly and doing the OP a disservice as well. We are discussing the likelihood that anything the OP would report to USCIS would bring about results.

And I can't resist saying that DM is absolutely correct. We can't be certain the OP is even reading the thread at this point but the discussion is both civil, and on topic.

[Alt name 1]

Accept my empathy my friend

pushbrk methinks u waste your time my friend

I guess that depends on just what you think I'm trying to accomplish, doesn't it? No worries. It's my time.

[Ban Hammer 12,836]

my money is on the mermaid

[rebeccajo 14]

my money is on the mermaid

Entertainment? Or enlightenment?

[Ban Hammer 12,836]

my money is on the mermaid

Entertainment? Or enlightenment?

primarily the latter. the former is provided by many other members

[Mags 112]

And I can't resist saying that DM is absolutely correct. We can't be certain the OP is even reading the thread at this point but the discussion is both civil, and on topic.

We can't be certain that any OP of any thread is reading them, but we shouldn't assume they aren't or won't come back at some point to see if there is any advice worth taking. And at no point have I said that either of you have been uncivil.

He said, she said. I understand that there is validity in correcting misinformation in threads here and of course I'm all for it as a rule. But in this particular case it is taking over the whole thread and, if I was the OP, I'd be thoroughly confused by now. I can see this discussion going on until the cows come home and still achieving nothing.

I'm going to ask that you both chill out and take a step away from this thread now. Thanks.

Mags,

In all due respect, I think this discussion is germane to the OP's questions. Pushbrk's words "he said, she said" relate to the USC and the alien's version of why the marriage ended...it is not a reference to what I have said and what he is saying.

To ask us to step away from this thread is wholly inappropriate, firstly and doing the OP a disservice as well. We are discussing the likelihood that anything the OP would report to USCIS would bring about results.

Actually, my useage of the terms "he said, she said" were in reference to you and Pushbrk and not Pushbrk's quote. I wholly understand WHY you are both discussing this and at no point have I mentioned that you were being rude or uncivil...because you weren't.

However, there comes a point when two people have completely taken over a thread and there is constant back and forthing - this gets confusing and can make it hard to weedle out any useable information. THAT'S why I posted what I did.

I actually value both of you here on VJ, you both provide a different aspect to VJ and are both informative, however I must just clarify that the reason I asked you both to take a breather is simply because it was taking over the thread - not due to any lack or civility or similar behaviour.

Perhaps, in the future, when quoting each other it might be best to remove all but the previous quote, this can makes things a bit clearer and can seem less cluttered when reading.

Edited December 31, 2007 by Mags

[rebeccajo 14]

He said/She said can be quite enlightening to the readers.

If both are interested in learning, and not just proving their point...............

[Mags 112]

He said/She said can be quite enlightening to the readers.

If both are interested in learning, and not just proving their point...............

I absolutely agree, but it can be hard to tell, sometimes.

[pushbrk 12,106]

He said/She said can be quite enlightening to the readers.

If both are interested in learning, and not just proving their point...............

I absolutely agree, but it can be hard to tell, sometimes.

It can be. However, there are times when either or both sides feel strongly that their point is critical to understanding an issue. People often mistake this for one or both attempting to convince the other. In my case, nothing could be further from the truth. I'm writing for the reader's information, not to convince an opponent in a debate, but rather to assure the reader has enough information to make what for them, will be a wise choice. I think this is best done by clearly understanding the results to be achieved by the various choices available.

Back on topic, I think this OP can choose whether or to what extent to attempt to involve the USCIS in his family issues but that he would be unwise to expect his attempts to involve them to result in any penalty to his wife or release from I-864 obligations, unless there's a whole lot more going on than some suspect motives upon her arrival. If there is more going on, then he would need to gather some concrete evidence before altering his expectations.

[rebeccajo 14]

He said/She said can be quite enlightening to the readers.

If both are interested in learning, and not just proving their point...............

I absolutely agree, but it can be hard to tell, sometimes.

It can be. However, there are times when either or both sides feel strongly that their point is critical to understanding an issue. People often mistake this for one or both attempting to convince the other. In my case, nothing could be further from the truth. I'm writing for the reader's information, not to convince an opponent in a debate, but rather to assure the reader has enough information to make what for them, will be a wise choice. I think this is best done by clearly understanding the results to be achieved by the various choices available.

Back on topic, I think this OP can choose whether or to what extent to attempt to involve the USCIS in his family issues but that he would be unwise to expect his attempts to involve them to result in any penalty to his wife or release from I-864 obligations, unless there's a whole lot more going on than some suspect motives upon her arrival. If there is more going on, then he would need to gather some concrete evidence before altering his expectations.

Feeling strongly about a point doesn't make it a point that will be helpful or informative to the reader.