Slammed at New Delhi

[ms_jinga_lala 0]

I posted this on the South Asia forum as well but thought maybe I could get some additional ideas here. My fiance had his interview on the 28th. He was yelled at by the CO and asked the same question more than 10 times (it was being yelled at him). He provided the same answer each time which is what kept angering the CO. He was being asked "What did your parents say when you told them she was divorced with 3 kids?" At one point another woman came over and her and the CO made fun of my fiance and laughed at him when he tried to answer the question again the same way. The CO yelled at him that his visa was denied and he shut the window. It was horrible.

I have emails typed up for the embassy and 4 U.S. Senators specifically requesting a congressional inquiry into the CO's actions and mistreatment of my fiance. I'm requesting the petition stay there and that they grant me another interview. (Thank you Twisted K for those ideas.) Is there anything else I can or should be doing or saying.

Thank you in advance. I don't know how to link to the post and I can't think straight to figure it out right now.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Letters and emails to senators are ok, presuming the senator's office decides to do anything for you. Presumably, two of the senators you wrote to are the senators representing your state. Don't be surprised if the other two politely refuse to do anything for you, and refer you to the offices of your state's senators.

Consulates and embassies are under the Department of State. You can try sending an email to DoS, as well as the office of the Secretary of State, Ms. Clinton. If you can get her office to take a personal interest in your case, then you should get some very fast action.

I don't mean to be callous, but good luck getting anywhere with this. Many consulates use similar tactics to try to uncover visa fraud, and these tactics pale in comparison to a Stokes interview, which is a tactic used by consulates as well as USCIS. A Stokes interview lasts for hours, involves both the US citizen sponsor and the foreign beneficiary/immigrant, and is comparable to the interrogation of a terrorist suspect (without the rubber hoses and waterboarding). It's brutally severe, and perfectly legal. While it's the stated policy of many consulates to treat applicants with courtesy and respect, the truth is that they often do not when visa fraud is suspected. In spite of tens of thousands of complaints, nothing has changed.

Anyway, it never hurts to have a senator on your side, and it can result in breaking down roadblocks set up by the consulate.

Good luck!

[TBoneTX 43,420]

I don't mean to be callous, but good luck getting anywhere with this. Many consulates use similar tactics to try to uncover visa fraud, and these tactics pale in comparison to a Stokes interview, which is a tactic used by consulates as well as USCIS. A Stokes interview lasts for hours, involves both the US citizen sponsor and the foreign beneficiary/immigrant, and is comparable to the interrogation of a terrorist suspect (without the rubber hoses and waterboarding). It's brutally severe, and perfectly legal. While it's the stated policy of many consulates to treat applicants with courtesy and respect, the truth is that they often do not when visa fraud is suspected. In spite of tens of thousands of complaints, nothing has changed.

Si, man (sigh, man). Good luck, OP, and do not give up.

[ms_jinga_lala 0]

Letters and emails to senators are ok, presuming the senator's office decides to do anything for you. Presumably, two of the senators you wrote to are the senators representing your state. Don't be surprised if the other two politely refuse to do anything for you, and refer you to the offices of your state's senators.

Consulates and embassies are under the Department of State. You can try sending an email to DoS, as well as the office of the Secretary of State, Ms. Clinton. If you can get her office to take a personal interest in your case, then you should get some very fast action.

I don't mean to be callous, but good luck getting anywhere with this. Many consulates use similar tactics to try to uncover visa fraud, and these tactics pale in comparison to a Stokes interview, which is a tactic used by consulates as well as USCIS. A Stokes interview lasts for hours, involves both the US citizen sponsor and the foreign beneficiary/immigrant, and is comparable to the interrogation of a terrorist suspect (without the rubber hoses and waterboarding). It's brutally severe, and perfectly legal. While it's the stated policy of many consulates to treat applicants with courtesy and respect, the truth is that they often do not when visa fraud is suspected. In spite of tens of thousands of complaints, nothing has changed.

Anyway, it never hurts to have a senator on your side, and it can result in breaking down roadblocks set up by the consulate.

Good luck!

I'm okay with callous. I just need some direction. I don't care how rough it sounds, if there is a chance - no matter how small - I will do it. I'm going to email Ms. Clinton. I may even appeal to the president. I know I'm a small person in the grand scheme of things, but complaints add up. I want my voice in there. This is ridiculous.

What is a Stokes interview? When is that used and what is that for?

Thank you.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I'm okay with callous. I just need some direction. I don't care how rough it sounds, if there is a chance - no matter how small - I will do it. I'm going to email Ms. Clinton. I may even appeal to the president. I know I'm a small person in the grand scheme of things, but complaints add up. I want my voice in there. This is ridiculous.

What is a Stokes interview? When is that used and what is that for?

Thank you.

A Stokes interview is used by USCIS more often than consulates, but consulates have been known to use them if fraud is suspected. The basic theme is that the petitioner and beneficiary are interviewed separately, and then their answers are compared. Sometimes it will involve two interviewing officers, each interviewing one of the parties simultaneously. After several hours of questions, they will switch interviewers and repeat the process. The Stokes interview process is long, grueling, and often involves deeply personal questions. The interviewers usually take an extremely adversarial position - they yell at the interviewee, make serious (usually false) accusations against them, accuse them of lying, threaten them with severe consequences for their alleged 'criminal' fraud acitivity, etc. Imagine 4 hours in a private room with a Marine drill instructor, where no answer you give is going to be acceptable, and you're beginning to understand what it's like.

USCIS will usually conduct a normal interview first. If they aren't satisfied with the results, they'll schedule a second interview, which is usually a Stokes interview. Some consulates have been known to demand that the petitioner appear for a Stokes interview if they aren't satisfied with the results of the initial interview with the beneficiary. This means the petitioner has to hop on a plane and fly to the beneficiary's country for the interview.

A Stokes interview is perfectly legal, and considered an important tool in fighting immigration fraud.

[ms_jinga_lala 0]

A Stokes interview is used by USCIS more often than consulates, but consulates have been known to use them if fraud is suspected. The basic theme is that the petitioner and beneficiary are interviewed separately, and then their answers are compared. Sometimes it will involve two interviewing officers, each interviewing one of the parties simultaneously. After several hours of questions, they will switch interviewers and repeat the process. The Stokes interview process is long, grueling, and often involves deeply personal questions. The interviewers usually take an extremely adversarial position - they yell at the interviewee, make serious (usually false) accusations against them, accuse them of lying, threaten them with severe consequences for their alleged 'criminal' fraud acitivity, etc. Imagine 4 hours in a private room with a Marine drill instructor, where no answer you give is going to be acceptable, and you're beginning to understand what it's like.

USCIS will usually conduct a normal interview first. If they aren't satisfied with the results, they'll schedule a second interview, which is usually a Stokes interview. Some consulates have been known to demand that the petitioner appear for a Stokes interview if they aren't satisfied with the results of the initial interview with the beneficiary. This means the petitioner has to hop on a plane and fly to the beneficiary's country for the interview.

A Stokes interview is perfectly legal, and considered an important tool in fighting immigration fraud.

Ironically, I can imagine that. My ex husband is a Marine, I was married to him for 14 years while he was in the Corps (he went psycho...legally diagnosed now...I was the one he went psycho on which is why I left him 2 years before meeting my now fiancee). I think the power these individuals have has gone to their heads. I just don't understand how someone who was American (my fiancee got the only white CO there) could act like 2nd marriages are so uncommon. It happens everyday in America with way too many people having 3 or more marriages. Me being married previously does not signify that my new relationship is fraud.

I've been doing my research and the CO can't deny our visa because of information that was known to USCIS at the time I petitioned. I submitted a copy of my separation papers and divorce papers to USCIS in the very beginning. Both were dated and there were witnesses that testified that we had been separated for a little over 2 years before the divorce. I also had written them well in advance of the interview (6 weeks in advance) about the NOA-2 expiring. This was something they chose to do because they could get away with it. It's bullshit. Someone needs to do something about this system and stop allowing the CO's to just toy with someones life at random. They had the denial letter ready before my fiance even sat down, he saw it in front of the CO before the questions started. They never had any intention of granting the visa, they just chose to subject him to the humiliation and degradation for their own entertainment.

I don't even know where we go from here. I'm so broken I can't even think.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

There have been a few cases where second interviews have been granted in cases where congressman or Sneators have been contacted. Correlating one to the other is near impossible, but it is free to try. The State Department does not report to the legislative branch and they are charged with preventing visa raud and are given a broad hand in so doing. The Inidan sub-continent is rife with visa fraud, especially in family visas. They are just very sensitive about this and something your fiance said or did, or some circumstance of your case was a trip wire for them.

If the phone calls don't get you a second interview then you have a couple options.

1. Let them deny the visa and file a new I-129f for a new K-1. By the time your interview comes along you will know the reasons and can avoid those problems the next time. Appealing this visa will take longer and cost more. Start over.

2. Go to India and get married and file a CR-1. The problem with this is that it can still be denied and then you are still legally married.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

There have been a few cases where second interviews have been granted in cases where congressman or Sneators have been contacted. Correlating one to the other is near impossible, but it is free to try. The State Department does not report to the legislative branch and they are charged with preventing visa raud and are given a broad hand in so doing. The Inidan sub-continent is rife with visa fraud, especially in family visas. They are just very sensitive about this and something your fiance said or did, or some circumstance of your case was a trip wire for them.

DO NOT assume it was the question they asked him over and over again and reacted badly to. In fact, I will nearly assure you 100% that was NOT the problem. It is a very common tactic for them to "seem" to focus on something as a distraction, especially when being group interviewed, and then another interviewer tosses in other questions. The subject is so confused and distracted and afraid he is going to be denied for something that isn't true, he gives an inconsistent answer to an earlier question and doesn't even realize it. Distraction and disorientation are among the absolute best interogation tools...short of waterboarding. They are used not only by law enforcement, government, but also doctors, attorneys and insurance companies (google "Waddell's Signs")

If the phone calls don't get you a second interview then you have a couple options.

1. Let them deny the visa and file a new I-129f for a new K-1. By the time your interview comes along you will know the reasons and can avoid those problems the next time. Appealing this visa will take longer and cost more. Start over.

2. Go to India and get married and file a CR-1. The problem with this is that it can still be denied and then you are still legally married.

[Anh map 2,098]

Ironically, I can imagine that. My ex husband is a Marine, I was married to him for 14 years while he was in the Corps (he went psycho...legally diagnosed now...I was the one he went psycho on which is why I left him 2 years before meeting my now fiancee). I think the power these individuals have has gone to their heads. I just don't understand how someone who was American (my fiancee got the only white CO there) could act like 2nd marriages are so uncommon. It happens everyday in America with way too many people having 3 or more marriages. Me being married previously does not signify that my new relationship is fraud.

I've been doing my research and the CO can't deny our visa because of information that was known to USCIS at the time I petitioned. I submitted a copy of my separation papers and divorce papers to USCIS in the very beginning. Both were dated and there were witnesses that testified that we had been separated for a little over 2 years before the divorce. I also had written them well in advance of the interview (6 weeks in advance) about the NOA-2 expiring. This was something they chose to do because they could get away with it. It's bullshit. Someone needs to do something about this system and stop allowing the CO's to just toy with someones life at random. They had the denial letter ready before my fiance even sat down, he saw it in front of the CO before the questions started. They never had any intention of granting the visa, they just chose to subject him to the humiliation and degradation for their own entertainment.

I don't even know where we go from here. I'm so broken I can't even think.

Having approval and denial letters prepared in advance is typical. The CO's review the case file prior to the interview and prepare for multiple outcomes.

[ms_jinga_lala 0]

There have been a few cases where second interviews have been granted in cases where congressman or Sneators have been contacted. Correlating one to the other is near impossible, but it is free to try. The State Department does not report to the legislative branch and they are charged with preventing visa raud and are given a broad hand in so doing. The Inidan sub-continent is rife with visa fraud, especially in family visas. They are just very sensitive about this and something your fiance said or did, or some circumstance of your case was a trip wire for them.

DO NOT assume it was the question they asked him over and over again and reacted badly to. In fact, I will nearly assure you 100% that was NOT the problem. It is a very common tactic for them to "seem" to focus on something as a distraction, especially when being group interviewed, and then another interviewer tosses in other questions. The subject is so confused and distracted and afraid he is going to be denied for something that isn't true, he gives an inconsistent answer to an earlier question and doesn't even realize it. Distraction and disorientation are among the absolute best interogation tools...short of waterboarding. They are used not only by law enforcement, government, but also doctors, attorneys and insurance companies (google "Waddell's Signs")

If the phone calls don't get you a second interview then you have a couple options.

1. Let them deny the visa and file a new I-129f for a new K-1. By the time your interview comes along you will know the reasons and can avoid those problems the next time. Appealing this visa will take longer and cost more. Start over.

2. Go to India and get married and file a CR-1. The problem with this is that it can still be denied and then you are still legally married.

Thank you, your post was very reassuring and helpful. I am emailing and calling like crazy to anyone and everyone I can. I'm not giving up. I've been researching. If this one fails how can I avoid getting the flat for misrepresentation? I know we may be able to get a waiver later, but I had rather avoid this all together. How long would it take to fail? I'm addressing all options, I have him talking to a lawyer about marriage regulations already. I want to be prepared for all options.

Even if another visa gets denied, I still love him. I want to be with him. I had much rather that be in person than over the phone and through a few visits. I won't give up. I can't. No matter how devastating this is, I just can't quit. I feel so broken right now.

[Twisted K 2]

you have the right attitude, and i believe you will be successful know that there is always other options. if you haven't already, i still recommend reading the pinned topic on the MENA forums. if you post on there, someone who has been through this will answer. especially kiyah. she is the best. she went through this and is willing to help any and everyone. also i contacted marc ellis. he is on here as ellis-island. he is a great attorney who has helped many get through this. although i did not retain him, he did answer general questions. i know many people on here have retained them, and they are all with their SOs today. keep up the fight

[ms_jinga_lala 0]

you have the right attitude, and i believe you will be successful know that there is always other options. if you haven't already, i still recommend reading the pinned topic on the MENA forums. if you post on there, someone who has been through this will answer. especially kiyah. she is the best. she went through this and is willing to help any and everyone. also i contacted marc ellis. he is on here as ellis-island. he is a great attorney who has helped many get through this. although i did not retain him, he did answer general questions. i know many people on here have retained them, and they are all with their SOs today. keep up the fight

Thank you. I will go post on there now. I'm not sure what to ask a lawyer. I really can't think straight and I don't know where we went wrong. I planned for every red flag I could. I put letters in the package explaining everything in full detail that I thought could cause any kind of doubt or questions. I emailed them, I called them. I wasn't naive enough to think that they were going to say something about the divorce and kids. My fiance knows everything about my previous marriage and all details associated with the divorce and after-divorce. We weren't engaged when I got divorced, we weren't making wedding plans at that time. I even addressed the issue of why I haven't made multiple trips to India, none of that mattered.

At any point will I find out why they denied him? I need something better than that they didn't think our relationship was real. I even supplied proof of our parents exchanging gifts. If it wasn't real, why would they exchange gifts (and they did that more than just at the ring ceremony, it's been an ongoing thing). I supplied proof of my phone calls to his family members - most of which do not speak any English. I detailed my learning of their language. He even gave the consular officer permission to talk to his parents who were with him there.

This just makes me think. If we as Americans are fighting for better treatment for prisoners of war, why the hell are we allowing law abiding citizens to be treated like this? It's just wrong.

[SuperDuper! 230]

Letters and emails to senators are ok, presuming the senator's office decides to do anything for you. Presumably, two of the senators you wrote to are the senators representing your state. Don't be surprised if the other two politely refuse to do anything for you, and refer you to the offices of your state's senators.

Consulates and embassies are under the Department of State. You can try sending an email to DoS, as well as the office of the Secretary of State, Ms. Clinton. If you can get her office to take a personal interest in your case, then you should get some very fast action.

I don't mean to be callous, but good luck getting anywhere with this. Many consulates use similar tactics to try to uncover visa fraud, and these tactics pale in comparison to a Stokes interview, which is a tactic used by consulates as well as USCIS. A Stokes interview lasts for hours, involves both the US citizen sponsor and the foreign beneficiary/immigrant, and is comparable to the interrogation of a terrorist suspect (without the rubber hoses and waterboarding). It's brutally severe, and perfectly legal. While it's the stated policy of many consulates to treat applicants with courtesy and respect, the truth is that they often do not when visa fraud is suspected. In spite of tens of thousands of complaints, nothing has changed.

Anyway, it never hurts to have a senator on your side, and it can result in breaking down roadblocks set up by the consulate.

Good luck!

So the OP thinks she gets a special privilege and big guns intervening for her just because CO was rude? Wow. Welcome to the real world!

[Twisted K 2]

honestly, it is not likely to find out the real reason for a denial, as the COs are not obligated to tell you. you will just have to go through every detail of the interview. yes, it is very common for them to have their minds made up before the interview. in 2008 when my then fiance was interviewed, they already had his 221g ready requesting the additional information. it was because of this 221g that we were able to figure out they were denying us for the lack of relationship evidence (which we really didn't have a lot back then). so when i filed for the cr1, i went into overkill on the evidence department. and this time, i am proud to say, they have told us over and over (embassy and DOS) that they do not need anything else from us.

some people have applied for freedom of information act (FOIA) and the ones i have talked to all said it was a waste of time, as it takes several months to get an answer back. you can try to get your senators to find out, but as was stated earlier, immigration is not subject to the legislative branch.

[ms_jinga_lala 0]

So the OP thinks she gets a special privilege and big guns intervening for her just because CO was rude? Wow. Welcome to the real world!

No...actually I think I they are worth asking for because I'm not going to roll over and die and I'm not afraid to ask for their help. This is the real world where some people don't give up and keep going no matter what. The CO was not just rude, he was unprofessional and unethical. As an American citizen I have a voice and I'm not afraid to use it unlike the people who just b*tch and groan and choose to do nothing.