Former K1 fiancées that didn’t marry my groom and left US.

[Augustajim 0]

No Kidding!

Is the guy less of a rat because of the date of a law?

Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

What difference in the world does that make? None!

The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.

[Augustajim 0]

The guy has filed three petitions in X# of years. There are real issues with him.

Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

What difference in the world does that make? None!

The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.

It makes a difference because the jerk lawyer that advised the USC to lie also probably didnt tell him about the IMBRA law. And for your info. there was only ONE previous approved petition and the reason most hire a lawyer is so they dont have to do "research" on their own. It doesnt make her guy a sneaky criminal as most have tagged him as.....it makes him lucky to have a gal who will find the facts so they can fire this idiot lawyer steering them in the wrong direction.

[Augustajim 0]

Great Advice! next question? why are are these women bailing on this guy?

Um, did I miss the part where the OP mentioned he got DIVORCED after he married one who promptly bailed the country (and I'm guessing the marriage) after failing to get a green card?

If you are in love and you go through with this process, I think you are one of the few situations where people here would urge you to retain a QUALIFIED attorney because you are going to have A LOT of convincing to do. A K1, a marriage to someone here on another kind of visa who bailed (no mention of attempt at a K3), there's lots of stuff here that might set off an adjudicator's fraud-detection instinct.

So, read the hell up on the basic instructions on the forms. Apply basic rules of language interpretation (ie: if it says tell us if you filed a petition in the past then TELL THEM). Then seek marriage counseling when you are together to see if it's right. Then find a really good attorney. Then file your paperwork. Then prepare to wait a long, long time. Best of luck.

Oh - make sure he's divorced.

[Caladan 19]

I abhor the (very natural and understandable) tendency of VJ to pronounce with authority the status of someone's relationship from a short post. (And honestly, if you were looking to snooker in a foreign bride for nefarious purposes, would you be looking for an Israeli?)

In any case, read up on the IMBRA forum, and in the instructions to the I-129F about the waiver; there's a few examples in the IMBRA forum, but it's basically just a letter explaining why he's needing to file another K-1. It isn't an automatic denial; I expect they're checking for patterns or for someone using the K-1 as a 'getting to know you visa' or for more nefarious purposes.

Don't lie. If I understand what you're saying, your fiancé had a fiancée come over on a K-1 and leave; then he married a woman here on a J-1, and she left. The first one is required to be declared on the I-129F; the second one has to be declared because it was a marriage, and there's going to need to be a proof of a divorce. So you can't hide them.

You may have other problems in your relationship, but I'm going to guess you're in a better position to see it than the rest of us.

[Augustajim 0]

I do not believe I ever questioned the status of the relationship. I believe I stated that there are many red flags and that this man appears to be a player. It is 100% the responsibility of the OP to determine the sincerity of her fiance. I believe that I was pointing out observations that I had made from the posting. I never stated his intentions as nefarious.

Good word usage on your part.

I abhor the (very natural and understandable) tendency of VJ to pronounce with authority the status of someone's relationship from a short post. (And honestly, if you were looking to snooker in a foreign bride for nefarious purposes, would you be looking for an Israeli?)

[DA BOMB 1]

"No Kidding!

Is the guy less of a rat because of the date of a law?"

Im shocked the admins of this site dont give you and others a stiff warning for this personal attack on the OPs fiance. Why do you find it necessary to ridicule and name call? The OP comes on here asking a sincere question and the next thing you know her man is getting bashed for being a "rat" and others are telling her to run fast in the opposit direction.

[RichardS 0]

Personally I think it's best to answer truthfully on the ALL applications. Why give USICS (or anyone) anything to pick apart as they "may discover it" later in the process.

Try sending a PM to HUSKERKIEV ... he once was an adjudicator in Nebraska SC and he can tell you waht they look for on various internal USCIS websites.

Good luck!

[DA BOMB 1]

"I do not believe I ever questioned the status of the relationship."

No, you just insulted her by calling her man a rat. Then again...saying "there are real issues with him". Do you actually have any advice about her petition? Evidentally you would rather jump on the bash wagon instead of reading the original post because you're under the impression that the fiance has filed THREE past petitions when in fact there was only ONE. Perhaps you could calm down the insults against someone you've decidedly labeled a rat after two paragraphs that you never took the time to read.

[TimsDaisy 0]

I don't think "ridicule" is the applicable word here. And she asked a sincere question and got, quite likely, a lot of sincere answers - just because they weren't warm and fuzzy, doesn't mean they don't come from a place of genuine concern.

The implication from the OP's original post and subsequent post is that she didn't know he HAD BEEN MARRIED before. That's the kind of fact I find important - and I think I'd find it important even if I werent' facing a protracted immigration process. So people here are going to raise a few eyebrows and call out behavior based on the information they are given. If the OP doesn't like the responses, he/she is always free to take or leave them as they see fit.

Oh and - again, we still have no confirmation that this guy is actually divorced from the girl he married who skipped town. That's a pretty important fact that can make this entire discussion completely pointless.

Edited February 26, 2007 by TimsDaisy

[payxibka 10,048]

"Do you actually have any advice about her petition?

Do you? It might be best if you follow your own advice rather than throw out all these gratuitous posts.

[DA BOMB 1]

Question from petition 11, I-129F:"Have you ever filed for this or any other alien fiance(е) or husband/wife before?"

My question is, should or shouldn’t we show that my fiancé already filled the K1 before and brought a bride to USA, that afterwards left before 90 days were over?

The two different lawyers that we asked about that matter, each gave us different information:

The first one suggested: we should definitely show, and on top of that, we should show the proof that she did leave USA.

The second one said: since the marriage did not happen, and the 90 day law was not broken, and mainly- no documents were filled in order to get the Green Card, so it will just delay our case for several more months.

I personally think that we should show that, because I’m concerned that the officers will see that he filled for another K1 in past anyway, write it or not.

My fiancé thou, thinks that I am not familiar with the American system and if no rules were broken with the last K1, we shouldn’t refer to it.

YES ! Tell your fiance you will run into problems if you dont list that information. IMBRA laws require that you file a waiver request if this past approved petition was within the past two years of filing this one. If it wasnt filed within the two years there's a good chance they will find that information when they do checks.

Yeah...this was my advice at the beginning of this snowball of a thread.

[payxibka 10,048]

Question from petition 11, I-129F:"Have you ever filed for this or any other alien fiance(е) or husband/wife before?"

My question is, should or shouldn’t we show that my fiancé already filled the K1 before and brought a bride to USA, that afterwards left before 90 days were over?

The two different lawyers that we asked about that matter, each gave us different information:

The first one suggested: we should definitely show, and on top of that, we should show the proof that she did leave USA.

The second one said: since the marriage did not happen, and the 90 day law was not broken, and mainly- no documents were filled in order to get the Green Card, so it will just delay our case for several more months.

I personally think that we should show that, because I’m concerned that the officers will see that he filled for another K1 in past anyway, write it or not.

My fiancé thou, thinks that I am not familiar with the American system and if no rules were broken with the last K1, we shouldn’t refer to it.

YES ! Tell your fiance you will run into problems if you dont list that information. IMBRA laws require that you file a waiver request if this past approved petition was within the past two years of filing this one. If it wasnt filed within the two years there's a good chance they will find that information when they do checks.

Yeah...this was my advice at the beginning of this snowball of a thread.

So two days ago you suggested a reasonable advice or course of action, very good..... Since then is it fair to say you have only added fuel to the "snowball"?

[DA BOMB 1]

I don't think "ridicule" is the applicable word here. And she asked a sincere question and got, quite likely, a lot of sincere answers - just because they weren't warm and fuzzy, doesn't mean they don't come from a place of genuine concern.

The implication from the OP's original post and subsequent post is that she didn't know he HAD BEEN MARRIED before. That's the kind of fact I find important - and I think I'd find it important even if I werent' facing a protracted immigration process. So people here are going to raise a few eyebrows and call out behavior based on the information they are given. If the OP doesn't like the responses, he/she is always free to take or leave them as they see fit.

Oh and - again, we still have no confirmation that this guy is actually divorced from the girl he married who skipped town. That's a pretty important fact that can make this entire discussion completely pointless.

How do you figure calling the fiance a "rat" comes from a genuine place of concern? That seems to be the problem with some of the advice on here. Her question was basically whether or not to divulge past petition/marriage information on the new petition. Not whether or not her man was a sneak, a cheat, a rat, or whether his actions would "raise VJers eyebrows". To tell her to run in the opposit direction is completely irrelevent and her relationship with him is not our business. Yes if he's not divorced that would make the discussion pertaining to her question pointless, but the fact that advice givers have crossed the line still stands.

[DA BOMB 1]

So two days ago you suggested a reasonable advice or course of action, very good..... Since then is it fair to say you have only added fuel to the "snowball"?

Its not my nature to sit back and let people get insulted for asking a simple question - then to defend that action from those same people is to be expected. Im entitled to my opinion as are the people who call the OPs fiance suspicious. You neglected to see how I gave my input sticking to the subject of the petition...perhaps you should reread all the posts to better understand how it got to this point.

Edited February 26, 2007 by MRS BILLY BONG

[TimsDaisy 0]

Nothing you said there makes sense. I didn't call him a rat, that I can recall, but if others did, I don't question their sincere concern for this girl getting mixed up with a guy who - from her own posts - didn't inform her of PAST MARRIAGES which were also to non-USCs. I think that's a serious omission on his part. Again, based on the information she provided.

And a question on whether or not to tell the truth on government forms? How would that NOT raise eyebrows. It's an innocent question from the OP, but since she also told us the USC had filed a petition before and BEEN MARRIED before, then we are going to naturally wonder why this guy doesn't know better already.

She made her relationship our business when she posted here in the way she did.

Again, if she's mature enough to consent to marriage, then she's mature enough to evaluate information and advice offered here and take or reject it as she sees fit. Or she can stop reading.

I haven't seen any censorship yet on this board, no undue editing by the admins, and I wouldn't expect to see any since it would violate the marketplace-of-ideas concept that is the bedrock of both America and the internet generally.