Didn’t tell interviewer at naturalization interview about marriage

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

24 minutes ago, Beto75 said:

Material facts are those that if known or disclosed would change the decision or outcome of the procedure. For example if you were getting a green card as an "unmarried son or daughter" and you withheld information about a marriage it would indeed be a material fact concealment and therefore fraud. However if you naturalize based on 5 years as a PR then it wouldn't be material. 

It would certainly be material if it changes the answer to "have you ever been married to more than one person at the same time", which has been implied as a possible outcome based on OP's past posts.  OP has provided no explanation for the deliberate falsehood however.

[coloradoman 32]

On 10/24/2018 at 1:00 PM, Realhelpneeded said:

Aaron if you have no advice to give please don’t respond to my tread .... people come here to get advice from other people not to be ridiculed so you please don’t 

On what basis are you asking Aaron to not respond to this thread? Do you not support the Constitution, specifically the freedom of speech? And if so, did you also not disclose that to your interviewer?

 

I have zero tolerance for a person that wants to become a citizen, lies under oath, gets all defensive when people take the time to read through her post and try to ascertain what the reason for the lie was, and tells people to shut up if they’re not telling her what she wants to hear. Way to start your life as a USC and proving your good moral character!

 

As for the issue at hand, your naturalization certificate will state that you’re not married. And once you file for your husband and need to enclose your marriage certificate along with your naturalization certificate, it won’t be hard to predict that an officer is likely to detect your false statement. And then you’re on the path to de-naturalization. 

 

Of course you don’t want to hear all that, because it’s inconvenient to hear. But the truth is that you lied under oath at your interview, and even signed your name underneath it. In court that’s called perjury and might yield you jail time. 

 

Sorry if you don’t care for my post either, but if you want advice, call USCIS and tell them that you got married and misrepresented that fact at your interview. Plain and simple. Or become a USC based on a lie and pray every single day that the officer who adjudicates your petition for your husband won’t stumble over that inconsistency. 

 

Good luck 👍🏻 

[Beto75 5]

11 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

It would certainly be material if it changes the answer to "have you ever been married to more than one person at the same time", which has been implied as a possible outcome based on OP's past posts.  OP has provided no explanation for the deliberate falsehood however.

Ah. Then yes. Bigamy is a specified bar to naturalization. 

 

Bottom of the story. Don't lie. It's fraud and should get you in trouble in the near or the short term. If you lie, it is wrong. Dont expect sympathy from others and don't proclaim knowledge of it the internet. 

 

The Material facts are more related to the: have you ever commited a crime and not been arrested or charged. And you may have jaywalked that very morning, or sped over the limit without being pulled over and failed/forgot to disclose. Its not material. Now if you comitted arson or bigamy.... That's a different story. 

 

Marriage.... It's kind of hard to believe you forgot. 

[Ketsuban 1,034]

On 11/2/2018 at 7:08 PM, coloradoman said:

On what basis are you asking Aaron to not respond to this thread? Do you not support the Constitution, specifically the freedom of speech? And if so, did you also not disclose that to your interviewer?

 

I have zero tolerance for a person that wants to become a citizen, lies under oath, gets all defensive when people take the time to read through her post and try to ascertain what the reason for the lie was, and tells people to shut up if they’re not telling her what she wants to hear. Way to start your life as a USC and proving your good moral character!

 

As for the issue at hand, your naturalization certificate will state that you’re not married. And once you file for your husband and need to enclose your marriage certificate along with your naturalization certificate, it won’t be hard to predict that an officer is likely to detect your false statement. And then you’re on the path to de-naturalization. 

 

Of course you don’t want to hear all that, because it’s inconvenient to hear. But the truth is that you lied under oath at your interview, and even signed your name underneath it. In court that’s called perjury and might yield you jail time. 

 

Sorry if you don’t care for my post either, but if you want advice, call USCIS and tell them that you got married and misrepresented that fact at your interview. Plain and simple. Or become a USC based on a lie and pray every single day that the officer who adjudicates your petition for your husband won’t stumble over that inconsistency. 

 

Good luck 👍🏻 

To be fair, freedom of speech is more about the government silencing people. That's why threads here can be closed, Twitter can suspend accounts and you can tell your friends/family/checkout assistant to shut up and not be in violation of the constitution. Unless OP is the government trying to silence Aaron then I think his rights are safe. Still not very nice though considering he was just trying to understand the situation.

[Villanelle 4,121]

TOS allows any member to post in any thread any content they want as long as it does not violate any of the other VJ TOS. Its that simple. So lets all try to stay on topic and not bother the mods.. The OP hasnt been on for a few days now so hopefully they will be on soon.

[Realhelpneeded 1]

On 10/23/2018 at 12:32 PM, Realhelpneeded said:

I applied for naturalization in April 2017 finally got my interview two weeks . I got married in August 2017 . I didn’t mentioned that I did because I didn’t have my marriage certificate yet . I take my oath soon how will this affect my husband application when I am ready to file for him .

Just an update for anyone that maybe concern . I had an appointment through infopass and spoke to someone. I was still granted my citizenship because of the fact it was not gained through marriage. I worked paid my taxes and was a good citizen for the last ten years in this country . Therefore I’m sorry to disappoint many of you that responded to this tread that was hoping I got denaturalized . Thanks to everyone that inbox me words of encouragement. I appreciate your help because with your awesome advice I was able to make the right steps ! Thank you ....

 

[Going through 5,668]

7 hours ago, Realhelpneeded said:

Just an update for anyone that maybe concern . I had an appointment through infopass and spoke to someone. I was still granted my citizenship because of the fact it was not gained through marriage. I worked paid my taxes and was a good citizen for the last ten years in this country . Therefore I’m sorry to disappoint many of you that responded to this tread that was hoping I got denaturalized . Thanks to everyone that inbox me words of encouragement. I appreciate your help because with your awesome advice I was able to make the right steps ! Thank you ....

 

The issue wasn't so much of your naturalizing (congrats by the way), because it wasn't a material misrepresentation to the N400... as mentioned in this thread, the issue might come about when you sponsor your husband after claiming you were single (as you questioned if that would be a problem in your first post), and the marriage certificate compared to the info on your N400/naturalization certificate could become material misrepresentation then---unless your naturalization certificate was changed to reflect your marital status when you took your oath?

[Prawninator 138]

I'm confused, whether or not it was relevant to them being granted citizenship, didn't they commit perjury? I had to swear an oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth before my interview.

[Villanelle 4,121]

2 hours ago, Prawninator said:

I'm confused, whether or not it was relevant to them being granted citizenship, didn't they commit perjury? I had to swear an oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth before my interview.

Yes.

 

Since this thread is such a unique situation and I suspect it will be referred to in the future I want to point out a few things for the 'record'. 

 

Clearly English is not the OPs native language. When dealing with immigration matters words matter. One small word can totally change the entire situation. Many of the responses here are based on what the OP wrote- and I suspect somethings got lost in translation so to speak. 

Below is the OPs postings along with my interpretation of what she meant to say that would explain how this ended the way it did.

 

I applied for naturalization in April 2017 finally got my interview two weeks . I got married in August 2017 . I didn’t mentioned that I did because I didn’t have my marriage certificate yet . I take my oath soon how will this affect my husband application when I am ready to file for him .

 She applied for naturalization Apr '17 when she was single, so she filled out the n-400 properly- as single. She then says got my interview 2 weeks- which she later clarified meant 2 weeks ago. Then she states she was married (future post says it was overseas) in Aug '17. Her final sentence- which is what caused the thread to go the way it did- seems to read she didnt mention she did (marry) because she didnt have a marriage certificate. Now everyone here assumed she meant she didnt mention she was married AT THE INTERVIEW- I believe she means she didnt mention it on the n-400 she filed as single.

 

I had my interview two weeks ago and I said I was single . I didn’t file for my husband yet because he has an obligation with work that he can not get out (contract)

She had her interview 2 weeks ago - and then she says 'I said I was single' but again does not specify if she said this in the interview or is referring to her n-400 application filled out as single. She then goes on to explain she hasnt filed any paperwork for her spouse because of whatever. Not relevant.

 

Just an update for anyone that maybe concern . I had an appointment through infopass and spoke to someone. I was still granted my citizenship because of the fact it was not gained through marriage. I worked paid my taxes and was a good citizen for the last ten years in this country . Therefore I’m sorry to disappoint many of you that responded to this tread that was hoping I got denaturalized . Thanks to everyone that inbox me words of encouragement. I appreciate your help...

I have to assume she explained her concerns to infopass and they were able to understand her and provided correct info. (I know I know). She specifically states they told her that her citizenship was not gained through marriage so its ok that shes married. The only way this makes sense as the answer they gave her is if she had concerns about still being eligible now that she is married. I didnt quote it above but she posted that she got LPR status through her dad and as everyone knows there are various requirements for those kinds of situations- ie married child vs unmarried child. Marital status in those situations can cause your originally accurately filed petition to no longer be valid. So I suspect she had concerns that the same applied to n-400, which it does not.  

The OP would have to post back specifically if she actually stated in the n-400 interview that she was not married. I suspect she didnt therefore there was no perjury or misrep and users responses here was based on misunderstanding due to language.

[Boiler 43,438]

I understand you are8i,[[[ required to reaffirm that the information you supplied in your application is still trues etc.

[Villanelle 4,121]

^ I believe the same. However I can not come up with any other explanation for what infopass told her. And I cant believe she went to infopass and directly told them she lied in her interview and they were OK with it, so there has to be something more. 

[Boiler 43,438]

Depends exactly what was asked.

[Prawninator 138]

If what you say is true, @Damara, then that makes a whole lot more sense. My concern is chronology. Here's the timeline from what I understand.

1. Applied for N400
2. Got married
3. Had Interview, said NOT married
4. Oath-taking ceremony questionnaire stating married (does it ask when?)

 

Why didn't they just say that they got married after submitting the application and before the interview? It wouldn't have affected anything if they applied with the 5 year rule. By saying they're not married at the time when they were, would be perjury, plain and simple.

But then again if they had been cleared w/infopass too, maybe it was indeed all just a linguistic misunderstanding, and I guess asking "why" now is a little pointless. 🙃

[Villanelle 4,121]

@Prawninator  Honestly I was hesitant to post what I did since its all speculation. But I thought about it a bit and just felt leaving the thread as it was with no hypothetical how can this happen explanation would be worse then being called out on posting speculation. Often times strange things happen in cases- it generates attention and sticks in peoples minds. It then gets quoted around 'well there was that case where she lied and it was ok, so go ahead and lie'

 

There is also the possibility that due to the suspected language issue/misuse of words- the Officer did not understand her responses or statements accurately (interview and/or infopass). 

Such as- she goes to infopass and gets to the window and says she has a question. The worker does not pull up her case. Her question is focused on her concerns - being able to petition for her spouse and losing her citizenship. She says to the Officer something the Officer hears as how she is LPR through parent and has her oath scheduled soon and got married but she was single when she filed and how shes worried they will take her citizenship away. It would then be a perfectly acceptable response for the Officer to say she was  "granted (her) citizenship because of the fact it was not gained through marriage" (that there is no issue with marriage based petition in the future); and her use of the word 'still' referring to the fact that getting married would not itself cause an eligibility issue for naturalization- so she can still remain in the n-400 process.

An alternate explanation would be to take her words literally- which I am hesitant to do- and look at her vague statement of 'I talked to someone' was actually more then what we automatically assume-- that she actually went into an office and sat down with an Officer or supervisor and somehow was able to explain to them that she married after filing and 'made a mistake' in the interview and they were OK with it and told her she can still would still be granted her citizenship because she has shown GMC (taxes, good citizen) and her n-400 was not based on marriage so it wasnt like she married a USC, divorced, got citizenship and was going to petition someone from back home. 

If that was the case she was extremely lucky. One can only hope this exchange was documented in her file in a way that it wont cause a future issue. I do not know if an Officer has the authority to forgive and correct an admitted lie under oath but it seems unlikely. Those types of findings usually are only done by a Judge. 

 

I would love it if the OP comes back and explains in more detail exactly what happened in the interview and at infopass. Perhaps one of the members she referenced, the ones that messaged her with support, will reach out to her and encourage her to post again if they are still in contact. She may not want to come back here- and thats fine- the overall response she got was negative but thats to be expected when you post that you lied under oath in your interview. Regardless of any language misinterpretation- thats what she posted, so those were the responses she got.

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

People have relied on being told things in person at infopass appointments to their peril. I know someone who was told at infopass that their DV visa application could get approved after fiscal year end as long as it was submitted before, which is complete nonsense. It’s unclear to me why infopass staff are not better trained, but that’s another issue. I do hope OP doesn’t run into any obstacles trying to sponsor her husband, which as I understood it was her main concern in starting the thread.