callmeshelle

The website never resolved for me, but we received an email about picking up her passport, so it's no longer a problem for us personally.  Still not clear what is up with the website.  Before we received the email, I called the helpline on the usvisa website and they wouldn't confirm anything (they are a separate group from CEAC).

He died murdered by asphyxiation. Whats your point? 

Sigh....
 
Yet another human being was murdered by the police in a country that calls itself democratic, free and first world.  THAT is the sad part. 

I would expect a charge of murder, not manslaughter.

Second degree murder in this case, means while the individual had no premeditated intent to kill the victim, they were inflicting bodily harm with malice aforethought and knew (had the training and knowledge) that their actions could and likely would lead to the death of the victim. The fact that he also knew that the victim had stopped breathing and there were other clear bodily evidence of no signs of life and continued, as if to be sure the victim was good and dead, is particularly cruel. He showed no signs of remorse, and no signs of consciously wanting to assist or realizing his 'error'. I believe that the jury did actually weigh this heavily, and I believe the prosecution and evidence was overwhelming. Even the defense witnesses could not defend his actions. 
 
To prove the second degree murder, in the state, the prosecution only needed to show that he didn't necessarily have the intent to kill his victim, only that he killed him while committing a felony which was assault. For murder in the third, they needed to prove that his actions were dangerous and disregarded human life. I think the evidence was overwhelming in this regard. His lawyer was terrible, and the witnesses were ill-prepared and could render no real defense of reasonableness. There was no overwhelming evidence to put doubt as to what he died from and the actions that caused it. The state witnesses were thorough, well-prepared, and logical.
 
The judge did not allow Chauvin's past history of complaints against his conduct as an officer. I think that's kind of unfortunate as it goes to show this was part of a pattern of his behavior and disregard for any human life. If it hadn't happened to Floyd, it may very well have happened to another eventually. But it was not ultimately needed to prove his guilt in this matter. He knew exactly what he was doing, and did it anyway. Maybe he thought it wouldn't have killed him, but his disregard shows the depravity of mind and heart. He is a very bad person.
If it wasn't Floyd that he killed that day he would have likely killed someone else. I don't see him as a hero, only a guy that was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He had a criminal past and clearly had some issues. That didn't mean he deserved to die that way which I find to be particularly cruel. Bad cops need to be removed.

I think prosecution made a pretty clear argument that Chauvin had to be aware of the consequences of restricting oxygen to the brain for 10 minutes. That made it murder, and the jury agreed.

He murdered someone. Everyone was able to watch him murder someone. He committed murder and it was pretty obvious.

The jurors were instructed according to Minnesota state law and their definition of 2nd & 3rd degree murder.  At the end of the day, what is the difference between manslaughter and murder?

I believe if the officer had stopped kneeling on Flyod right after he passed out and tried to help him, the juror would not have convicted on 2nd degree murder charge, may be just the lower two convictions. The fact that he stayed the same way for 4 more minutes even after he passed out, even after other officer said "no pulse" could be the major factor in 2nd degree murder conviction in jurys' eyes.

Surprisingly evenhanded for Redstate! I don't disagree with it, in the sense that it's a primer on the procedural aspects of what juries do. I have nothing to say about whether cops will retire as a result of the conviction. If anything, I have been reading about how very many police officers, sheriffs and deputies have come forward to say that was not good policing under any stretch of the imagination. There is still honor in the job, and if this conviction is a reminder that officers who do not adhere to policing standards can be culpable for crimes they commit under color of law, so be it. 
 
Quite unlikely. I encourage you to read the piece in Slate I link to above. I do not condone her comments, which I think were highly unhelpful. But she does have the right to make such comments, and their import is unlikely to be such that they could have influenced any of the jurors' decisions in the circumstances they were made. It is one thing for a judge to say Chauvin has grounds for an appeal on the basis of her comments, and another to assume that they will be sufficient for a new trial to be ordered. The judge is, of course, just giving his own opinion here. It is not up to him whether an appeal is granted or not, but rather it's the role of the Court of Appeals in Minnesota.
 
Very likely incorrect. I refer you to the relevant Minnesota statute on what constitutes jury tampering in that state: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.498 It is a far, far reach to get to even third degree jury tampering. Where was the intimidation of the jurors themselves inside of her comments? Don't stretch to get there -- use a common sense, plain reading of the statute. 
 
More generally, I would remind everyone that it is very, very difficult to disturb a verdict, either through a motion for a new trial, or on appeal. On appeal, the court will likely not be looking to the facts of the case (the facts is the facts, and unless there was something glaringly wrong going on, that's not a road to go down), but to the law. Where new trials frequently happen is when the jury instructions are faulty in some way -- the law was misstated, an element of a crime or cause of action is omitted, etc. These look like technicalities but the jury instructions must be legally correct or the defendant is not afforded his or her due process. Maxine Waters' statements, while unhelpful, don't mean squat, to use a very learned legal term.

The facts show, on actual video everyone watched with their own eyes, that he murdered someone. If by public perception you mean that the public actually saw him murder someone on video and that it's impossible to think that he didn't even before hearing the testimonies in this trial, then yes, you're right.

If you, after all this you still think he's innocent, then I'm not sure you get to call anything or anyone else politically motivated.

Breonna was sleeping in her house. 
 
I find it weird how for some its all we want big guns and no social responsibility and "freedoms" and flags and to attempt coups to overthrow democratic governments with 0 consequences.
 
But when it comes to police brutality, wich is pretty much the definition of government oppression and terrorism, its ah its ok for you to be murdered by the state. 

and this is exactly what makes you a "learned non lawyer" my friend. 

Like I said before, you can define  "duress" to be any situation where you feel any pressure at all. IOW, I can say that signing the affidavit of support was under duress because if I don't do it, I can't see my love. Is there bigger pressure than love? You could say it about ANY legal document, since if you don't sign it, you won't have what you want. But DESIRE is different from DURESS. 

Duress is legally defined as 
-- https://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/duress.html
 
and
 
-- https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/duress


It's not emotion  from fearing failure of attainment
 

Not sure I would call a Netflix account a 'significant asset'.

I made a note to myself to be sure to come back here to Visa Journey to share with you all my experience with my filing of the writ of mandamus, whether the results would be good or bad, as I am hoping many of you, who were stuck like me, get the resolve you deserve. I noticed no one has documented enough about it so I'm happy to be the first.
 
My Writ of Mandamus that my lawyer filed forced the Jordanian Embassy to make a decision on our case since being stuck in AP since September 2019. It was a SUCCESS. My fiancé picked up his Visa this morning. Before I get into the process, how long it took, who I hired, etc, I will breakdown my timeline first below. 
 
I'm asking the senior and regular active members here to try to refrain from continuously sharing FALSE information about WoM. In the past several weeks I have read numerous comments from many of the senior members on other WoM posts DISCOURAGING people to move forward yet admitting to not knowing much about it or how it works.  First of all you are not lawyers. Try not discourage on a subject you don't know much about. That's what petitioners and beneficiaries should seek legal consultations for. No two WOM's are alike. Only a lawyer can tell you if you are a good candidate and hopefully, you will consult with a lawyer like mine who insisted he see the petition and hear our case before agreeing.
 
So here is my timeline and what happened with my WOM:
 
- Visa Category, K-1
- Fiance's consulate Interview was 9/8/2019 (I-129F petition filed 3/23/2018)
- Agent at window advised we need to wait for a call that would "come in shortly" and returned passport
- Numerous emails sent to the Embassy inquiring what they needed with no response
- October 31, 2019 received an email from embassy asking for proof of relationship....we sent the same exact package they returned to us 10 minutes before his interview. Only thing we added were a few more photos
- No updates or word from them until January 2020 where I saw several updates on CEAC, no communication.
- February 2020 pandemic hit, no word. AP changed to REFUSED
- Researched writ of mandamus just in case we didn't hear anything soon and in fear pandemic will drag our case
- April 2020 located the best lawyer for me with long successful track record and paid for a 30 minutes consultation. After hearing my story and seeing my case, he accepted my case.
- May 15th I started my case. 
- May 22nd my case was sent to the 8 agencies my lawyer was suing. They have 60 days to respond.
- Those 8 agencies are: USCIS,  DEPT OF STATE,  DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,  US CONSULATE AMMAN JORDAN,  SECRETARY OF THE DEPT OF DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,  THE DIRECTOR OF USCIS, SECRETARY OF STATE, CHARGE' D'affaires of the US CONSULATE AMMAN JORDAN. 
- June 29, my fiance receives a call from the US Embassy Amman asking him to update his Medical and send it in with his passport. We wait. 
- July 18, Passport is sent back to my fiance with a list of 10 questions (similar to DS-5535) and to email responses back and wait for a call. Paper states it can take 2-6 weeks.
- July 18 also, US Attorney emails my lawyer and asks for a 60 day extension since its close to deadline. Judge also grants it. 
- July 23, I email the responses to the 10 questions to Embassy.
- August 26, Embassy calls my fiance back to resend his passport again
- September 2, my lawyer receives an email from the US Attorney advising him that the Visa has been issued and CEAC status changes an hour later to "ISSUED"
- September 3, my fiance tracks the tracking number and sees Visa is already at Aramex and goes picks it up.
 
It took a total of about 3 1/2 months from the time they were served to finish. Definitely worth it. I have read some members giving incorrect information that the WoM could cost around $15,000 and read other outrageous numbers. It does not. I checked numerous lawyers before hiring mine and have received quotes anywhere from $4000 to $8000. Definitely have not heard more. I paid for my consultation which was then applied towards my WoM.  My lawyer charged me on the lower end than most.  I hired Jim Hacking of The Hacking Law Firm. I would only recommend him. 
 
Please feel free to message me if you have any questions. Wishing you all love and happiness! 
 
 

yes I will do. and I joined the round 2 milligan vs pompeo lawsuit.

thanks, we filed in october 2019. so its been a long wait 

Congratulations ☺🎉🎉🎉
 

I was missing a document for the interview i had on the 23rd of march, and so was approved but received a 221g refusal until I sent the document in. They received it on Monday the 29th, and my case status changed from refused to administrative processing on the Tuesday. Then today, the 1st of April, my status now says issued:) this is london embassy btw

I just got my interview date🎊🎊🎊🎊

I joined the Milligan 3rd lawsuit too. Interview set for next week March 24

I joined a lawsuit, 3rd round, we have an interview for June 1st. 

Hello all! 
 
My fiancé and I finally have an interview scheduled in Colombia April 8th. We just found out yesterday and we are super excited, but now scrambling over the next two weeks to make sure we are ready. I can’t wait to see him in just a few weeks, and soon he will be here 🥰
 
Stay patient everyone! The waiting is so hard but it will be worth it in the end. 

Hi VJ members,
 
I am new to this platform so please excuse any errors or lack of info.
 
Case-My fiancé is 7 years older than me and she has 5 children. She is widowed and her late husband was helping the afg govt against the Taliban when a suicide bomber killed him and others. We met as we are related and I fell in love with her resilience and faith.
 
Formal engagement through family and visit to afg. Proof with Pictures and flight provided. All cultural formalities were completed related to the norms and customs of the country
 
First interview was smooth March of 2020 with an American consular and translator. 4-5 general questions and answers were given.  Was sent to AP due to medical examination needed for all of them. Medical exams completed and passports given back to embassy and sent over and then in AP for almost a year.
 
Second interview was yesterday and it was terrible. This time it was an Afghan Consular who asked for 10 phone numbers of relatives and called each one because they were suspicious of her late husbands death and children's ages. For some reason, they were convinced that one of her daughters is much older than her age and is married. Specifically telling her she was 4 or maybe 5 years older (very strange).. They asked my fiancé to swear on her daughters life and said they would conduct a physical to see if she was a virgin. She told them they could conduct any physical they needed at any hospital and that they would see she is not married. They went to the extent of telling her to sign a statement that she lied about her children's ages and the documents were fake and if she did they would approve her case on the spot because she admitted her lie and was honest. Obviously she did not sign it and firmly stood her ground. 
 
Everyone they called also confirmed the death of her late husband and children. There were also death certificates and several news articles provided.  Its also strange because they all have passports they submitted which is not something that is fake..
 
They separated the children as well and kept asking the daughter to admit that she was married. They went in to her room and told her that her mother just admitted that she was married and that she should confess, to which she replied, "why would my mother lie, I am not married I do not believe you." My fiancé had never said that.
 
They then asked the children how they identified their fathers remains after the explosions and if he was in a pieces or whole.. at this point one daughter cried and said, "how dare you ask me that type of question, do you have no heart." and then the consular apologized and moved on.
 
My fiancé along with her children answered all of the questions the same and all of them were obviously upset and humiliated.
 
After persistently interrogating all of them, and my fiances refusal to sign the statement, they simply said.. the interview is complete.. no rejection or approval. Passports were not given back.
 
I am still in absolute shock and at this point I am not sure if I should withdraw the application and go get married, or hire a lawyer. I wish I could do something about the treatment but no surprise when the second interview consular is a cruel local afghan man.
 
I did know the age gap would be brought into question but did not think it would be so offensive and humiliating for them to experience this.
 
Has anyone experienced something like this with a second interview for Kabul Embassy?

Except for me and my fiancee being in the first round of plaintiffs from a non-travel banned country and we are getting married this Thursday.