So Lets Shaft Our Farmers.....
News2 mins ago
For Buenchico (Chris)...............
5 Answers
Thanks for the reply you gave to my query about chips in passports. You seem to be very informed about these things so how do you know so much about them? Do you work in this area? The reason I ask is because we were arguing about chipped passports and one person is going to the US with his family but one of them has a caution for a minor offence in 2004. At the time, the police were annoyed because they said he should have gone to hospital, not a police station, as the offence was brought on by an overdose of medicine. He says he will not declare this but thinks it might be on his new passport, which is due for re-newal in May. People have told him he must apply for a visa, but he is not going to do that, so he is going at his peril and taking a chance. I've told him this is not a good idea.
Answers
1 to 5 of 5
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Mr.Tamzarian. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
By what conceivable mechanism do you think the information could possibly get on the chip in the passport in the first place?
If you declared it on your passport application, then it could conceivably get there - but the passport doesn't ask about that sort of thing and have no legal way of finding out the information anyway.
Or does it all happen by magic?
Whether the so called 'minor offence' (a totally meaningless term in US legal speak) matters in the first place depends on what it was, not whether you think it is 'minor' or not.
If you declared it on your passport application, then it could conceivably get there - but the passport doesn't ask about that sort of thing and have no legal way of finding out the information anyway.
Or does it all happen by magic?
Whether the so called 'minor offence' (a totally meaningless term in US legal speak) matters in the first place depends on what it was, not whether you think it is 'minor' or not.
Disregard Dzug 2's ignorant answer. I presume that you are talking about the warning index scanner used by immigration to find out if there is a 'hit' on your passport. If so, then it doesnt matter whether there is a chip or not on your passport as information is checked using your name, date of birth, passport number and country code.
Anyway, only major offences would appear under WI. In addition, if this was just a caution then as it was not a conviction and therefore does not need to be declared (I am not sure if any kind of offence at all should be declared to the U.S. authorities when applying for a visa). In any event, if there HAD been a conviction, it would be spent after 5 years. I think the fountain of all knowledge, Buenchico, will be able to assist you better. Im not usually the one answering the questions, I ask them!
But as I work with visas all the time...
Anyway, only major offences would appear under WI. In addition, if this was just a caution then as it was not a conviction and therefore does not need to be declared (I am not sure if any kind of offence at all should be declared to the U.S. authorities when applying for a visa). In any event, if there HAD been a conviction, it would be spent after 5 years. I think the fountain of all knowledge, Buenchico, will be able to assist you better. Im not usually the one answering the questions, I ask them!
But as I work with visas all the time...
(2-part post):
A caution isn't a conviction so, even by the rules stated on the US embassy website (which strangely seem to be rather stricter than the regulations actually used by the US immigration service) it doesn't bar anyone from visa-free travel to the USA. However (somewhat perversely) the rules on the embassy website state that anyone who has ever been arrested for ANY offence, other than minor motoring matters, (even if completely innocent) can't use the Visa Waiver Program to enter the USA. Since the caution you refer to was probably preceded by an arrest, the person is (according to the US embassy) unable to travel without a visa.
However the actual question on the ESTA application page is this:
"Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or have been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or have been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?"
A caution isn't a conviction so, even by the rules stated on the US embassy website (which strangely seem to be rather stricter than the regulations actually used by the US immigration service) it doesn't bar anyone from visa-free travel to the USA. However (somewhat perversely) the rules on the embassy website state that anyone who has ever been arrested for ANY offence, other than minor motoring matters, (even if completely innocent) can't use the Visa Waiver Program to enter the USA. Since the caution you refer to was probably preceded by an arrest, the person is (according to the US embassy) unable to travel without a visa.
However the actual question on the ESTA application page is this:
"Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or have been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or have been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?"
Unlike the information on the embassy website, that question makes it clear that only offences of 'moral turpitude', or involving drugs, are really relevant. 'Moral turpitude' includes all offences of dishonesty (even nicking a Mars bar) but excludes most offences of violence. (The US authorities seem to regard minor shoplifting - or even an arrest for shoplifting which was later found to be totally without foundation - as far worse than beating someone up. It's a strange country!).
While I'll always exercise caution when suggesting that people should 'chance it' and travel under the Visa Waiver Program, this seems to be a suitable occasion to do so. There's absolutely no way that a chip in any UK passport could show a caution. It wouldn't even show multiple convictions for rape, murder, armed robbery and drug-smuggling. EU privacy laws prohibit the inclusion of such information within passports.
Chris
PS: No, I don't work with passports. I'm just a boring nerd who actually reads through extremely wordy EU documents, and who keeps an eye on related matters in the more serious parts of the media.
While I'll always exercise caution when suggesting that people should 'chance it' and travel under the Visa Waiver Program, this seems to be a suitable occasion to do so. There's absolutely no way that a chip in any UK passport could show a caution. It wouldn't even show multiple convictions for rape, murder, armed robbery and drug-smuggling. EU privacy laws prohibit the inclusion of such information within passports.
Chris
PS: No, I don't work with passports. I'm just a boring nerd who actually reads through extremely wordy EU documents, and who keeps an eye on related matters in the more serious parts of the media.
1 to 5 of 5
