Prince Harry's visa application

Oops sorry posted on wrong thread

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Here we are in case anyone is considering applying to enter the USA:

unlock.org.uk/advice/identifying-whether-my-offence-is-a-crime-involving-moral-turpitude-cimt/

Same same, sorry !

Siope - thanks for your interesting comments. It confirms my belief that America truly is a foreign country.
Moral Turpitude - a despot’s dream. I bet the Taliban would find many uses and abuses for this

A lifetime ago, I worked in a US legal support centre, which provided resources and advice for people who couldn’t afford attorneys and were having to represent themselves in court. If anyone came in with a moral turpitude query, I’d hide under my desk. Actually I’d make the excuse that we don’t have it in my country, but the truth is I didn’t understand it then, and I don’t understand it now. It varies (inevitably) by State, but also by the area of law it’s being applied to - so it can be differently applied to immigration than to employment, for example - because it has to reflect how society regards depravity in different contexts. Generally though, corrupting a child, child abandonment that leads to bad things, prostitution, and killing people are definitely in there.

I remember a while ago when entering the US foreign nationals had to fill out some sort of disembarkation form aboard the aircraft and one of the questions was something along the lines of "have you been involved in any moral turpitude?" , "couldn't say, no idea what that would involve, sounds serious though" we were tempted to put on the form, but of course we didn't, none the wiser, we just stated "no" and that was a question posed to visitors

Thank you Siope

Once again, confirming previous drug use does not automatically exclude someone from getting a residential US visa. It’s not like getting an ESTA, where a machine reads the answers - it’s one question in a very very long form (if memory serves me right, about 50 pages) which is read by humans, and which is followed by a fairly lengthy interview with an immigration officer who has a great deal of autonomy in making the decision. The issue is whether one is guilty of moral turpitude (which doesn’t even have a formal definition, but equates roughly to ‘is your behaviour so degenerate it would scandalise most people’. I doubt that’s true of casual drug use, tbh. And, even if it was, it is permitted to apply for a waiver which means the behaviour causing a visa block can be ignored.

It could become more of an issue when/if a Green Card application was made, but there are plenty of examples to show that it often isn’t.

My guess would be that Harry and Meghan had the sense (and the wherewithal) to use a seriously good immigration lawyer, who would have guided them through the necessary hoops.

Rosie51

Callistemon21

Summerlove

Do they release regular citizens immigration applications? Why this one?

Yes, my question too?

Surely there must be a data protection law against this?

The application is being released to a judge, to be viewed solely by him. It won't be for public consumption. The reality is one of three scenarios.

1. Harry lied in his book about his cocaine use
2. Harry was honest about his cocaine use on his visa application and enjoyed special treatment (ie it was disregarded)
3. Harry lied on his application and didn't disclose his cocaine use.

I'm not sure if the public will ever find out which one is fact.

As I posted earlier the question n the form is Are you or have you ever been a drug abuser or addict?
It is possible to argue that occasional use constitutes neither of those things, so "No" can be the answer even if there has been some experimentation with drugs.

I truly believe the info will,not be released

Callistemon21

Summerlove

Do they release regular citizens immigration applications? Why this one?

Yes, my question too?

Surely there must be a data protection law against this?

The application is being released to a judge, to be viewed solely by him. It won't be for public consumption. The reality is one of three scenarios.

1. Harry lied in his book about his cocaine use
2. Harry was honest about his cocaine use on his visa application and enjoyed special treatment (ie it was disregarded)
3. Harry lied on his application and didn't disclose his cocaine use.

I'm not sure if the public will ever find out which one is fact.

Smileless2012

They might be now, but they weren't doing so before were they and the money made in the back of trashing H's family goes some way to financing to their life style doesn't it.

As a child, he was “easily cowed by the forceful personality of his father,” whose rebukes for “a deficiency in behaviour or attitude… easily drew tears.”

Friends who spoke with his permission also described the father as “belittling” and even “bullying” to his son. He was less harsh about his mother, whom he dubbed “not indifferent so much as detached.”

At age 20, He was asked whether his father had been a “tough disciplinarian” and if he had been told “to sit down and shut up,” he replied: “The whole time, yes.”

I've taken the names out of these pieces, but I think you will agree they are critical of family.
They are of course remarks by Charles

Harry is "Following in father's footsteps"

Anniebach

The late Queen had 4 children,8 grandchildren, only one has
claimed she telephoned them after her husband’s death, same
one and only one who,told the world what he said to his grandmother’s body shortly after her death,

Are you saying people shouldn't be permitted free speech Anniebach?

The late Queen had 4 children,8 grandchildren, only one has
claimed she telephoned them after her husband’s death, same
one and only one who,told the world what he said to his grandmother’s body shortly after her death,

They might be now, but they weren't doing so before were they and the money made in the back of trashing H's family goes some way to financing to their life style doesn't it.

Stop telling untruths

Smileless2012

Maybe there are some things that some posters would love to say to someone in their own family but that's not what H & M have done is it. They've done so publicly with the Oprah interview, with H's book and with various mouthpieces.

Most families row, fall out, make up swear they'll never do it again and just carry on if only H & M could.

I think you've missed something-they are. Raising two kids and supporting charities and causes. What else should they do?

Maybe there are some things that some posters would love to say to someone in their own family but that's not what H & M have done is it. They've done so publicly with the Oprah interview, with H's book and with various mouthpieces.

Most families row, fall out, make up swear they'll never do it again and just carry on if only H & M could.

eazybee

It is the way they have behaved in their family relationships, which is the same as everyone else's, despite being royal: father, mother, step parents, siblings, aunts and uncles.
Harry and Meghan are rude in public; William and Catherine may be so in private (I don't know) but have never expressed any criticism of their family in public.
Th criticism of MM and H is not abuse, it is justified criticism of their poor behaviour, which anyone is entitled to express. It never seems to occur to them that they are responsible for their unpopularity.

OMG the Royal PR machine's "they are just like any other family". has been swallowed whole and regurgitated.
Firstly -no they are not (unless maybe other families all curtsey to senior members and have a strict pecking order)
Secondly if they are, all families have disagreements, but usually there isn't a PR team standing next to it trying to ensure that their particular family member comes out best. Most families row, fall out, make up, swear they will never do it again and just carry on.

I do wonder though if all the ire aimed at Meghan and Harry is really something some posters would love to say to someone in their own family. It does seem intensely personal sometimes.

It is the way they have behaved in their family relationships, which is the same as everyone else's, despite being royal: father, mother, step parents, siblings, aunts and uncles.
Harry and Meghan are rude in public; William and Catherine may be so in private (I don't know) but have never expressed any criticism of their family in public.
Th criticism of MM and H is not abuse, it is justified criticism of their poor behaviour, which anyone is entitled to express. It never seems to occur to them that they are responsible for their unpopularity.

He said in his book he'd used cocaine

Allsorts

I do hope this doesn't mean we have to have them though, knowing what he thinks of Uk and of course dislike of family. Megan can gave all the gurus she likes but she needs to look at herself, at odds with all members of family, consider just maybe not everyone is in the wrong.

Normal people would be at odds with family who try to profit off of spreading their personal business and bashing them in the media. Only a strange individual wouldn't. Her father and half siblings are trash. Sorry, but it's true.

nanna8

Hope they stay put in the US and just shut up. They are a nasty,boring couple of people. I used to like him once,too.

I think they’re neither “nasty” or “boring”, I neither like nor dislike any person I’ve never met!

I don’t hold much store in what the media chooses to report or edit or withhold.

Who actually even cares?

eazybee

If you really cannot see the difference between Meghan Markle's behaviour, particularly towards the family she could not wait to marry into, and that of the Princess of Wales there is little point in you trying to defend yourself.

I really don't care about how either of them have behaved towards the outdated anachronism that is the RF.I do think women who speak out about things that matter are to be applauded. And I find the abuse aimed at Meghan Markle unacceptable. You may not. But as I said it is a short step from abusing someone you don't know on social media and abusing someone you do know, and many of the posts on these threads show how vitriolic some people can be about something which really doesn't affect them.

It's also fascinating to watch the progress of the "Good Royal", "Bad Royal" saga which makes deities of some people and devils of others, but permits some fluidity between the two roles when the Royal PR machine kicks in.

This is an interesting account of the changing popularity of the RF www.newsweek.com/king-charles-popularity-worst-polling-prince-harry-meghan-markle-1857394