HEY!!!, I just got an idea.... Please Read

[lopay]

I was reading the EWI (Entering Without Inspection), Bans and what you should know before you file thread and this idea came to me...

I am now almost 100% positive that it's due to a fingerprint mismatch. I was read that thread and it said that you can send your fingerprints to the FBI to see if you have an deportation against you.

So here is my idea: I can take my wife's fingerprints and send them into the FBI with a letter explaining that the consulate had a very hard time taking the fingerprints and we believe that it was a mismatch.

I could also request the one following from them- if they once again believe that it's a match that they send a copy of the other fingerprints that are on file so that we can see them. If they were to discover that it was a mismatch, that they contact CDJ and explain what's going on.

Any ideas?

[lopay]

and another question: I don't understand why they say that she entered without inspection and there not be something like an deportation against her. If they had caught her at the boarder, it would have been called a throwback, and nothing would have gone on the record.

If someone else just used her name, then the fingerprints would not have matched.

Has anyone else experienced anything like this?

[lopay]

If this was in fact a fingerprinting error, then we may have a chance:

"Your wife would need to request a copy of her criminal history record. Once she receives this record, you may challenge the information you believe to be incorrect. We will assist you with this process.

To obtain a copy of the record, please follow the instructions on this site:"

I know this is not guaranteed to have a difference, but it's worth a shot.

To be honst, I'm really not expecting anything from this. They said that she EWI'd, nothing else. But what I really don't understand is how a person can EWI without being deported or ordered removed.

They claim that she EWI'd in 2003, right? So why did the not try to arrest her or have her removed? My guess is that the fingerprints are going to come back clean with no association to the EWI. Then we will have to do an FOIAR to try to get her records. Then the record is not going to help us because even if they see that they made a mistake, they will cover themselves and say that someone called and said they saw her in town or something.

So who knows? I'm going to keep trying and post anything I find in case someone else finds themselves in the same boat.

[y14gemini]

Hi,

I think if this is something that you want to persue then I would do it. There are alot of people that are EWI and ICE does not actively seek them to have them removed. I know that where I live ICE has never just came to someone's house looking for them (it has happened but in a rare occasion). Usually here if the person is arrested and they are in the DHS system (been previously removed, etc) then their name will have a hit on it and then the person has a immigration hold put on them but if they EWI and has never been caught entering then they are considered "clean". That person just wouldn't have the means to prove that they are legal because they are not. But I do not know if this is true where you live, I am only commenting on where I live. In other words, they (the authorities) don't just go to people and ask them for their status unless their crime or whatever they are investigating is serious (murder, drugs, manslaughter, etc)!!

Now that I think about it, I would do the FBI fingerprint thing if I were you. The reason that I say that is when I went to the embassy in Honduras for my husbands interview the IO told me that incorrect information is put in the A-files all of the time. That is kind of scarey if you think about it!

Good Luck!!

[nsoto]

Did they take her fingerprints? I don't understand if the consulate takes your finger prints, and they do come up with something, how could that lie? No one has the same fingerprints? That would be a major mess up...I would hate to think or see this actually happen..I"m sorry..

If you think they made an error, I would certainly send her fingerprints in..It's worth a shot..

Good Luck!

[y14gemini]

I must agree with nsoto, fingerprints are unique! But go ahead and do the fingerprint check to see what comes up, once again Good Luck!

[HANNAH19]

Good luck w/ that and keep us posted w/ any info you find out!

[lopay]

Actually it's not the fingerprints that are the problem. Its the person taking them. If you research fingerprinting, you'll find out that it's not perfect. They compare different points on the fingerprints to see if they match. So if the consulate took bad fingerprints, then it's possible that there could have been an error.

I'm not sure that this happened because if you think about it, how would they get her fingerprints? If they had caught her at the border, it would have been catch and release. Right? Or maybe that is what happened.

I don't understand where they got it from. All they say is that she reentered without inspection. I don't know if that means they caught her at the border, someone else was caught at the border and used her name, or someone just called in and said that she was in the US. None of it makes sense.

If they did catch someone at the border and it's a fingerprint error, then we should be able to clear it up. I know they don't have her fingerprints because she never tried to go in.

Does anyone know what it might mean, entering without inspection? Does it mean that they caught her at the border? If so, then there should be some other fingerprints? I know what a EWI is, but I don't understand what it means when it's on someone’s file alone, no deportation, no removal warrant, nothing else.

Well, I'll let you guys know what happens. Thanks

[JennyM]

Does anyone know what it might mean, entering without inspection? Does it mean that they caught her at the border? If so, then there should be some other fingerprints? I know what a EWI is, but I don't understand what it means when it's on someone’s file alone, no deportation, no removal warrant, nothing else.

Catch and release is at the border, and they do take fingerprints they just throw them back in Mexico and they try to enter illegally again. My husband is EWI. He was caught at the border, fingerprinted, said he was mexican even though he was Guatemalan and once they dropped him off in Mexico he snuck in a different way. How did they get in if they didn't enter EWI?

[JennyM]

Actually it's not the fingerprints that are the problem. Its the person taking them. If you research fingerprinting, you'll find out that it's not perfect. They compare different points on the fingerprints to see if they match. So if the consulate took bad fingerprints, then it's possible that there could have been an error.


Fingerprints are unique and if she has enough characteristics to make a match then it is possible. You can always challenge the fingerprints but people get put away on fingerprints alone. Did you ever ask her if she was caught?

[y14gemini]

I googled EWI as a definition for immigration purposes and this is what came up, I hope this helps....

Entry Without Inspection
Coming into the US without authorization by an INS official. Examples are coming across a US border without being inspected by the INS, or using someone else's passport at an inspection point. This type of entry is called "EWI".

Acronymn for Entry Without Inspection, a legal term used by US Immigration Officers. It refers to illegal aliens that enter the United States without being inspected by a US Immigration Officer.

The ICE Immigration Enforcement Agent had to process 5 aliens: One was a visa overstay and one was an AggFelon, but the other 3 were just plain ol' EWIs.

The US Border Patrol Agent deals mostly with EWIs every day.

[lopay]

I never asked her because she never did it. I've been married to her since 2002. We were at the time trying to get her an immigrant visa and were just waiting for an appointment. We honestly have no idea where this came from. She has a bad leg from the accident in 2000 can not walk or be on her feet for very long, so she could not have tried to do it on her own. I have been the only source of income for the last 7 years, so I know she didn't have any money to hire someone. She has never wanted to live her illegally. She says that life is too hard illegally. She doesn't want to live in fear all of the time. She would not have tried to come across.

I've been reading and looking, but I can't figure out what an EWI means when it is alone. Do they mean to say that they caught her at the border? Or do they mean to say that they had proof that she was in the states? But if that was true, would they not of had an arrest warrant for her?

From what I can tell, they don't charge anyone they catch with entry without inspection, right? I know because of Mgarcia's post, catch and release isn’t counted as an entry or deportation. So what could it mean?

Let me see if I can put my thoughts into words: If the caught her at the border, and they did anything to the record, would it not have been a deportation? Why just have an EWI?

I just don't see how there can be an EWI without something else on the record too.

My wife has never EWI’d into the US. She always crossed at a port using her border crossing card, and I was married to her when they took it.

[lopay]

ok let me see if I can figure out how to put what my thoughts are on here:

(1) They caught her trying to cross the border. This would have been back in 2003. From what I have read, this is not counted as an actual entry into the US. That's why a person can do it a hundred times and have nothing against them. So why would this show up on her record.

(2) If they did catch her, why did they not deport her? Why would they just say that she tried to enter? Would they not have taken photos?

(3) If they did catch someone, and anything was done to that person's record, then they would have taken fingerprints. We know it was not her, so why did the match come up?

(4) they did not catch her at the border, but someone (ie a daughter who was really mad at her at the time because she would not let the daughter's boyfriend live with us) just called immigration and told them that she was living in the US. If this had been the case, would there not be something else in her case file, like an arrest warrant?

Where else could they come up with this from?

[lopay]

They were not in the US. My wife hasn't been in the US since her border crossing card was taken from her in 2002.

-she came over with the father of her kids using her border crossing card.
-she was given a notice to appear, but left the country before the court date (1998)
-she continued to use her crossing card until after we had married. One of the officers at the border told us that we could go to the consulate and they would give my stepdaughters a card too. The guys at the consulate took her card from her on the spot.
-She hasn't been in the US since then. That's what we don't get. Some how, they think that she EWI'd in 2003. She has never EWI'd

Maybe I should have mentioned this before but I can't see how it could relate because of the amount of time in-between the two and their order: On Oct 29, 2003, my wife meet a lawyer in the middle of the bridge to sign an affidavit to get sole custody of her kids. We are not sure if that immigration just looked thought court documents and said "ha, she was here, no questions to ask and put an EWI on her file. But there would not have been any fingerprints and they say they date of her EWI was on Aug 23, 2003.

When the consulate took her fingerprints, they had a really hard time getting them. I mean they had to do several takes. They even asked what she had done to her fingers to have the prints removed. Up until that point they had said that everything looked good. They finally got some prints and we were told to come back. Well, it took a couple of days for them to see us again. We returned and they said, well everything looks good but you were EWI'd and were living in the US. My wife said "WHAT????" and passed out.

[kitkat1]

(2) If they did catch her, why did they not deport her? Why would they just say that she tried to enter? Would they not have taken photos?

Because that's what catch and release is. You can't deport someone who isn't in the country. You can deny admission. You can catch them, fingerprint them and/or take photos or do neither and release them over the border.


(3) If they did catch someone, and anything was done to that person's record, then they would have taken fingerprints. We know it was not her, so why did the match come up?

They don't always take fingerprints.


(4) they did not catch her at the border, but someone (ie a daughter who was really mad at her at the time because she would not let the daughter's boyfriend live with us) just called immigration and told them that she was living in the US. If this had been the case, would there not be something else in her case file, like an arrest warrant?


Unlikely that there would be an arrest warrant -- possible an order of deportation. But a phone call to immigration doesn't guarantee that they did anything, just like filing an I-130 while a person is illegally in the US doesn't result in their deportation. USCIS knows about it from the petition, but there is no way they can follow up on everyone.

Exactly what is the situtation? They show an illegal entry that she did not have? If so, how do you know about it and what is the status? It's extremely unlikely that they have fingerprints from someone else who gave her name, but surely it would make sense to follow up on that with the FBI fingerprint request.

Keep in mind that "someone calling" or "seeing in her town" does not work for DHS. It has to be something recorded. It seems maybe you think that EWIs don't have any record, but of course if they are caught and released, they do have one. Anyway, good luck on the FBI check.

[kitkat1]

-she was given a notice to appear, but left the country before the court date (1998)

Why?


-she continued to use her crossing card until after we had married.


That right there is illegal. Did she ever mention that to a border agent? Perhaps AFTER she had already entered with her border crossing card? That could result in an "illegal entry" claim by them.

The guys at the consulate took her card from her on the spot.


Why?

Some how, they think that she EWI'd in 2003. She has never EWI'd

How did you find this out? Was it at an interview? Did they give her an option for a waiver? And have you consulted several qualified lawyers? Seems like that would be a smart move -- they know a whole lot more about these situations than most of us.

[JennyM]

ok let me see if I can figure out how to put what my thoughts are on here:

(1) They caught her trying to cross the border. This would have been back in 2003. From what I have read, this is not counted as an actual entry into the US. That's why a person can do it a hundred times and have nothing against them. So why would this show up on her record.

The biometric border crossing card (BCC) project is a joint effort of the Department of State and the Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security (CIS) to comply with the Section 104 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). The law requires that every Border Crossing Card (BCC) issued after April 1, 1998, contain a biometric identifier such as fingerprint, and be machine-readable.

The law also mandated that all pre- April 1, 1998 BCC's expire on October 1, 1999. In recognition of the magnitude of replacing over five million existing cards, Congress extended the deadline to September 30, 2001.

The new BCC is a laminated, credit card-style document with many security features and ten -year validity. Called a "laser visa," the card is both a BCC and a B1/B2 visitor's visa. Most Mexican visitors to the U.S., whether traveling to the border region or beyond, receive a laser visa.

The Consular Affairs Bureau undertook a number of initiatives to better manage the large number of replacement card applications. We opened a new consulate in Nogales and expanded the consulate in Nuevo Laredo. We also established USG contractor-Operated Temporary Processing Facilities (TPFs) along the border, Most co-located with existing consular offices, and a card facility in Tijuana that quickly sorts and returns the USCIS-produced cards to the twelve posts in Mexico processing BCC's.


From April 1, 1998 through August 21, 2001, American Embassy and Consulates adjudicated over 4.8 million applications, approving slightly more than 4.0 million. Somewhat less than half are for replacement cards; the rest are for first time applicants.

Responsibility

Border Biometrics Program is responsible for coordinating policy and providing operational guidance for the new biometric border crossing card project.
Criteria for Issuance of Laser Visa

Laser visa applicants must meet the same eligibility standards as those for the B-1/B-2 visa and for the BCC formerly issued by CIS.
Applicants must demonstrate that they have ties to Mexico that would compel them to return after a temporary stay in the United States. U.S. consular officers look for evidence of strong family, business, or social ties.
When they found out you were married, that's why they took it.


(2) If they did catch her, why did they not deport her? It doesn't work like that..ICE only picks up who is on thier list....until recently, now it seems they are picking up anyone who doesn't have papers. Why would they just say that she tried to enter? The system is not always correct. Sumbit a set of her fingerprints to the FBI and have them check again. Would they not have taken photos? My husband never got his photo taken

(3) If they did catch someone, and anything was done to that person's record, then they would have taken fingerprints. We know it was not her, so why did the match come up?Like I said, go the the FBI website, I've posted the link many times before and get they to check it again.

(4) they did not catch her at the border, but someone (ie a daughter who was really mad at her at the time because she would not let the daughter's boyfriend live with us) just called immigration and told them that she was living in the US. If this had been the case, would there not be something else in her case file, like an arrest warrant? Not necessarily, it really depends what ICE is doing, some agents are pretty cool and some are just Aholes. We know a couple in CLT and my husbands boss already told him all not to be coming to his business....and they won't either.

Where else could they come up with this from? When the check the fingerprints there were enough characters from a seperate person....remember people are human, it doesn't matter if you work for the consulate or wall street....people screw up.

They were not in the US. My wife hasn't been in the US since her border crossing card was taken from her in 2002. If she wasn't in the states, challenge the fingerprints.

[lopay]

But why would they say that this happened in 2003 when her card was lifted in 2002?

A letter to my Senator's office:
"On Aug 23, 2003, after unsuccessful and repeated attempts to obtain a humanitarian permit through DHS to enter the US and after having had her laser visa lifted, name reentered without inspection."

The card was good until 2002 when they took it. She used it a thousand times without any problems. They knew her situation. It's been awhile, but I don't think that she ever had any problems getting across using her card.

We went to the consulate to get my stepdaughters cards because an officer at the border told us that we could, so the immigration officers at the border knew that I was married to her.

[JennyM]

ok let me see if I can figure out how to put what my thoughts are on here:

(1) They caught her trying to cross the border. This would have been back in 2003. From what I have read, this is not counted as an actual entry into the US. That's why a person can do it a hundred times and have nothing against them. So why would this show up on her record.

The biometric border crossing card (BCC) project is a joint effort of the Department of State and the Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security (CIS) to comply with the Section 104 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). The law requires that every Border Crossing Card (BCC) issued after April 1, 1998, contain a biometric identifier such as fingerprint, and be machine-readable.

The law also mandated that all pre- April 1, 1998 BCC's expire on October 1, 1999. In recognition of the magnitude of replacing over five million existing cards, Congress extended the deadline to September 30, 2001.

The new BCC is a laminated, credit card-style document with many security features and ten -year validity. Called a "laser visa," the card is both a BCC and a B1/B2 visitor's visa. Most Mexican visitors to the U.S., whether traveling to the border region or beyond, receive a laser visa.

The Consular Affairs Bureau undertook a number of initiatives to better manage the large number of replacement card applications. We opened a new consulate in Nogales and expanded the consulate in Nuevo Laredo. We also established USG contractor-Operated Temporary Processing Facilities (TPFs) along the border, Most co-located with existing consular offices, and a card facility in Tijuana that quickly sorts and returns the USCIS-produced cards to the twelve posts in Mexico processing BCC's.


From April 1, 1998 through August 21, 2001, American Embassy and Consulates adjudicated over 4.8 million applications, approving slightly more than 4.0 million. Somewhat less than half are for replacement cards; the rest are for first time applicants.

Responsibility

Border Biometrics Program is responsible for coordinating policy and providing operational guidance for the new biometric border crossing card project.
Criteria for Issuance of Laser Visa

Laser visa applicants must meet the same eligibility standards as those for the B-1/B-2 visa and for the BCC formerly issued by CIS.
Applicants must demonstrate that they have ties to Mexico that would compel them to return after a temporary stay in the United States. U.S. consular officers look for evidence of strong family, business, or social ties.
When they found out you were married, that's why they took it.


(2) If they did catch her, why did they not deport her? It doesn't work like that..ICE only picks up who is on thier list....until recently, now it seems they are picking up anyone who doesn't have papers. Why would they just say that she tried to enter? The system is not always correct. Sumbit a set of her fingerprints to the FBI and have them check again. Would they not have taken photos? My husband never got his photo taken

(3) If they did catch someone, and anything was done to that person's record, then they would have taken fingerprints. We know it was not her, so why did the match come up?Like I said, go the the FBI website, I've posted the link many times before and get they to check it again.

(4) they did not catch her at the border, but someone (ie a daughter who was really mad at her at the time because she would not let the daughter's boyfriend live with us) just called immigration and told them that she was living in the US. If this had been the case, would there not be something else in her case file, like an arrest warrant? Not necessarily, it really depends what ICE is doing, some agents are pretty cool and some are just Aholes. We know a couple in CLT and my husbands boss already told him all not to be coming to his business....and they won't either.

Where else could they come up with this from? When the check the fingerprints there were enough characters from a seperate person....remember people are human, it doesn't matter if you work for the consulate or wall street....people screw up.

They were not in the US. My wife hasn't been in the US since her border crossing card was taken from her in 2002. If she wasn't in the states, challenge the fingerprints.

But why would they say that this happened in 2003 when her card was lifted in 2002?

A letter to my Senator's office:
"On Aug 23, 2003, after unsuccessful and repeated attempts to obtain a humanitarian permit through DHS to enter the US and after having had her laser visa lifted, name reentered without inspection."

The card was good until 2002 when they took it. She used it a thousand times without any problems. They knew her situation. It's been awhile, but I don't think that she ever had any problems getting across using her card.

We went to the consulate to get my stepdaughters cards because an officer at the border told us that we could, so the immigration officers at the border knew that I was married to her.

Read the post!

[lopay]

So this is sounding more and more like it has to do with the fingerprints. And you guys are saying that it is possible that someone could have tried to cross into the US, been fingerprinted and had an EWI along with the fingerprints entered into the file without a deportation or anything else, right?

[kitkat1]

1) Was she refused at her Immigrant Visa interview because they said she EWI'd
2) Are you saying she was in Mexico at that time and there is NO way she EWI'd when they said she did?
3) With what you posted about her fingerprints, it seems rather clear that there is a mix up. Do the FBI check. Get your US Senator involved. Get a lawyer.

And yes, most catch and releases are fingerprinted and the information is in their file. That's how CDJ knows about it when they go to their interview (and that's why the applicant has to tell the truth - because they already know and being caught in a lie is a much harsher charge to overcome). People who are caught and released are NOT deported - they never entered the US for long enough to be deported. They were "escorted" out.

[lopay]

sorry for being blind, but where does it explain why they would have said she EWI'd over a year after her card was taken from her by the consulate? And why would it be considered an entry without inspection if she went to the border and was inspected by the officers there and they let her in?

I understand why they took it from her and that's fine. What I was saying was that she never lied about being married to me. If I'm not mistaken, I asked about cards for my stepdaughters right after we got married. The officers at the border had to know we were married being that I was asking about my stepdaughters.

[lopay]

1) Was she refused at her Immigrant Visa interview because they said she EWI'd

That's correct. We went to CDJ and everything was fine. He looked over the papers and said that everything looked good. They then took her fingerprints and like I said it took several attempts for them to get them. Then it took a couple of days and when we went back, they said well everything looks good but you EWI'd in 2003 (I think they might have even said something like "you've been living in the US)
2) Are you saying she was in Mexico at that time and there is NO way she EWI'd when they said she did?
No, there is NO way at all. In some of our fights, she has even accused me of turning her in to keep her in Mexico (let's just say the stress levels have become really really high before)

3) With what you posted about her fingerprints, it seems rather clear that there is a mix up. Do the FBI check. Get your US Senator involved. Get a lawyer.

My senator's office knows me on a first name bases. I'll call them and let them know that I'm going to do a FBI check. I turned in all kinds of evidence including affidavits from other people that say she was always in Mexico. The lawyer who did her custody case even sent an affidavit to the Senator's office saying that she had been in Mexico.

[lopay]

So it's possible that if a person is caught at the border, a EWI can be entered in a person's file? So they don't count it as actually making it into the country but they still say it's an entry?

[kitkat1]

But has all of the evidence that she did NOT EWI been discussed directly with the consulate? Did you talk with them immediately upon the accusation? What was the response to the affidavits you sent? Have you contacted them about getting new fingerprints taken?

Nothing else is important here. The only details that matter is that they accused her of an entry that she did not make. Clearly it was only based on fingerprints. Can't imagine any other way to resolve this than to talk to the Director of Immigrant Visas there and arrange for another fingerprint appointment, or run the prints with the FBI and Fed Ex them directly to him. Anything you do here is simply spinning your wheels IMO. When did all of this happen?

So it's possible that if a person is caught at the border, a EWI can be entered in a person's file? So they don't count it as actually making it into the country but they still say it's an entry?

If a person is caught at the border and shortly thereafter returned to Mexico, it is NOT an illegal entry. They did NOT enter. It was an attempted entry. They were NOT successful at evading immigration. Their attempt is recorded, normally along with fingerprints and photos, but these are not always taken. It doesn't matter anyway. An illegal entry is not grounds for denial. Illegal PRESENCE of more than 180 days = a three year ban. More than 365 days = 10 year ban.

[lopay]

Forgive me, I'm kinda tired and I meant to put it up before when you asked. She has a life time ban because her record says that she was deported then EWI'd. Thats 212a9cii.

[kitkat1]

All the more reason to get the situation discussed and resolved directly with the consulate. If she never EWI'd in 03, that's the only thing you need to clear up to be allowed to submit a waiver for the deportation. So I would be on the phone with the Director of Immigrant Visas, faxing affidavits, calling, emailing, demanding new fingerprints, working with senators, lawyers, etc.

[lopay]

My wife and I decided that it was more important to get the stepdaughters across before we fight them about her case. I was always under the understanding that the consulate could not question stuff like that as it is a matter of fact, not a matter of law. Laurel Scott told me I had no recourse, but I think she was speaking from the view point of dealing with the consulate. I know that stuff like this can be challenged because I am challenging my stepdaughter's removal date.

My guess is that if the fingerprints come back a mismatch, then we will have to send all the evidence to where the EWI took place and wait for them to respond. Or wait, no, I would just have to contact the consualte and tell them the fingerprints they took were bad and what the FBI says.

[lopay]

well, I wonder if I would still need a waiver for the deportation. I guess they would use the date that they took her border crossing card as her last day in the country, then ten years after that, right? Or would they just use the date the order of removal was created since that the removal was never executed?

If they would just use the 1998 date, then her ban ends in March. Other wise it would be in 2012, so then I would need a waiver.

[y14gemini]

I would have to agree with KitKat here, if the fingerprints are being read wrong, then I would challenge the results of the fingerprints, I would do the FBI fingerprint check to see what comes up. If I may ask, what happened to her fingers that made them "unreadable" (sorry If I sound harsh I don't mean it).

[y14gemini]

One other thing, you said your wife received a letter to go to court but she never went to court correct. If she never went and then attempted to re-enter (even with her card that they took away), maybe that is where they are getting the EWI since her name came up when she tried coming to the US. Her name came up because she was probably ordered removed in absentia.

[lopay]

she was ordered removed by absentia. It's ok, you don't sound harsh, I'm a direct kind of person too, so don't worry about it. Thanks for the input

Wife my has had a really hard life, from being sexually abused by some of her family when she was a child, to being treated like a complete dog by the father of her kids. She does know why her fingerprints are like that. I really don't think she has ever done anything to alter her prints. She hasn't had a reason too. You have to remember that she had no idea about any of this stuff before that consulate, and she would have told me about it before we went if she had known. I know some may think I am being nieve, but after everything that we have been through with immigration, she would have told me if she had ever tired to do anything. She has never wanted to live here illegally. When she was living here with the father of her children, he told her it was ok for her to be here because of him. She doesn't like living in fear, she did it for many years, and she hates it.

She thinks that it may be from where she uses one of those stone bowls to make salsa or pico de gallo because she has used one several times a week for almost all of her life. She doesn't know if that's what it actually is. I know that there are millions of other people that do the same thing without anything happening to their fingerprints, so I doubt it was actually that.

I'm worried that this did not happen because of a border crossing, but something else. I have always thought that it had something to do with the daughter that was causing a lot of trouble at the time. Maybe she got caught and used her mom's name or something. but if that they had caught her, they would have fingerprinted her.

I'll send in the fingerprints to the FBI and see what they say. I'll also request the file from them. I personally don't think that this had anything to do with her using her border crossing card because they would have arrested her at the border and charged her with misrepresentation, not with an entry without inspection. So does anyone know which date they would use, the 1998 deportation, or the last day they know she was in the states?

[lopay]

and I have no idea why the let her cross after being ordered removed. The port that she would have used is where they send all of the idiots. They have told me so many things that were just pure lies. Like the guy telling me I could take my stepdaughters and get them a border crossing card. He would have known better because he was one of the officers there. My guess is he did it just because he wanted to.

We found out that the youngest had canner in 2004, and I needed help with her, I would go to the bridge with different members of the family almost every day and ask them for help. They always said no. I had letters from the doctors and everyone else saying I needed help and that she really did have cancer. The last time I took my family up there, they told me that if I brought them back they would arrest them all and deport them. So the guys at this border are complete heartless idiots.

I'm going to send in the fingerprints as soon as I can. Hopefully it will not take forever to do them. I just have to talk to my wife to get her to do them. Every time I mention immigration, it ends up in a fight and she tells me that it makes her sick to her stomach and to never mention it to her again (like I said, it's been somewhat stressful).

[kitkat1]

lopay, border official cannot help. They are in charge of entry. They often don't know the law and give incorrect information.

Regardless, you need to delve into the removal as well as the fingerprint issue. Really, consult with a lawyer. I suspect there is something tied to the removal and subsequent (illegal) entry using a border crossing card. That doesn't explain the prints in 03. Once you get the FBI results, you need someone who can make the calls to the consulate and get this moving in the right direction. I really think you need help from a lawyer to get this resolved.

[y14gemini]

Hey lopay, I really do not have any real answers for you, other than to start with the fingerprints. Start there and see where it takes you, at least you will have started somewhere! Things will soon start to piece together! I know things between you and your wife get heated as they do with me and my husband! She is frustrated and so are you! Try not to let this immigration situation get in the way of the love that the two of you have :love: ! I know it is frustrating becasue I am going through it with my husband! I wish you luck and if you want to vent you can always PM me! Once again it will work out, just have faith and some patience! :thumbup:

[lopay]

thanks guys. I really wish I had found this site a really long time ago.

I'll keep you guys posted and let you know what happens. Do you think we can have her fingerprints taken at any consulate? I don't see why CDJ would have to take them. There is another that is about an hour away. Maybe I could call them and ask them if they would be will to just take the fingerprints for us. The cost to go to CDJ is a lot for us, bus ticket, hotels, ect, so if it would be possible, maybe I could them to just take her fingerprints?

I talked with a friend of mine today to make sure I had his story right before I posted it here. His wife has lived in Mexico for many years, but was here when she was younger (she is getting up there in age). He told me that when she went to CDJ, the lady doing the interview told her that someone had called INS (whoever it was when this happened) and said that they saw her and that she was living in the US, not once, but twice and it was on her record. I really don’t think that immigration really cares if it’s correct or not, they just put it in the file and go on. I have seen immigration do things that most people would not believe at all. I live on the border and have been crossing everyday for many years. They do what they want and no one questions them.

[kitkat1]

I would not bother going to a consulate. Just take them with an ink pad and the form downloaded from the FBI site. It costs $18. It's more than easy and no need to go anywhere. Once you have results, (several months) contact the Director of Immigrant Visas at CDJ directly. Ask to fax and fed ex the prints and ask how to get a new appointment.

Why was she ordered deported in the first place? This appears to be an important detail.

The story that the interviewer said someone had called INS is most likely just a story. It really does not work that way. And what happens on the border with border officials is a completely separate situation - they are required to manage entry and exit. That's it. They rarely know the law (have you seen all the stories where a border official told people they have no ban? That's because they do NOT know) and they have little power to do anything more than allow or deny entry. They are not consulate employees.

[lopay]

A lot of the stories I have seen. They may be just BP, but what if they put something on someone’s record, then it's there. They decided to execute my stepdaughter's order of deportation when her sister was paroled into the US. She was not even at the border because she stayed home to watch the youngest sister. I agree with you 100% that they do not know what they are talking about. Most of the people I know who have stories about the immigration process are still in Mexico, so they did not let them in.

The other day I was crossing and one of the officers asked me if I would allow them to plant a decoy to help train their dogs. I told the guy he was crazy and there was no way I would let them do that. If I had, every time I went through, they would have searched my car until the scent went away.