Newsstand - "INS greets New Zealand woman with handcuffs and humiliation"

"HARSH TREATMENT WAS BY THE BOOK, OFFICIAL SAYS"

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/peninsula/3853796.htm


------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

This isn't the America where I grew up. This government makes me ashamed of my country.

Bruce

Not the best of circumstances, but where do you draw the line? The immigration laws have to be enforced.

Why, pray tell? Did they come down from the mountaintop on stone tablets?

I apologize in advance for being sarcastic. I can't help myself.

Bruce

Yes, order must be kept and the purity of our nation and its vital fluids must be preserved at all costs least the resulting chaos interfere with or plans to annex Poland in the spring...what? Woops, did I say nippley? Did it get hot in here all of a sudden?

Whoa, what happened there? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif I must have slipped and fallen.

What I meant to say is that officious government drones must be allowed to continue to do their jobs without using even the slightest bit of common sense as doing so surely keeps us all safe. Doesn’t it. No really, doesn’t it? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

From the article referenced above,

"We have been the subject of very harsh criticism since 9-11," said Virginia Kice, spokeswoman for the INS Western region. "All our employees understand we cannot afford to make any mistakes now, and everybody is very, very vigilant. The stakes in this climate are very high."

Yeah, CYA baby. However the stakes here are; my job, any embarrassment I might feel from the past ineptitudes of others in my department, and that warm comfy feeling of power that I get from throwing a 50-year-old New Zeeland woman up against a wall.

Ideological unanimity, HP flight attendants, INS drones, whatever. We indeed seem to be turning into a nation of idiots and losing ground every day.

Now I am just waiting for the serious hyperbole to start, "So anrkitec, you would then have INS just let the terrorists through the front door unabated I guess?" Yes, Yes I would. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

Can’t wait to see the responses from those so ready and willing to submit to any and all "authority figures".

Cheers

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by cactuspete:
Not the best of circumstances, but where do you draw the line? The immigration laws have to be enforced.</font>

Agreed, and I would have sent her back on the next plane home.

But the rampant, unchecked abuses of power by our federal officials -- all in the name of "security" -- are turning this country into something straight out of an Orwellian fantasy.

Mook

------------------
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

-- Thomas Jefferson

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The charge? In 1998 -- three U.S. visits ago -- she overstayed her visa by eight days.</font>

Yea, this is just plain stupid. My g/f went through a similar experience (although she didnt get deported) last month when were coming back from the carribean. First it was "You have a fake passport"... then it got changed to "You overstayed your visa in 1998" seems to be a 1998 theme here... then they went through her wallet to "see if there is anything that can prove you left the country". She got lucky and was released after 2 hrs of being "in the room". I feel sorry and ashamed at what happened to Ms. Anderson.

Well, it's pretty simple. Access to the United States is a priviledge, reserved for those that follow it's rules. If you do not do so, you are subject to the scrutiny of those who administer such rules.

The INS has been lambasted for ignoring the rules it was given, quite rightly, so is now being vigilant in enforcing them. Like most law enforcement matters, there is no room for discretion, because that leads to both abuse and holes in the system.

Civil servants being what they are, it is entirely possible that this woman had a very bad experience, even one she didn't deserve from the nature of her transgression. She may elect to make a case of it via her country's embassy to the U.S., and I hope she does do so.

But, in keeping balance here, we have visa expirations to control access of foreign nationals to the U.S. That is an entirely proper use of administrative regulation.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">A 12-year-old Chinese girl who disappeared after arriving in San Francisco with a tour group and reappeared with relatives in Amherst will seek asylum in the United States, her lawyer says.</font>

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2002/08/14/national1123EDT0577.DTL

Seems we will let the chinese girl stay with no penalty, but the wife of a US citizen gets the third degree. SEND THE KID BACK!!

Well what a surprise it took Brain all of 3 hours to post with the usual goverment propoganda line.
I happen to have frequent daily contact with the drones at the INS and people wouldnt believe the crap they inflect on visitors to the country. A lot of this stuff was going on pre 9/11. Did not most of the hijackers have valid visas??

Just recently I have seen them refuse an entire ship's crew all with valid visas from having shore leave just because the crew list was not presented in alphabetical order.
Yet there is no written regulation saying the list should be presented as such.
It was too much trouble for the lazy SOB to check off the 22 names on the list.

Stuff like this really makes me fear for this country because there are many sheep who see this behaviour as acceptable.
Mike

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by MIKESILV:
Well what a surprise it took Brain all of 3 hours to post with the usual goverment propoganda line.
I happen to have frequent daily contact with the drones at the INS and people wouldnt believe the crap they inflect on visitors to the country. A lot of this stuff was going on pre 9/11. Did not most of the hijackers have valid visas??

Just recently I have seen them refuse an entire ship's crew all with valid visas from having shore leave just because the crew list was not presented in alphabetical order.
Yet there is no written regulation saying the list should be presented as such.
It was too much trouble for the lazy SOB to check off the 22 names on the list.

Stuff like this really makes me fear for this country because there are many sheep who see this behaviour as acceptable.
Mike
</font>

Thank you for calling my post propoganda, as you showed via your post how completely unbiased your own view is.

I don't pretend to offer anything more than my exceedingly well reasoned and carefully crafted opinion, which you are free to disagree with, although civility is always appreciated, though not always granted.

Incidentally, anecdotal information cannot be evaluated in the absence of anything resembling real evidence that what you say is both accurate and complete.

[This message has been edited by Brian (edited 08-14-2002).]

I want to know how on earth the INS checks if a visitor has left or not. There are no immigration checks to leave the United States so what is the point. The green cardboard card that sits in your passport until you leave should be handed to an airline official as you board or to a Canadian or Mexican border official(at least that is what is says on the back).

I can tell you honestly that the Canadian Customs officials could not care less about collecting those INS cards. In fact I had one young lad refuse to take it off me saying it was not his job to enforce US regulations. When I asked what I should do with it - he just shrugged and said have a nice day!

My point is, If the INS are going to enforce a 3 day overstay like they did to the Kiwi lady, then I think they need to at least place a few INS officials on the US borders to see who actually leaves - otherwise, the system is open to all types of stories. Come to think of it - what is the point of giving out visitors visas if they do not check when they leave. Hello - a possible illegal immigration problem here.

I can honestly say that I have thrown out many Green Cards because no airline official or Canadian Customs officer wants it.

One word to describe the experience of the Kiwi lady - DISGUSTING

Anyone know if the 1963 Vienna Convention of Consular Relations requires INS to notify the New Zealand Consulate that she is being detained while awaiting deportation?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Brian:
Thank you for calling my post propoganda, as you showed via your post how completely unbiased your own view is.

I don't pretend to offer anything more than my exceedingly well reasoned and carefully crafted opinion, which you are free to disagree with, although civility is always appreciated, though not always granted.

Incidentally, anecdotal information cannot be evaluated in the absence of anything resembling real evidence that what you say is both accurate and complete.

[This message has been edited by Brian (edited 08-14-2002).]</font>

Hey I could'nt care less whether you accept my anecdote as you call it as factual or not.

But I believe I have a much better feel for the so called security being implemented at least in the country's ports.

Every foriegn vessel docking is visited by least one officer from Customs, one from INS, one from Dept of Agriculture add to that the Coast Guard and the Border Patrol
and now lately even local law inforcement sometimes with divers.
When you visit 300 to 350 ships a year as I do, see them on the job it sometimes very hard to take them seriously.
I absolutely guarantee if I wanted to hide contraband on a vessel it would take them months to find it, if ever.

When much less than half the INS officers do not even bring a computer to vessel to check crew names, Customs is more interested in whether the in-bond liquor store has been sealed and Agriculture wants the make sure the garbage cans have proper covers, I know we have a problem , which deporting someone who has stayed a few days over on their visa
is sure as hell not going to solve.
Mike

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by thezipper:
... then they went through her wallet to "see if there is anything that can prove you left the country". </font>

Well, how about the ticket that proves she just ENTERED the country?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by LGA_UAL:
Anyone know if the 1963 Vienna Convention of Consular Relations requires INS to notify the New Zealand Consulate that she is being detained while awaiting deportation?</font>
In case anyone cares, the answer is no. INS officials were required to inform her that she had the opportunity to have them contact the Consulate in LA. However, they were not required to contact it since New Zealand is not on the mandatory notification list.



[This message has been edited by LGA_UAL (edited 08-14-2002).]

Gotta watch out for those Kiwis. No telling what they're going to get up to in the USA, what with such ideas a proportional representation and more democratic forms of governmental institutions.

As for Saudi visitors, they can get their visas from a travel agent, and not have to worry about pesky finger printing.

Suppose I should soften this message if I want to get into the USA tomorrow!

[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited 08-14-2002).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Just Passing Thru:
Well, how about the ticket that proves she just ENTERED the country?

</font>

In MIA you DO have to show your BP and passport when you go through immigration, so they already knew she had a ticket to get there and the follow-on ticket back to japan was in her purse.

Unbelievable but this was going on pre-September 11. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

There are no rights of appeal, just do what they say.

I heard a CBC radio story about a person who was being taken by cab from southern Alberta to Montana (quite the fare!) for a court appearance. The first attempted border crossing at Wildhorse (teeny rural area) had no immigration officer on duty so the cab was sent to Sweetgrass a couple of hours west and open 24 hours with full staff.

On attempting the border crossing in Sweetgrass, the cab driver was arrested and had his cab impounded for attempting a second border crossing in 24 hours (apparently a violation of some regulation), despite being told to report to Sweetgrass at Wildhorse!

The cab driver's brother was a policeman in Alberta who had to enlist the support of Montana Senator Max Baucus to get this sorted out. The cab driver spent almost a month in detention (not the great fare he thought it was) and it took several months to get his cab back. How's that for abuse of power!

In my youth, I experience the same abuse of power by immigration authorities but there was nothing I could do about it. There is nothing reasonable about it and it certainly hasn't prevented a whole host of hostile elements from entering the USA or the USA from spawning its own hostile elements.

I love visiting the USA but new security measures are doing little to improve security while impeding many people's legitimate travel.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Brian:
Incidentally, anecdotal information cannot be evaluated in the absence of anything resembling real evidence that what you say is both accurate and complete.</font>

Ah.

As for the INS, it (sadly) ranks at the very bottom of government agencies (http://www.govexec.com/gpp/0299ins.htm)when it comes to performance, management, record keeping, etc, etc... I'm pretty astounded they even figured out (assuming they are correct) that Mrs. Anderson overstayed her tourist visa in 1998. I would say that about half of the time my I-94 card is not taken away by airline personel. Though I normally point this out of them, it still happens that one will argue they need not/should not take it.

Since Mrs. Robinson did not dispute the facts of her having overstayed her visa however, it appears that she certainly does bear responsibility for the matter. How to extend your stay in the US. (http://www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics/howdoi/extendstay.htm)

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by MIKESILV:
Did not most of the hijackers have valid visas??</font>

I think this is exactly the point. At least one, if not several, of the 9/11 hijackers were admitted to the United States after having previously overstayed a visa. Had what happened to the Kiwi lady been in place and properly enforced prior to 9/11, at least one of the hijackers would not have been legally admitted to the US. In addition to general criticism over a lot of things, there was a lot of specific criticism over this particular set of circumstances (i.e. a person with a previous record of an overstay being granted subsequent entry with no questions asked). I don't think it's unreasonable that the INS is now strictly enforcing this rule.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">But the rampant, unchecked abuses of power by our federal officials -- all in the name of "security" -- are turning this country into something straight out of an Orwellian fantasy.</font>

Despite what I've said above, I agree completely with this quote. I guess to sum up my opinions, just because we had security lapses that had a partial contribution to 9/11 is no excuse for the gov't to implement unreasonably harsh policies in the name of "security." At the same time, it's unreasonable to think that just because some policies are unreasonable, that every time a policy is enforced, it is done in an unreasonable manner, especially in the case where you have a person with a previous personal history of violating the regulations.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Seems we will let the chinese girl stay with no penalty, but the wife of a US citizen gets the third degree.</font>

I really don't have an opinion one way or the other regarding the Chinese girl, but I would like to point out several differences in the two cases that make any direct comparison unreasonable:

- In the case of the Chinese girl, no indication that anything was amiss was present at the time of her admission to the US. Once admitted, the rights of the person admitted are greatly increased (whether they be US citizens or aliens). Specifically, you have a right to a hearing, right to access to an attorney, right to due process, protection from unreasomable searches, etc. None of these are present prior to being admitted (some of this is true even for US citizens). So, in the case of the Chinese girl, since the gov't had no information of any problem until after admission, any action taken must meet greatly increased due process protections, along the lines of what you would generally expect in a US courtroom or agency.

- The notion that a 12 year old girl could form the same level of criminal intent for a visa violatiom as a 51 year old woman, married to a US citizen, having been a flight attendant, and having a lifetime's experience with immigration regulations, including arriving and departing the US "hundreds of times," is pushing it. Saying the Kiwi had "criminal intent" is probably a great stretch, but it certainly could be said that she should have known better than to overstay her visa.

Regarding the lack of formal immigration exit procedures in the US, I don't see this as a big contributor to this particular situation. Ordinarily, for an air departure, the departure portion of the I-94W form is collected by the airline when you check in for the departing flight. The only way the INS would have known that the departure in 1998 took place 8 days after the end of the 90-day period would be if they actually received the departure card, or otherwise got electronic information from the airline about the passenger's passport number, flight, and date.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">My point is, If the INS are going to enforce a 3 day overstay like they did to the Kiwi lady, then I think they need to at least place a few INS officials on the US borders to see who actually leaves - otherwise, the system is open to all types of stories. Come to think of it - what is the point of giving out visitors visas if they do not check when they leave. Hello - a possible illegal immigration problem here.</font>

Had it been the case of the departure record not having been made at all, I think the results would have been very different. Although there may have been a question raised upon arrival, there would have been no concrete proof of a previous overstay had the departure record been lost. Also, there was no indication that the facts surrounding the overstay in this case are in dispute. So, although departure procedures might possibly be improved, this really has nothing to do with this particular case. Having perfect recordkeeping of departures won't prevent future problems in the case where someone actually overstays their visa, as was apparently the case in this situation.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">There are no rights of appeal, just do what they say.</font>

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">You feel powerless. You don't get Mirandized. You don't get a lawyer.</font>

Well, the Kiwi in question chose to use the Visa Waiver Program. This offers streamlined admission to the US, but also has a few restrictions. Among others, these include:

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">- Not have failed to comply with the conditions of any previous admission under the visa waiver program.

- Waive any right to review or appeal an immigration officer's decision as to your admissibility, other than on the basis of an application for asylum or an application for withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment</font>

So, in this case, the Kiwi voluntarily waived her rights to appeal in using the Visa Waiver Program. Had she applied for a visitor's visa, she would not have had this problem. I think this is clearly demonstrated by the fact that after her return to NZ, she did apply for and was granted a visitor's visa in only a week.

This brings me to my next point: How was this person to know that this was going to happen to her? There was probably no way for her to know, which bothers me. As the article pointed out, she was admitted several times after the 1998 visa violation. How was she to know that there would be such a big problem this time? The answer is that there is no way she could have reasomably known.

I don't know how to address this problem in a general way. I'm not proposing this as a solution, but I have to point out the system that Australia has: a national of any country other than Australia and New Zealand must have an Electronic Travel Authority, or ETA, prior to boarding their flight to Australia. For visitors from countries that don't otherwise require a visa to visit Australia, this appears to be just a check to make sure that the visitor is not on any sort of "watch list" or would otherwise be denied entry due to individual circumstances. Perhaps there should be an easy way, perhaps mandatory, for visitors to the US that plan to use the Visa Waiver Program to easily check to make sure that there's not some sort of problem specific to them individually prior to arriving in the US.

As to the humiliation, feeling of complete vulnerability, and the general notion that "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely," I completely agree. Let me share a personal experience from my own life:

I have personal experience in the "back room." Several years ago, I entered the US under circumstances that the INS felt was suspicious. I was taken into the "back room," given a thorough "pat-down" of my body, and had the contents of my possessions, including my personal papers, gone through in minute detail. Without question, this procedure makes you feel powerless, vulnerable, scared, and generally extremely uncomfortable, and makes you realize the enormity of the power that INS/Customs has at a point of entry. On a separate occasion, I was extracted at gunpoint from my vehicle by INS officers.

So, although I didn't experience an overnight detention and deportation as the woman in the article at the top of this thread did, I do think that I have more standing than most based on my experience to comment on entry procedures at the US border. In both of my cases, I had done absolutely nothing wrong, but became well acquainted with the raw power of the border agents, the attitude that it gives some of them, and the feelings of hopelessness that it can create in the traveler.

I hope that I've been able to contribute to this thread, and that readers will see what i'm trying to say - that is, rules need to be enforced, but at the same time, we must be very careful not to overreact and especially not to abuse power.

Regarding the tracking of US departures --- yesterday morning at SMF while checking my wife & son in for a trip to MEX, I noticed the United Airlines agent scanning their USA passports using one of those readers that picks up the standardized coding on the bottom of the passport's front page. I'm guessing this is used to gather data to prepare an EDI manifest of passengers for Mexican immigration. Couldn't the INS use this same data to at least track visitors who leave the USA by air?

I used to come to the US on business and as a tourist. I don;t spend my tourist dollars there any more and stories of this type will put people off coming. Perhaps the US doesn't want us - OK by me.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Markie:
I used to come to the US on business and as a tourist. I don;t spend my tourist dollars there any more and stories of this type will put people off coming. Perhaps the US doesn't want us - OK by me.</font>

I wouldn't let a few of these stories stop you from visiting the US. There have been millions of people admitted to the US since 9/11, and the vast majority of them have had no problems.

I do agree that the US has a certain brand of harshness all its own when it comes to matters like this. However, I think the same holds true for many Commonwealth countries.

I personally know of someone that was denied entry to Canada solely because he had a typewriter in the back seat of his car. Apparently, the inspector thought that nobody visiting Canada on vacaction would bring a typewriter with them, and therefore he must be lying and actually intended to work in Canada. In addition to the notion of "possession of a typewriter" being grounds for denial of entry, the general issue of Canada needing to protect itself from Americans wanting to go there to work illegally is somewhat humorous (humourous?) in its own right.

I think they do. When I had my INSPASS renewed last time, the INS officer called up my travel data on his screen. All my departures where there, so it must have come from somewhere. They only way I can think of is when my passport is scanned at check-in (and that's not even a US passport).

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by El Cochinito:
Regarding the tracking of US departures --- yesterday morning at SMF while checking my wife & son in for a trip to MEX, I noticed the United Airlines agent scanning their USA passports using one of those readers that picks up the standardized coding on the bottom of the passport's front page. I'm guessing this is used to gather data to prepare an EDI manifest of passengers for Mexican immigration. Couldn't the INS use this same data to at least track visitors who leave the USA by air?</font>