PDA

View Full Version : Icelandic tourist arrested at JFK for overstaying visa over 10 years ago


rotornut
17th Dec 2007, 18:43
Woman arrested at JFK for overstaying U.S. visa
Woman arrested at JFK for overstaying U.S. visa more than a decade earlier
The Associated Press
updated 3:57 p.m. ET, Fri., Dec. 14, 2007
REYKJAVIK, Iceland - Iceland's government has asked the U.S. ambassador to explain the treatment of an Icelandic tourist who says she was held in shackles before being deported from the United States.
The woman, Erla Osk Arnardottir Lillendahl, 33, was arrested Sunday when she arrived at JFK airport in New York because she had overstayed a U.S. visa more than 10 years earlier.
Lillendahl, 33, had planned to shop and sightsee with friends, but endured instead what she has claimed was the most humiliating experience of her life.
She contended she was interrogated at JFK airport for two days, during which she was not allowed to call relatives. She said she was denied food and drink for part of the time, and was photographed and fingerprinted.
On Monday, Lillendahl claimed, her hands and feet were chained and she was moved to a prison in New Jersey, where she was kept in a cell, interrogated further and denied access to a phone.
She was deported Tuesday, she told reporters and wrote on her Internet blog.
On Thursday, Foreign Minister Ingibjorg Solrun Gisladottir told U.S. Ambassador Carol van Voorst that the treatment of Lillendahl was unacceptable.
"In a case such as this, there can be no reason to use shackles" Gisladottir said. "If a government makes a mistake, I think it is reasonable for it to apologize, like anyone else."
Van Voorst has contacted the officials at JFK airport and asked them to provide a report on Lillendahl's case, Gisladottir said.

Ozzy
17th Dec 2007, 19:21
She is definitely from Iceland:E:E

http://eggmann.blog.is/users/d2/eggmann/img/erlaosk3_279954.jpg

Ozzy

frostbite
17th Dec 2007, 20:27
Dunno about fingerprinting but I'd photograph her as well.

Wingswinger
17th Dec 2007, 20:38
The Land of the Free strikes again. And they wonder why they are unpopular around the world.

brickhistory
17th Dec 2007, 21:03
And they wonder why they are unpopular around the world.

No, no we don't. We just don't care about your opinion.







But to think 'jobsworth' stupidity like this is only in the US is the height of arrogance.


Oh, wait, that's our trait......................

AirScrew
17th Dec 2007, 22:17
She sure looks like a terrorist to me. You can see the thinly veiled (sic) threat....

But ofcourse I am not surprised.
I have entered the US many many times, and visited many countries around the world.
The US immigration service is BY FAR... the most unwelcoming bunch of peaked caps I have every seen.

tony draper
17th Dec 2007, 22:23
Hmmm,the cousins do tend to go over the top a tad with prisoners,but when yer think what Mr Bonney did to Bell and Hollinger yer can't blame em.
Keep the change Bob.:E

RatherBeFlying
17th Dec 2007, 23:36
She looks too much like Valerie Plame for her own good:}

Dan D'air
17th Dec 2007, 23:41
brickhistory,

Thank God (The White, bearded original one) for you............

Some people may have begun to think that our closest allies have no sense of humour..........

Two's in
18th Dec 2007, 00:37
Is everyone upset because she wasn't offered a job in Airport Security like in the UK?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7089214.stm

Or is it because when you are in custody it means just that?

Or assuming as a tourist she availed herself of the I-94W Visa waiver program (applicable for Iceland) she misunderstood the question:

...or have you ever been excluded or deported, or been previously removed from the United States, or procured or attempted to procure a Visa or entry to the United States by fraud or misrepresentation?

Couldn't see anything there about "unless it was a really long time ago..."

In addition to the Form I-94 requirements, the Form I-94W includes specific questions related to inadmissibility issues. If the applicant answers yes to any of the questions on the reverse side of the Form I-94W, the applicant should contact the United States Embassy/Consulate in his/her country to obtain a visa prior to travel. The applicant must sign and date the Form I-94W, which indicates agreement to waive his/her right to a hearing before an immigration judge, if found inadmissible.


Vicious, fascist bastards in the US CIS, imagine carrying out the threats they printed on all the forms. It's almost like they take this stuff seriously these days.

con-pilot
18th Dec 2007, 01:26
I mean for god's sake, she is a blond. DUHHHHHH! :p

Blacksheep
18th Dec 2007, 03:04
Wow! PPRuNe is so inclusive, we even have Jobsworth members. :ooh:

Me, I'd have thought an I-94W was a westbound interstate highway... :}

P.S. I know a couple of blondes who like to be shackled hand and foot. :suspect:

...and no you can't have their phone number.

Blacksheep
18th Dec 2007, 03:22
She's such a bonny lass I couldn't resist looking further into this. Erla's blog (http://eggmann.blog.is/blog/eggmann/) makes interesting reading.

Its not surprising that she was denied entry, as she must have made a false statement on her I-94W or whatever, but it is hard to understand the severity of her treatment. Some of what she was subjected to could be classified as torture. When I did my stints as Orderly Sergeant in the RAF Northolt Guardroom (Doubled as RAF Southern Region Detention Centre) we were certainly never permitted to treat prisoners in military confinement in this manner - and they were all convicted criminals.

West Coast
18th Dec 2007, 04:40
"She sure looks like a terrorist to me"
I wonder the looks of the lady who was caught carrying a bomb on board an aircraft for her terrorist boyfriend. I also wonder about the women who tried to blow up the wedding party in Jordan, luckily her explosive belt didn't work and her husband did the deed instead. How about the grandmother or the pretty young school girl who were also suicide bombers. Can only hope you would be a little more vigilant should you be thrust into a position of responsibility for such things.
I don't think she was a terrorist, from the looks of her I can imagine her in the adult entertainment industry instead. She wasn't arrested for being a terrorist from the looks of the article, but rather for being in the country illegally. Don't let that bother you however.

eastern wiseguy
18th Dec 2007, 05:03
She only had to read her visa waiver form which states she waives ALL rights upon arrival(paraphrasing but thats the gist).Her treatment does however seem to be more than a little severe.

Loose rivets
18th Dec 2007, 07:10
They put a busty blond into a full set of chains on a T/V prog about traffic police. She had given a false name in a panic, then corrected herself to no avail.

The Nr Fairy
18th Dec 2007, 07:13
I feel a minor clarification is in order to West Coast's post. Nezar Hindawi (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article493799.ece or Google for background) duped his pregnant girlfriend into unwittingly carrying a bomb, she had no knowledge of the plot at all.

Daysleeper
18th Dec 2007, 08:58
It raises a number of questions about the whole visa process. As aircrew I've been in and out of the states a number of times on biz jets and freighters where leaving through small airports we have had no INS presence and very little interest when we try to get hold of them. Inbound obviously they are interested. So at a guess I have probably officially entered the USA twice for every time I have left. I have just renewed my crew visa with no problems but I gotta say that stories like this make me worry that one day I'll arrive in JFK and they will tell me that in 1997 I never left and have therefore overstayed my visa by years and will end up in a cell with Bubba. :hmm:

AirScrew
18th Dec 2007, 10:26
100% right DS.

Happened to me, but before 911.
Entered into DFW.
Previous trip was 4 weeks before, exited LAX.
They had no record of me leaving.
Frogmarched into side room, grilled and waited for nearly 4 hours.
Calls to British consul were needed.
And then to my employer re travel dates.
I think if I didnt work for a large US co (IBM), I might still be there...

I had the exit stamp, and the thin edge-piece of the green card still stapled in the passport.
Clearly they had lost the green card, but they couldnt admit fault and certainly not say sorry.

Not a good experience, but more importantly, it reflects very badly on the US.

radeng
18th Dec 2007, 11:21
Now what would happen if the Icelanders picked up a few US citizens and treated them the same way?
Probably nothing, since in general, it seems governments don't give much of a damn for protecting their citizens abroad.

corsair
18th Dec 2007, 11:33
Happens all the time. Big over the top reaction from the guardians of the gates. Some Irish students overstayed a while ago to go touring. They were caught on a train, shackled and locked up in jail with the murderers and rapists before being summarily deported.

Meanwhile down near the border. Illegal Mexicans can raise their flag over the US post office without any intervention. The whole immigration thing is a shambles in the US these days.

Ace Rimmer
18th Dec 2007, 13:00
As a dual national I've never had any hassle with the migra neither has Mrs R (but then she's never overstayed a visa either) If you want dumb first prize has to go the the Canadians...here's and example...

Toronto Pearson:
IO: Here for business of pleasure
Me: Business (thinks "like it says on the card")
IO: What are you here to do?
Me: I'm visiting Bombardier, I'm writing a flight test story for a magazine so I'm gonna do some flying with them out of Downsview (the Bombardier plant in Toronto can't be more than what 15-16 miles away).

IO: So why are you seeing Bombardier?

Me: Errrr they make the aeroplane I'm gonna fly and write about

IO: OK so you are here on business then

Me: Yeah I know it sounds like fun dosent it?

IO: But you said you are here on business...

Continues in this vein for some time (so maybe this guy has a sense of humour dryer than the Gobi desert or the intellect of an artichoke).

The rude prize goes to an LHR IO though...

IO: (examining UK Passport that has suffered an inadvertant wash) "You've damaged this document! This is government property! You can't do that!

Me: I know, bit of a cock up while I was away, left it in my trouser pocket it got washed, you know how it is...

IO: But it's a GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT you are responsible for keeping it undamaged. You've defaced it!

Me: Yeah OK, like I say I'll hot foot down to Victoria and get a new one...

IO: You don't seem to understand if you tired to travel on this passport to the USA you'd be arrested and put in jail.

Me: (tired and getting hacked off with IO) Nope don't think so...

IO: I'M a HOME OFFICE official and if I SAY the US immigration will arrest you for trying to travel into the US they will

Me: (pulling out US passport) Well I'M a DUAL national so it seems you are wrong in this case dosen't it?

IO: Just get it replaced....

airship
18th Dec 2007, 13:16
It's one of the reasons why I've never yet taken up con-pilot's repeated kind invitations to partake in his deep-fried chicken and bar. Back in the '80s, I used to transit through USA sometimes. 5 years or so ago, I was looking through an old passport and I found one of those cards that "I should have handed back in to US immigration on leaving after transit" but I never did...?! :eek: So like 14/15 years afterwards, I mailed the completed form to US Immigration in LAX. Never heard back from them.

I'm sure con-pilot's deep-fried chicken and Scotch is 1st rate, but I'm not sure they're worth the risk of being held incommunicado and in irons for 48H before being put on a flight back to Europe or worse (being sent down to Guantanamo for an undefined period)...?! :O

con-pilot
18th Dec 2007, 15:02
I'm sure con-pilot's deep-fried chicken and Scotch is 1st rate, but I'm not sure they're worth the risk of being held incommunicado and in irons for 48H before being put on a flight back to Europe or worse (being sent down to Guantanamo for an undefined period)...?!

Well, the invite is still open, however, one small point to address your paranoia. Was the lady in question the only person to attempt to enter the US that day? Would you care to guess how million of people from other countries enter the US every week with no problem?

Lets get real people. Do try a bit of logical thinking on these incidents. :rolleyes:

(And remember, she was a blond. :p)

Justiciar
18th Dec 2007, 18:44
Would you care to guess how million of people from other countries enter the US every week with no problem?

Absolutely right. However there have in recent years been a number of incidents reported in the UK of our citizens being treated in this manner. Countries the world over suffer from morons in uniform at their borders - it is just that the treatment of the individual by the US authorities usually makes the news because it is wholy disproportionate to the offence. Perhaps we are just too sensitive or just plain unreasonable to expect something resembling civilized conduct from officials in the biggest democracy in the world.

brickhistory
18th Dec 2007, 19:43
Or the rest of the world and its media looking for something to find fault/have a go with the US?



Nah, that would never happen................

Justiciar
18th Dec 2007, 19:51
Well having spent a good part of my career as a criminal lawyer I have never known anyone treated in the way the lady was in this case. As for putting her in leg irons, this went out in England in Victorian times. This is the sort of behaviour I would expect in those parts of the world where there is no concept of the rule of law.

rotornut
18th Dec 2007, 19:52
Years ago I overstayed my visit in Scandinavia - I think it then was a 3 month limit without a visa. In any case when I returned to Denmark the cheerful and polite immigration official pointed it out when he saw my passport and told me not to worry about it. Maybe a little bit of courtesy would have helped at JFK.

Re Toronto Pearson - As a Toronto resident I've heard good and bad about immigration at YYZ. However, my own experience has been excellent. For that matter I found the immigration people at JFK excellent but that was before you know when.

VP959
18th Dec 2007, 20:02
Courtesy? From US Immigration? You've got to be kidding!
I used to visit the US two or three times a year, every year. Had done for years, often spending a fair bit of cash there.
The last visit was so thoroughly ruined by the completely OTT attitude of the immigration guy that I vowed never, ever to return. That was three years ago, and despite having lots of US friends I'm afraid I won't set foot in the country again - it's just too much hassle.
VP

brickhistory
18th Dec 2007, 20:06
Yeah, well, we like our guns and the death penalty, too! (in most states...)



I wonder how many 'wonderful' experiences are had by Americans, Brits, Germans, etc at ports of entry of many of these other same nations? The ones that don't make the news because it's not America. Funny how that is usually the case.

I'm not defending the actions taken in this instance, but I'm also not overly criticizing the Immigration officials until I know both sides of the story.

As a criminal lawyer, I would have thought you would have wanted to see both sides as well.

Apparently not.........................

Ace Rimmer
18th Dec 2007, 20:47
VP:Honest I've never experienced anything other than courtsey from US migra...really - Of course there are little Hitlers but you find them everywhere...why let them win?

WHERE EVER THEY ARE

Dushan
18th Dec 2007, 23:45
Because US is such an open country (where else in the world can you leave the country, other than Canada, without having to show you "papers"), then they expect you to follow the rules. In any other country this would have happend to her on the way out, instead.

Lesson learned: "Don't Fe*k with INS".

priapism
19th Dec 2007, 01:10
The nicest people in the world live in the USA - and the nastiest work at their airports. - Just an observation.

Blacksheep
19th Dec 2007, 01:31
...where else in the world can you leave the country, other than Canada, without having to show you "papers"Well, The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for starters.

I never found the US immigration officials any ruder than those at a multitude of places. I was surprised by the cheerful and polite immigration in The People's Republic of China (at Pudong, Shanghai) and the worst immigration I've ever encountered was in Saigon, though they've improved a great deal since that first visit. I'd hate to find out what happens to overstayers there.

On a different note; I had an odd experience the last time I applied for a Vietnamese Visa. The consular official took my passport and said it would take about half an hour. A couple of minutes later he came back to the waiting room with a copy of an English magazine article about Vietnam and asked me to explain the meaning of the colloquial expressions. Its not easy, though fortunately I've had some previous experience, coaching Mrs BS when she first came to UK.

Dushan
19th Dec 2007, 01:46
Well, Blacksheep, I won't argue, but it seems to me that the few times I was leaving London, I had to show my passport to someone who looked like police or some kind of immigration/exit control. No, I am not talking about security or airline people. I KNOW that this is true in France, Germany, Italy etc. as well as all the third world countries.

Canada/US border has ABSOLUTELY NO exit control whatsoever. When you drive across the border, you only get stopped by the border guards of the country you are entering. By then you've left the other country about 1/2 mile behind.

Dushan
19th Dec 2007, 02:02
If this is what she said to the INS guy at JFK, she deserves every bit she got:E
Starfsfˇlki­ ß Brei­avÝk ß ■essum ßrum, var sjßlft kornungt. Gu­nř Halldˇrsdˇttir, n˙ kvikmyndaleikstjˇri, var sjßlf ein af starfsm÷nnunum ungu. starfsfˇlki­ fÚkk aldrei a­ vita af hverju st˙lkurnar voru vista­ar ß Brei­avÝk. S÷gu ■eirra mßtti aldrei segja. Mßlsg÷gn ■eirra hurfu ˙r kerfinu. ŮŠr voru brennimerktar sem vandrŠ­ast˙lkur, en ekkert mßtti falla ß mannor­ ■eirra sem brutu ß ■eim.

Blacksheep
19th Dec 2007, 02:04
They did have immigration officials at the exit points for a while after 9/11 but they've gone again. You're checked out of the country through the check-in system but never see an immigration official - unless you've been naughty. At terminal 3 you show your docs to the chap at the departure entrance to prove you're a passenger, get through the usual security checks then pass straight into the duty free shopping area via an annoying additional shoe X-Ray.

mutt
19th Dec 2007, 03:51
Blacksheep,

My last trip through LHR was in June, terminal 3 had immigration officers located in the departure area before you enter the duty free.

Mutt

airgrunt
19th Dec 2007, 04:30
Brickhistory, a question if I may. Are you vertically challenged ? 5'4" or so as you do seem to suffer a bad case of "small man syndrome" You come across as an angry and somewhat paranoid person. :suspect:

Justiciar
19th Dec 2007, 08:13
As a criminal lawyer, I would have thought you would have wanted to see both sides as well.

Apparently not.........................

You seem to have missed the point. It is not about whether this individual was guilty or not - it is about the way she was treated. Don't you have a presumption of innocence in the US? I thought you did. Maybe she has made it all up, in which case I apologise. But, the leg irons, the denial of access to a telephone or to the consulate, the general treatment has figured in a number of similar cases in recent years.

Eliason
19th Dec 2007, 08:31
Either the people at Boston immigration are more friendly or I was just lucky...

A few years ago (post 911), I entered the US, only to be greeted at the passport-check by a friendly: Have you ever overstayed a visit visa?

After declining, I was asked to a small waiting area. After a few questions they asked me to wait. When they later came back with my passport and printout seemingly a lot didn't match up:
- stamp in the passport compared to date I entered the country previously (I entered 28th of Feb, stamp was 28th of August),
- no date leaving (but many other stamps of other countries during the time I "supposedly" was in the states)
- Stamps and visas of very worriesome countries propaply didn't help either (that time I had visas from Russia, China, UAE, Pakistan, ... in my passport).

The whole procedure lasted about an hour, with a friendly: enjoy your stay in the US following :D

I guess a lot also depends on the way you treat them ... :cool::ok:

G-CPTN
19th Dec 2007, 08:41
One way or another, they seem to have made it clear that this woman is 'not welcome' in the US. I believe that she overstayed her visa a decade ago. Was she apprehended and deported then, or did her transgression go un-noticed? Would her current passport include details of the original visa and the dates of her entry/exit? Or would this information be on their electronic database?

If she was expelled from the US previously, then she should have anticipated problems in gaining entry, however, her treatment (if accurately reported) would seem extreme. Appearances can be deceptive (think Baader-Meinhof), and I wonder if the authorities had other intelligence in addition to the relatively minor (?) visa offence. What was the purpose of her previous visit? It's relative easy to declare 'shopping' as cover for an otherwise nefarious purpose.

I was told that according to their records I had overstayed my visa by 3 weeks in 1995. For this reason I would not be admitted to the country and would be sent home on the next flight. I looked at the official in disbelief and told him that I had in fact visited New York after the trip in 1995 without encountering any difficulties.
(from:- http://eggmann.blog.is/blog/eggmann/entry/389611/ )

Ancient Mariner
19th Dec 2007, 09:36
Dushan:
Because US is such an open country (where else in the world can you leave the country, other than Canada, without having to show you "papers"),

Scandinavian countries, EU. Border between for instance Norway and Sweden, Sweden and Denmark has no "paper" control whatsovever. No need to stop, just cross. Not exactly news. Oh, leaving and entering.
Per

moosp
19th Dec 2007, 11:05
Priaprism at post #34 you got it in one.

I would love to visit my many friends and colleagues, go do training courses and spend vacation time in the USA but until it settles down there I cannot take the risk. There are too many innocent people being persecuted by the immigration and TSA, everything from three hour questioning to appalling incarceration.

And I'm a WASP. If I had any of the ethnic qualities that would single me out for even more special attention I would be even more wary of visiting your fine country.

Sad. Hopefully the next president (and especially the vice president) might lighten things up a bit. I do really want to come back.

radeng
19th Dec 2007, 11:22
I think that it depends where you are entering the US. At one time, I always seemed to get the same guy at Phoenix, to the point where he'd recognise me before seeing the passport. Phoenix immigration are generally friendly, while the speed going through security is frequntly such that you haven't time to put a bag down and get out a handkerchief! Heathrow, please go and LEARN! I haven't found Chicago bad, either.

brickhistory
19th Dec 2007, 11:43
Are you vertically challenged ? 5'4" or so as you do seem to suffer a bad case of "small man syndrome" You come across as an angry and somewhat paranoid person.

Mr Grunt, one would think you'd play the ball not the man, but since you asked (which is both offensive, something I thought Commonwealth members sought at all costs to avoid - and troubling that you'd ask about another man's physical characteristics....),

I do indeed suffer from the malady you described. I'm struggling to reach the stratospheric heights of 5'4." But since Napolean did so well, maybe, I still have a chance to achieve greatness as well.

Do I offend you just because I'm not a Michael Moore acoylte? I don't loath my country just because it exists. Do we do lots of things foolishly? Absolutely. Do we make mistakes? Yep. Do we do lots of great things both big and small that rarely, if ever, get credited? Yes as well.

So, in this instance, perhaps the INS over-reacted. Has such a thing never happened in your country? Or is it just didn't recieve the publicity because it wasn't America?

I also leave open the possibility that there is more to this incident than has been reported.

And to the lawyer who abhors 'leg irons (actually probably leg chains, not 'irons.'), you might think about re-instituting such practices. It might help law and order regain the upper hand over the overwhelming numbers of socially repugnant, unable to tell right from wrong citizens that seem to inhabit your land. Or is that stereotypes that only apply one way?

Or not, being 'enlightened and progressive' seems to be working so well.


(edited to add: that 5'4" little man is trapped inside a 6'5" oaf who likes to drive big cars and shoot guns......)

TBirdFrank
19th Dec 2007, 11:55
The inter country slagging off that appears in this thread is as regrettable as it is deplorable.

However, carting off someone who might - and it only appears to be might - have overstayed a previous visa waiver, and putting themin leg irons incommunicado is like something out of the dark ages; not the actions that you would expect of the country that parades it self as the guardian of the free and of true democracy.

I mean - would you necessarily accept everything that appears on a computer screen?

The kind of treatment carried out reeks of paranoia and suggests that the whole edifice of INSA needs a re-appraisal.

There is a whole lot of difference between a technical overstay and potential memebership of Al Qieda, but it doesn't seem apparent here.

Reserve the full might of security for those who might merit it - a few girls on a shopping trip - lighten up!

Justiciar
19th Dec 2007, 13:06
It might help law and order regain the upper hand over the overwhelming numbers of socially repugnant, unable to tell right from wrong citizens that seem to inhabit your land. Or is that stereotypes that only apply one way?

Absolutely. I favour bringing back flogging and hanging as well. What does it matter that a few innocents swing as long as we get one or two of the bad guys. It is the price you should willingly pay for being in a civilised society. :rolleyes:

airship
19th Dec 2007, 14:27
Hopefully the next president (and especially the vice president) might lighten things up a bit. I do really want to come back. I would not cling too tightly to those hopes.

Having watched a fair number of the upcoming Presidential-hopefuls speak out and debate recently, it would appear that they're all equally convinced of and generally voluntarily profess "that the USA is the greatest country in the world, to be a citizen of or to live in", Full Stop. No "if"s, "but"s or "if only"s or any other qualifications that a modern European citizen might expect to hear when life in various European countries is compared say.

I assume that the quality of life in the USA has by now reached such a level, that any imperfections observed are nevertheless far superior to the levels that anyone who is not a US citizen or does not live there, could ever even aspire to.

Dushan
19th Dec 2007, 16:36
No "if"s, "but"s or "if only"s or any other qualifications that a modern European citizen might expect to hear when life in various European countries is compared say.


When it's needed, as in other European countries, then it is added:E

Charles Darwin
19th Dec 2007, 19:28
The foreign minister of Iceland called the US ambassador to her office and protested this barbaric handling of an Icelandic citizen. Handling that clearly had no other purpose than to degrade the girl.
Today there came an answer from Homeland Security (just the name is sickening) and there, the American government acknowledged that this matter had gone out of hand. They said that working rules would be revised because of this.
They did not apologize.:ugh:

radeng
19th Dec 2007, 19:39
It would be interesting if the Icelanders then PNG'd the US Ambassador because of no apology. Unfortunately, they won't do this. But a '24 hour to get out of the country' might make the US State Department start looking at how unpopular Homeland Security has made the US worldwide - and the implications.

Is there still a US Base at Keflavik?

redsnail
19th Dec 2007, 19:59
Just entered the US yesterday at Detroit. The process took a bit longer than it should because some of the people in the queue had out of date forms. (I think they've changed the wording on the top).

Since the crowd controllers could see the delays and once the US folks had gone through they then invited us waiting to go to the US side. The border officer was polite and friendly.

As for rudeness? Well, the luggage was taking quite a while to turn up and immediately after the announcement for the reason, an American woman took it upon herself to hurl abuse at the poor guy who just made the announcement. He brushed her vitriol off. I then asked him a polite question afterwards and got a courteous response back.

airgrunt
19th Dec 2007, 20:46
edited to add: that 5'4" little man is trapped inside a 6'5" oaf who likes to drive big cars and shoot guns......)

I rest my case your Honour :rolleyes:

AMF
19th Dec 2007, 21:17
(Yeah yeah, they probably beat her with rubber hoses and smudged her makeup too. The Word Court should convene for hearings on the matter)

Face it, the woman's simply irate because she wound up missing the holiday season shopping sales at Bloomingdale's and Macy's. The funniest thing, however, is all the feigned, self-righteous indignancy the incident has generated in this thread. To praphrase...

"Oh how horrible and medieval how on earth can they claim to be free and democratic Ill never vist the US every again never no wonder the world hates you Waaaaah"....

Allow me be the first to apologize that our border guards don't hand out candy canes and gumdrops to visiting foreigners while waving you in without a glance. And don't worry about overstaying your visas. Just stay as long as you want. I mean sure it's a crime but gee we'd hate for anyone to think we're hypocritical for not being "free", or something.

Dushan
19th Dec 2007, 21:26
+1 AMF

and as for They said that working rules would be revised because of this.
They did not apologize.

Boo, why should they apologize if they followed the current rules. Maybe the rules are a bit OTT, but the guy applying them did what he had to.

Like I said: Don't Fe*k with INS.

tony draper
19th Dec 2007, 21:53
Disgraceful we would never do anything like this to Iceland, err, come to think we did Invade them a little bit in 1940.:rolleyes:

G-CPTN
19th Dec 2007, 22:12
And then there was bumper-ships during the Cod War.
http://www.btinternet.com/~warship/Feature/cod/cod6.JPG

tony draper
19th Dec 2007, 22:18
Yer well them Cods was ours.:suspect:

brickhistory
19th Dec 2007, 22:20
Ok, so it does look like DHS was over-zealous in appying its rules.

Iceland calls in the US Ambassador to demand an explanation and/or apology for the treatment of one of its citizens.

Fair enough.

One wonders, however, did Iceland ever recieve the US Ambassador after one of the hundreds of US SAR forces saves in Iceland of Icelandic citizens during the US's presence from 1942 (after Britain invaded as Mr. Draper rightly points out) until the final US withdrawal in 2006 (much against the wishes of the Icelandic government one notes. So to answer the question, Kef is closed.)?

I'm betting probably not. So how about we call it even?

One over the top detention of a babe (Iceland does have some stunning women! Keeping the gene pool pure would tend to do that, I suppose....) traded for the SAR saves over the decades.

Deal?

con-pilot
19th Dec 2007, 23:35
Okay, I am not defending the actions of the TSA or Homeland Security (never liked that name) in this case in the fact that she was arrested for something minor that happened ten years ago.

However, I need to inform all of you that are so shocked and appalled about the fact that the lady in question was placed in "leg irons" a few facts. Her ankles had leg restraints placed on them, also she had a waist chain placed around her waist that had a short chain connected to her handcuffs. This was done for her transfer to a holding facility from JFK.

Now, as I was not there how do I know exactly how she was restrained? Because, all prisoners in custody in the United States, whether Federal, State or local are transported this way. Reason for this is dead police officers, dead prisoners and dead civilians.

Justiciar, in this country you are considered innocent until proven guilty, of that there is no doubt. However, while any suspect is in custody they are treated the same, unless there is a clear reason that the suspect is so dangerous that more strict measures are needed. The lady in question was not considered dangerous and was treated accordingly. To be honest I am quite surprised that a "criminal lawyer" is shocked and appalled by the way the lady in question was restrained for transport. While it is very true that everyone arrested in the United States is considered innocent, all persons under custody are treated the same for security reasons.

I am also very curious if the lady in question was instead of being a blue eyed, blond headed beautiful young woman was a dark skinned, skinny crack whore if the outrage would have been the same. :suspect:

I think not.

(Oh, in case you don't know, I was with the United States Marshal Service for over ten years.)

Charles Darwin
20th Dec 2007, 00:01
The main thing is the satisfaction and fun the Americans seem to have whenever they have the chance to degrade someone. I have seen people arrested both in England and in USA. Oh boy, what a difference. In America everything is done with shouting and with as much bloody mess as possible. They even put 10 year old kids in chains (even 5yo in Florida if they throw their food around in playschool). In the civilized world even the prisoners are allowed to keep some dignity. They kill more cops in America in spite of your methods there.
What is the purpose of parading a chained deportee through a full air terminal, stopping regularly and shouting so that all others can see? I've seen some unbelievable things done by US "law" enforcement. Yes there may well be rules about the chains, but only idiots follow all rules (well, that figures).
They sadly get their thrills by degrading others. At least that's what it looks like to Europeans and other people from the civilized world.

brickhistory
20th Dec 2007, 00:04
At least that's what it looks like to Europeans and other people from the civilized world.

Really? I realized 'group think' was a Euro-thing, but you can speak for all Europeans, not to mention the 'civilized world?'








Dang, them Borg ain't got nuttin' on y'all................

con-pilot
20th Dec 2007, 00:38
I have seen people arrested both in England and in USA.

So have I. I have also seen the 'chavs' in action in England and watch them get away with their actions. Sorry, I don't like it when punks get away with physical and verbal abuse of innocent victims.

But you know what, that is your country, not mine. I respect your laws and procedures even when I don't agree. Too bad you don't do the same.

Two's in
20th Dec 2007, 00:49
Extract below from the UK Custody management guidelines for high risk prisoners - no wonder everyone's outraged by the Viking's treatment, the only thing missing off the list below is a cup of tea, comfy pillow and a blowjob from the Clerk of the Court. Whatever next - a strongly worded memo from the Home Office?



1. This note provides best practice guidance for Custody Management Directions for those prisoners who may a pose a risk of escape or violence. The guidance applies to both Crown and Magistratesĺ Courts, but not to civil courts. The objective of the guidance is to ensure that wherever possible the risk of escape or violence by prisoners is identified in advance of a court appearance and is managed by introducing appropriate arrangements that do not unnecessarily prejudice the prisoner.

2. The guidance is underpinned by the following principles:

(ii) Any escape from court is highly undesirable and undermines public confidence in the criminal justice system
(iii) Custody Management Directions (including the use of handcuffs or other restraints) must not prejudice a fair trial
(iv) Any application of force to a person is used only when it is necessary, for the minimum possible duration and only to the extent necessary
(v) There must always be compelling reasons supported by a risk assessment and comprehensive information before applications are made for the use of any restraints. Care must always be exercised to restrict the occasions where applications for Custody Management Directions are made to the Court to those where the use of restraints is, exceptionally, justified.
(vi) In all but the exceptional case, the risk posed by a defendant will be managed through the use of a secure dock where available and through the provision of the necessary number of dock officers.
(vii) All applications for Custody Management Directions should be made at the earliest opportunity. Applications for restraint will be made by the prosecuting authority having conduct of the case, for example, Customs and Excise, Serious Fraud Office as well as the CPS with full supporting reasons.
(viii) It is for the Court to determine whether handcuffs or other restraints may be used.
These principles apply to all stages of court proceedings. The approach should not differ merely because a prisoner has been convicted or remanded for sentence. Save in the most exceptional circumstances a trial will not be conducted with a defendant in handcuffs. This may have an effect on the verdict of the jury and therefore be prejudicial to the prisoner.

BenThere
20th Dec 2007, 00:51
What is the purpose of parading a chained deportee through a full air terminal, stopping regularly and shouting so that all others can see?

A few reasons occurred to me:

1. So you won't get away

2. So you don't do it again

3. So others might see it and decide against doing it themselves

AMF
20th Dec 2007, 02:58
Justiciar quote:
You seem to have missed the point. It is not about whether this individual was guilty or not - it is about the way she was treated. Don't you have a presumption of innocence in the US? I thought you did.

You seem to have missed the point. She wasn't charged with a crime in this incident, she was denied entry into the US and detained until the next flight back from whence she came. Happens all the time, and nobody gets phone calls to the consulate etc etc. Do you think they should have allowed her (or others) to enter the country and run free with a promise to show back up?

The woman had already commited a crime in the past after being allowed to enter; she'd disregarded the law and overstayed her visa. Without that on her record or falsified documents when she presented herself this time, I'm sure she may have been afforded more courtesy while in detention. In fact, she would have been allowed to enter.

Immigration law is a specialty. Obviously, it's not yours.

But, the leg irons, the denial of access to a telephone or to the consulate, the general treatment has figured in a number of similar cases in recent years.

For you indignant stone-throwers, it's not like this only happens in the US. About 3 years ago a smaller UK airport that had no dedicated detention room I personally witnessed a gentleman handcuffed to the Immigration Officer's desk for 8+ hours after he'd arrived on a private aircraft with no visa, awaiting another flight out. We arrived soon after his aircraft did, waiting while they sorted him out, and when we left later that evening he was still there. For all I know he still is, now a skeleton, still shackled to the leg of the desk.

I never saw any reports of him on the news, or here on Pprune. Maybe I should have begun a thread whining and lecturing the UK about the treatment of a stranger I had nothing to do with by a government that's not my own on how to enforce it's own laws.

But for all you sensitive types who try to enter the US illegally, overstay your visa, or can't be bothered to tell the truth on Immigration documents because you think it doesn't matter the next time you present yourselves at the border, we'll make sure to reserve rooms at the Ritz Carleton where you'll be comfy during the delay prior to deporting your a$$.

StbdD
20th Dec 2007, 04:27
Stipulated to be fact by her and by her media:

Fact one - she overstayed her previous visa and was at that point a criminal
Fact two - she concealed it and fraudulently signed an entry form to re-enter

Facts in evidence:

She attempted to re-enter, was captured and deported

Media hype to show she was a poor, mistreated pretty blonde. Whose name and model picture were suddenly provided to the media and internet but lack any evidence of her claim of abuse.

Colour me surprised

parabellum
20th Dec 2007, 07:42
Charles Darwin - If you had to stump up the bill, (or even contribute to it), for dealing with illegal arrivals in the USA you would probably get a bit cross too and make an example of those that chose to ignore or flout your laws, especially the ones that were not seeking asylum or desperate but just taking the pi$$.

It is very easy to get a visa renewed or extended, especially ten years ago, but this women chose not to and therefore got deported, it would have been stamped in her passport at the time, coming back to the USA, as she did, without making any effort to clear her path, shows both arrogance and contempt for the laws of the USA, hopefully she knows better now.

No I am not an American but I put this women in the same category as those ignorant few that deliberately break speed limits simply because they think they know better, showing a blatant disregard for the law, placed there to protect the majority.

Forkandles
20th Dec 2007, 08:08
Extract below from the UK Custody management guidelines for high risk prisoners:

2(v) There must always be compelling reasons supported by a risk assessment and comprehensive information before applications are made for the use of any restraints.

Above copied from Two's In's post.

So then, for people who are already considered, given half a chance, ready to make a run for it, using violence if necessary, there still needs to be a risk assessment made over whether to put cuffs on them? Because it might prejudice a fair trial? :ooh:

This country truly has bent over and gripped it's ankles.

The US treatment, across the board, when transporting prisoners, for the reasons con-pilot points out, seem pretty reasonable to me.
I would hope this case was a one off, where the rules were adhered to when common sense should have prevailed.

There again, I've just finished Grisham's 'The Innocent Man', so I'm not so sure... :sad:

ORAC
20th Dec 2007, 08:55
StbdD: Fact one - she overstayed her previous visa and was at that point a criminal

AMF: AMF: he woman had already commited a crime in the past after being allowed to enter; she'd disregarded the law and overstayed her visa........Immigration law is a specialty. Obviously, it's not yours. :hmm:

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), in an 04/06/06 report entitled "Immigration Enforcement Within the United States," offered the following (http://www.immigrationprocon.org/questions/illegalimmigrationcrimefelony.html):

"The INA [Immigration and Nationality Act] includes both criminal and civil components, providing both for criminal charges (e.g., alien smuggling, which is prosecuted in the federal courts) and for civil violations (e.g., lack of legal status, which may lead to removal through a separate administrative system in the Department of Justice). Being illegally present in the U.S. has always been a civil, not criminal, violation of the INA, and subsequent deportation and associated administrative processes are civil proceedings."

StbdD
20th Dec 2007, 10:56
Geepers ORAC, you are right. She was just a civil criminal.

Oops, then there is the federal fraud involved on her recent attempted entry. Kinda bumped that one right up to a felony fraud charge didn't it?

Um, that would be criminal if that makes ya happy.

Nobody came after her, she tried it on.

Justiciar
20th Dec 2007, 11:04
Immigration law is a specialty. Obviously, it's not yours.



What exactly is the relevance of that remark? Why do these forums descend to personal attacks? Does this somehow strengthen your case? What my experience may or may not be is pretty irrelevent to the arguments, unless you are only entitled to speak if you are an expert on (US) immegration law.


all persons under custody are treated the same for security reasons.



Perhaps then we should view it as a reflection of the society - our prisoners are transported in handcuffs, yours are in leg irons (sorry, mannacles), chains belt irons and cuffs


lecturing the UK about the treatment of a stranger I had nothing to do with by a government that's not my own on how to enforce it's own laws


You are absolutely right. We have no right to comment at all on how the US treats people in this situation - after all, you would never catch the US doing that, would you :rolleyes: . They are quite entitled to be as anal as they wish - in the last few years they have certainly been less troubled by dodgy foreigners from many parts of the world coming to do business, to do flight training etc. It must be a huge relief.

BTW, was it actually established that there had been a previous overstaying? I believe that she had visited the US subsequently without a problem.

brickhistory
20th Dec 2007, 11:29
What exactly is the relevance of that remark? Why do these forums descend to personal attacks?

I agree that these threads too often devolve to personal attacks, but regarding 'relevance,' you did open the door with your 'having been a criminal lawyer for most of my career' line.

Therefore, your expertise, or lack thereof, is relevant to the discussion.

Justiciar
20th Dec 2007, 11:39
you did open the door with your 'having been a criminal lawyer for most of my career' line.



TouchÚ. However, it was in the context that this had enabled me to experience how prisoners are treated in the criminal system in the UK and drawing a comparison with the apparent approach in the US. Whether the publicity is fair or not it does create a negative impression abroad which the US would be unwise to ignore.

Having said that, I have found the staff at Us airports to be friendly and indeed bend over backwards to help visitors get the forms filled in properly, so I am commenting on this report and not reflecting my personal experience. I know that such incidents are the exception, though as I commented earlier there have been a number in the recent past which generated a fair amount of negative publicity.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo041020/halltext/41020h01.htm

This is a slightly old (2004) link to a debate in parliament referring to a number of similar incidents, if you can wade through it