BoxRec

Anybody know the definitive answer to this, or if he's been to the US for any reason at all over the past few years?

Martin Murray is the name that comes to mind as somebody who was never able to go there to fight. Was wondering whether AJ could have a similar problem.

dont know the answer re AJ

but wasn't martin not allowed to fight there cause he lied on a visa about his conviction, so he could go to a hatton fight

To get a visa for America, you basically have to be completely honest about convictions and then hope for the best, as his crime was relatively minor, didn't result in a prison sentence and was non violent I think he would be fine. Also lets say he became as popular as let's say Hatton did in a few years time and could bring 30 000 Brits to Vegas with their wallets full, this would also probably have a bearing on the decision.

If it was Joe bloggs wanting a visa and you had drug charge you have no chance of getting a visa he may well get one in the future but now he wouldn't especially for drugs, I got a visa recently and I've got enough convictions and I had no problem

At the same time drugs and drink driving offences are the worst when getting a US working visa I don't think AJ will struggle they're very strict

sweetscience wrote:dont know the answer re AJ

but wasn't martin not allowed to fight there cause he lied on a visa about his conviction, so he could go to a hatton fight

Was murrays for assault?
Did he serve time for it?
If he had been honest regarding a visa would it have made any difference?

craigjenkins05 wrote:At the same time drugs and drink driving offences are the worst when getting a US working visa I don't think AJ will struggle they're very strict

I'm not sure how these points connect to each other. If you say drug offences are among the worst when getting a US working visa and that they're very strict on it, then why do you say in the same sentence that you don't think AJ will struggle?

wesshaw1985 wrote:

sweetscience wrote:dont know the answer re AJ

but wasn't martin not allowed to fight there cause he lied on a visa about his conviction, so he could go to a hatton fight

Was murrays for assault?
Did he serve time for it?
If he had been honest regarding a visa would it have made any difference?

Thought it was street robbery which is more serious than an assault.

palooka wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:

sweetscience wrote:dont know the answer re AJ

but wasn't martin not allowed to fight there cause he lied on a visa about his conviction, so he could go to a hatton fight

Was murrays for assault?
Did he serve time for it?
If he had been honest regarding a visa would it have made any difference?

Thought it was street robbery which is more serious than an assault.

#levels

My mate got refused due to an old drugs charge, cultivating cannabis, and he passed his CRB check for work. 12 months later he got in after a drug test. Had to go to London twice.

palooka wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:

sweetscience wrote:dont know the answer re AJ

but wasn't martin not allowed to fight there cause he lied on a visa about his conviction, so he could go to a hatton fight

Was murrays for assault?
Did he serve time for it?
If he had been honest regarding a visa would it have made any difference?

Thought it was street robbery which is more serious than an assault.

I think it was robbery AND assault, plus he had been in prison four times.

I think that's a little more serious than getting caught with a bag of skunk.

johnswan1 wrote:

craigjenkins05 wrote:At the same time drugs and drink driving offences are the worst when getting a US working visa I don't think AJ will struggle they're very strict

I'm not sure how these points connect to each other. If you say drug offences are among the worst when getting a US working visa and that they're very strict on it, then why do you say in the same sentence that you don't think AJ will struggle?

Sorry I meant that he will struggle, I didn't read my comment back

Entry comes down to something called Moral Turpitude. I have had to research this as I am travelling with the British team for the World Natural bodybuilding championship in Atlantic City next week and have an assault situation from years back. I will quote the official literature.

(this is re assault and murray) -
if you fall into this category, you cannot get a VWP (Esta, Visa Waiver and will instead need an interview at the Embassy)

Assault (this crime is broken down into several categories, which involve
moral turpitude):
(a) Assault with intent to kill;
(b) Assault with intent to commit rape;
(c) Assault with intent to commit robbery;
(d) Assault with intent to commit serious bodily harm; and
(e) Assault with a dangerous or deadly weapon (some weapons may be
found to be lethal as a matter of law, while others may or may not be
found factually to be such, depending upon all the circumstances in
the case. Such circumstances may include, but are not limited to, the
size of the weapon, the manner of its use, and the nature and extent
of injuries inflicted.);

This is NOT Moral turpitude and so you should be fine to apply for an ESTA
Crimes committed against the person, family relationship, or sexual morality
which do not involve moral turpitude include:
(1) Assault (simple) (i.e., any assault, which does not require an evil intent or
depraved motive, although it may involve the use of a weapon, which is
neither dangerous nor deadly);
(2) Illegitimacy (i.e., the offense of begetting an illegitimate child);
(3) Creating or maintaining a nuisance (where knowledge that premises were
used for prostitution is not necessary);
(4) Incest (when a result of a marital status prohibited by law);
(5) Involuntary manslaughter (when killing is not the result of recklessness);
(6) Libel;
(7) Mailing an obscene letter;
(8) Mann Act violations (where coercion is not present);
(9) Riot; and
(10)Suicide (attempted).

Onto Joshua -
9 FAM 40.21(a) N2.3-4 Intentional Distribution of Controlled
Substances
(CT:VISA-2166; 08-22-2014)
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a conviction for the
intentional distribution of a controlled substance or a conviction for drug trafficking
is a crime involving moral turpitude. A typical drug statute that would constitute
a crime involving moral turpitude is “possession with intent to distribute.” In order
to be a crime involving moral turpitude, a conviction is required, unlike an
ineligibility under INA 212(a)(2)(C)(1) based only on “reason to believe.” The
mere possession or use of a controlled substance is not a crime involving moral
turpitude.

So as far as I can tell, he has a conviction for a moral turpitude crime so cannot automatically get entry but would have to be interviewed at the embassy. That will come down to the decision of one person interviewing him.

re Murray. If you lie on the application for a waiver and say you have you are clear of convictions when you aren't, it is made clear that will affect future applications ie you will not get approved when you may have done if you had not already attempted illegal entry

Maybe AJ should just fly in via Washington or Colorado