Denied entry at Suvarnabhumi Airport

[007 RED]

1 hour ago, SunsetT said:

So 90% of men arriving should be refused entry ................

You slightly miss quoted Section 12(8) of the Immigration Act... but I'm happy to call it journalistic licence...Have to say it made me . 

[phuketrichard]

4 hours ago, SpeakeasyThai said:

As an honest law abiding ex pat living in Thailand, I am fed up meeting lawless ex pats with criminal history, problems and mental baggage that they bring to Thailand. They end up bringing their problems with them and thus, creating problems for the rest of us. Your 'friend' should stay in America where he belongs. He is America's problem, not ours.

 

Well done Thai immigration. 

must be nice to look down from such lofty heights..

[MyFriend You]

7 hours ago, Mattd said:

I'd be gobsmacked if Thai immigration suddenly has access to US criminal records, especially one going back so long ago. As above, there must be some other reason.

I would think his passport has been coded/flagged, quite possibly the New designator for a sex offender offense.    That is the only one I would say that Thai Immigrations has access to.

[MyFriend You]

38 minutes ago, Mansell said:

I really doubt that a record, and a short record like his from 25 years ago is still in the system in the US....possible, but unlikely. And unless it was a Federal crime it wouldn't be in a national database. If he is from Oregon then it would only be in their database, and I am guessing probably a small weed conviction. His problem was saying Yes to them. I spent a short amount of time in a prison in Morocco, but there is no way I would tell them this.....and I would bet big money there is nothing on record in that country.....in fact it was 1972 which is 46 years ago which is a lifetime ago there. Obviously they didn't ask him first time in came into Thailand.....I am just surprised they would ask a tourist with money and ticket out of the country.

Hmmmmm  I thi k you just did tell them  

[007 RED]

14 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

I would think his passport has been coded/flagged, quite possibly the New designator for a sex offender offense.    That is the only one I would say that Thai Immigrations has access to.

Not having any real feeling for what the sentencing policy is in the USA, I have looked up the USA federal mandatory sentencing guidelines (minimum/maximum) for Judges (Up-dated November 2008). 

 

These guidelines cover everything from 1st offence driving a snowmobile whilst under the influence of alcohol = 48 hours to 6 months jail time, up to Capital felony = Execution or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

 

To put things in perspective, processing child pornography carry sentences of between 1 and 5 years; minor crimes of sexual nature against children carry sentences of between 2 to 5 years.  However, if it is an aggravated sexual assault against a minor the sentence starts at 25 years for a 1st offence.

 

The OP has indicated that the person concerned was jailed for 2 months (25 years ago). So I think that is a fair indication that whatever the offence was, it was relatively minor and nowhere in the league of sex offences.

 

FYI - Passports do not carry any information concerning criminal offences.  Before you suggest the so called biometric chip does, it does not.  It only contains the same information that is between <<<< >>>> at the bottom of the photo page plus a copy of the individual's photo.  The chip information is encrypted to make it harder to forge the passport.

[Donotdisturb]

The best OPs are always the ones starting with "A FRIEND OF MINE". the guy was rejected for something we dont know about. Period. The whole story is vague and blah blah. Ps. Maybe he wasn't wearing underwear which, as we all know, is a crime/illegal in thailand 555 ?? 

[JackThompson]

9 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

Not having any real feeling for what the sentencing policy is in the USA, I have looked up the USA federal mandatory sentencing guidelines (minimum/maximum) for Judges (Up-dated November 2008). 

 

These guidelines cover everything from 1st offence driving a snowmobile whilst under the influence of alcohol = 48 hours to 6 months jail time, up to Capital felony = Execution or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

 

To put things in perspective, processing child pornography carry sentences of between 1 and 5 years; minor crimes of sexual nature against children carry sentences of between 2 to 5 years.  However, if it is an aggravated sexual assault against a minor the sentence starts at 25 years for a 1st offence.

Those are federal - but most crimes are prosecuted at the state-level.  I have known "average" people who had (before I knew them) been caught red-handed and charged with serious offenses with multi-decade sentencing potential - often when they were young and foolish.  They hired expensive lawyers (often involving the sale of family homes, to pay them), and received reduced charges and probation, or very light sentences. 

In the "child abuse" realm, consider Jeffrey Epstein who, when busted, hired Allan Dershowitz (of OJ-Simpson trial fame) and Ken Starr (independent investigator of Bill Clinton / Lewinsky affair).  Epstein did do some "prison" time - but that consisted of spending nights in his cell, and days at his office.  Only one charge was actually levied, to spite his having, literally, a private island and airplane "staffed" with underage girls.  Former president Bill Clinton took 26 flights on that plane.  Anyone not as wealthy and connected would have spent the rest of their lives in prison.

It's not much different in the USA vs any 3rd World country when it comes to the criminal "justice" (sic) system - just more expensive, depending on the severity of the offense and whether dealing with state or federal charges.

[Donotdisturb]

1 hour ago, phuketrichard said:

must be nice to look down from such lofty heights..

Speakeasythai is holier than the pope. And we all know how those holy people behave behind doors. 

[xerostar]

Is it possible the person who was denied entry had his passport details copied by somebody on his first visit to Thailand. His passport could have then been forged. So the real owner of the original passport comes under suspicion when the forgery has already been sighted by immigration and allowed to pass as genuine. Years ago I was stopped a few times because I have a common Irish name and the IRA were active at the time. Mistaken identity being the problem.
It would be easier for the Thai immigration to deny entry rather than having to do bothersome research.

Sent from my SM-N915F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[SCOTT FITZGERSLD]

3 hours ago, Mansell said:

Nobody was nailing people for child porn 25 years ago in the USA. So I really doubt that was it.

i didnt say it happaned 25 years ago, and i mentioned it only as an example.

it can be many other things, even tax problems (in the USA).

[Shatian]

9 hours ago, Mattd said:

Quite possibly they do, although given the nature of the US system, even this is probably only certain limited info, i.e. whatever is on a federal database.

I still doubt the Thai's have this sort of access.

And 25 years ago. He could not be refused entry due to a minor crime of 25 years ago.

[Russell17au]

Everyone is overlooking one important point.

It does not matter if you have a valid visa from any Thai embassy's or consulates, the IO at your entry point has the legal right to refuse you entry for any reason.

As soon as the chap admitted he had a criminal record that gave the IO the legal right to refuse him entry.

The IO has possibly placed an alert on the computer system now say that he has a criminal record so everytime he comes here it will come up.

There have been others lately that have also been refused entry by IO.

It is the same in Australia, New Zealand and most other countries.

[punchjudy]

it reminds me of the irish gentleman that told the singapore airport cops he was broke and then got turfed out.

 

you never tell these people the truth......always deny, deny deny.

[thrilled]

Something’s wrong.I have been going to Thailand since 1971 and have never had 

immigration ask me about my past.As far as I know they don’t ask anyone.

 

[rwdrwdrwd]

12 hours ago, SpeakeasyThai said:

'Gobsmacked'... clearly you are living in the past? Don't you know everything is linked up to computers now! They can find out anything about anyone if they want to. Elementary.

 

 

Obviously if "everything is linked up to computers now" then anyone with a conviction anywhere in the world would be automatically flagged, and anyone with a criminal conviction anywhere in the world would never get entry to a country that does not allow visitors with criminal records to enter.  They wouldn't need to *ask*, they would already know the answer.

This doesn't happen because.... that level of sharing does not currently occur.

You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

Edited January 29, 2018 by rwdrwdrwd

[jacko45k]

15 hours ago, berybert said:

If asked "have you ever been to jail" the correct answer is NO. Why on earth did he say yes ?

 

Perhaps he had a sudden attack  of honesty.

Unusual in some people's world.......

 

Isn't the fear that they know the answer already and are prompting you to dig the hole deeper.

[chicowoodduck]

Why do I sense a wind-up??

[logres212]

In Australia criminal convictions are wiped from your record after 10 years if the sentence was 30 months or less. Not sure about US.

[berybert]

17 hours ago, SpeakeasyThai said:

As an honest law abiding ex pat living in Thailand, I am fed up meeting lawless ex pats with criminal history, problems and mental baggage that they bring to Thailand. They end up bringing their problems with them and thus, creating problems for the rest of us. Your 'friend' should stay in America where he belongs. He is America's problem, not ours.

 

Well done Thai immigration. 

Thank god there are not to many people like you in this world.

[berybert]

3 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Perhaps he had a sudden attack  of honesty.

Unusual in some people's world.......

 

Isn't the fear that they know the answer already and are prompting you to dig the hole deeper.

Perhaps the reason I don't get scammed as often as many people is because I tend to save the honesty for people I trust. 

Anyone in a uniform in Thailand is not going to be of that cloth.

Edited January 30, 2018 by berybert

[chrisinth]

1 hour ago, logres212 said:

In Australia criminal convictions are wiped from your record after 10 years if the sentence was 30 months or less. Not sure about US.

Moved from one database to another possibly. But they will never be wiped regardless of which country you hail from.

[Russell17au]

2 hours ago, logres212 said:

In Australia criminal convictions are wiped from your record after 10 years if the sentence was 30 months or less. Not sure about US.

Sorry but that is incorrect.

My brother worked at a dance hall called "The Beach House" in Sydney back in 1962 and he was only 18. There was some trouble there one night and he told someone he was a police officer to try to stop things and someone reported him to the police and he was arrested and charged with impersonation and it cost him 20 pound fine in court and when he went for his security license in 2000 he had to supply a police check and it was listed on that. So all convictions remain on the police data bank.

[Mattd]

4 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

Sorry but that is incorrect.

My brother worked at a dance hall called "The Beach House" in Sydney back in 1962 and he was only 18. There was some trouble there one night and he told someone he was a police officer to try to stop things and someone reported him to the police and he was arrested and charged with impersonation and it cost him 20 pound fine in court and when he went for his security license in 2000 he had to supply a police check and it was listed on that. So all convictions remain on the police data bank.

This from the AFP website regarding spent convictions.

Convictions covered

The scheme applies to spent convictions where a waiting period has passed and the individual in question has not re-offended.
The following conditions apply to convictions for a Commonwealth, Territory, State or foreign offence:

• it has been 10 years from the date of the conviction (or 5 years for juvenile offenders)
• the individual was not sentenced to imprisonment for more than 30 months
• the individual has not re-offended during the 10 year (5 years for juvenile offenders) waiting period
• a statutory or regulatory exclusion does not apply

The scheme also covers convictions that have been set aside or pardoned under Part VIIC of the Crimes Act 1914. An individual whose conviction is protected does not have to disclose the conviction to any person, including a Commonwealth authority.

Exclusions

There are some exceptions which require you to disclose a spent or protected conviction.

The Act includes specific exclusions for some positions of employment. The Attorney-General has also granted exclusions from the scheme for several categories of employment.

This means that people applying for such positions must declare all convictions, or any convictions for specific offences, as required for the specific position.

Details of exclusions should be provided to you by the employing organisation before your consent is sought to obtain a criminal history check.

 

[JaiDeeMakh]

@darrendsd @Mattd @JackThompson @mstevens @007 RED @Briggsy  

 

**Update**

My friend and i finally got the "truth" of him. Seems he was arrested over 25 years ago for sex with an underage girl. He "say's" he was 18 at the time, and she was 16 and used a fake ID. How much of this is true i don't know.  

 

I've checked the NSOPW Register and cannot find his name, and checked through Oregon Court records. Whilst he has been in trouble with the law quite a few times, they all seem to be Traffic violations or other non-serious offences. He is also divorced and legally required to pay monthly alimony payments.

 

I do apologize for not having this information on hand when writing the OP, my friend was naturally very upset her fiance was not allowed to enter Thailand and i decided to reach out to the ThaiVisa community for help. Only after sifting through all your comments, and doing some Google detective work were we able to pressure this guy into telling his "story".

 

I completely agree with most of your thinking with regards to "there MUST be more to this story than the OP knows", and you were all right. The one thing we are still in the dark about is what exactly was on the Immigration Officer's computer that flagged him, and was it because he visited Thailand in October (a known country for Pedophile's etc) 

 

Thank you to all ThaiVisa Columbo's, Sherlock Holmes's and Poirot's for your help and advice and everyone who commented

 

 

 

 

 

[Russell17au]

6 minutes ago, Mattd said:

This from the AFP website regarding spent convictions.

Convictions covered

The scheme applies to spent convictions where a waiting period has passed and the individual in question has not re-offended.
The following conditions apply to convictions for a Commonwealth, Territory, State or foreign offence:

• it has been 10 years from the date of the conviction (or 5 years for juvenile offenders)
• the individual was not sentenced to imprisonment for more than 30 months
• the individual has not re-offended during the 10 year (5 years for juvenile offenders) waiting period
• a statutory or regulatory exclusion does not apply

The scheme also covers convictions that have been set aside or pardoned under Part VIIC of the Crimes Act 1914. An individual whose conviction is protected does not have to disclose the conviction to any person, including a Commonwealth authority.

Exclusions

There are some exceptions which require you to disclose a spent or protected conviction.

The Act includes specific exclusions for some positions of employment. The Attorney-General has also granted exclusions from the scheme for several categories of employment.

This means that people applying for such positions must declare all convictions, or any convictions for specific offences, as required for the specific position.

Details of exclusions should be provided to you by the employing organisation before your consent is sought to obtain a criminal history check.

 

This must have come in after 2000 because my brothers conviction was still listed then when he applied to the NSW police for his security license

[Maggusoil]

20 hours ago, berybert said:

If asked "have you ever been to jail" the correct answer is NO. Why on earth did he say yes ?

 

Well said. The answer is "No." I did some 'time' back in the days when you could work off thousands of dollars worth of parking fines in one weekend. In Australia at least i think after twenty years you can request a removal of your record of some minor convictions so they don't appear at least in cursory searches.

[logres212]

3 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

Sorry but that is incorrect.

My brother worked at a dance hall called "The Beach House" in Sydney back in 1962 and he was only 18. There was some trouble there one night and he told someone he was a police officer to try to stop things and someone reported him to the police and he was arrested and charged with impersonation and it cost him 20 pound fine in court and when he went for his security license in 2000 he had to supply a police check and it was listed on that. So all convictions remain on the police data bank.

Sorry this is correct, I should have said to be completely accurate a conviction becomes what's known as spent, and becomes sealed and is not visible on a normal data base but can be seen with an application to a court. So it's true to say convictions are not completely wiped but certainly are not visible to immigration or police in other countries.

[stevenl]

So he was, as suspected by some, on the sex offenders list.

[Russell17au]

3 minutes ago, logres212 said:

Sorry this is correct, I should have said to be completely accurate a conviction becomes what's known as spent, and becomes sealed and is not visible on a normal data base but can be seen with an application to a court. So it's true to say convictions are not completely wiped but certainly are not visible to immigration or police in other countries.

So, if you are required to supply an Australian police check to an Australian police force for an application for a security license then it would still go on that report?

[dennis D]

19 hours ago, SpeakeasyThai said:

As an honest law abiding ex pat living in Thailand, I am fed up meeting lawless ex pats with criminal history, problems and mental baggage that they bring to Thailand. They end up bringing their problems with them and thus, creating problems for the rest of us. Your 'friend' should stay in America where he belongs. He is America's problem, not ours.

 

Well done Thai immigration. 

Once a crim always a crim and people never change right? The only difference between you and him is that you have never been caught. Have you never broken any law ever?