Wife's ex-husband says we will be arrested by Homeland Security when arrive to the US

[CdwJava]

Regardless of the POTENTIAL crime, Homeland Security and the National Guard would NOT be involved. And, absent an arrest warrant (likely issued by a CA Superior Court) no arrest or detention for that potential offense will be forthcoming.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I agree. They are not the responsible agencies for passport fraud. I will provide the investigative link again.

http://www.state.gov/m/ds/investigat/

 

[CdwJava]

Of course, the OP is not intending to report themselves for what MIGHT be fraudulent (and this appears arguable given the intent required) so unless the ex is viewing this website, I'm not sure what will come of it.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Apparently the ex is aware he only needs to report it. I can only assume you have never been blessed with a Federal investigation based on a citizen report/complaint. Trivial can take on an entire new meaning for some.

 

[LdiJ]

Regardless of the POTENTIAL crime, Homeland Security and the National Guard would NOT be involved. And, absent an arrest warrant (likely issued by a CA Superior Court) no arrest or detention for that potential offense will be forthcoming.

OhioRoadWarrior is trying to claim that since the birth certificate is fraudulent (in his opinion) then the passport application for the child was fraudulent...because it was a "feeder document". He further theorizes that therefore Homeland Security and ICE would have an interest in the matter and would actually prosecute the matter.

The problem with his theory is that the birth certificate is NOT fraudulent. The birth certificate shows exactly what it would have shown had the parties handled the matter of the child's birth in the proper legal sequence. It shows the actual, biological parents of the child. Therefore the passport application is NOT fraudulent...and Homeland Security or ICE would have absolutely no reason to have any interest in the matter...particularly since the child would have been a US citizen no matter who the father was, because the child was born in the US. There is some sliver of a chance that they might have some interest if the actual biological father of the child was NOT a US citizen and the child was born on foreign soil, but that is not the case here.

What OhioRoadWarrior is completely disregarding is the fact, that even in his widely speculative theory, whether civil or criminal law was involved, that part of the proceedings would be a DNA test to determine the parentage of the child. A DNA test would simply prove that the birth certificate was correct, and therefore all other matters related would be moot.

 

[CdwJava]

OhioRoadWarrior is trying to claim that since the birth certificate is fraudulent (in his opinion) then the passport application for the child was fraudulent...because it was a "feeder document". He further theorizes that therefore Homeland Security and ICE would have an interest in the matter and would actually prosecute the matter.

The problem with his theory is that the birth certificate is NOT fraudulent. The birth certificate shows exactly what it would have shown had the parties handled the matter of the child's birth in the proper legal sequence. It shows the actual, biological parents of the child. Therefore the passport application is NOT fraudulent...and Homeland Security or ICE would have absolutely no reason to have any interest in the matter...particularly since the child would have been a US citizen no matter who the father was, because the child was born in the US. There is some sliver of a chance that they might have some interest if the actual biological father of the child was NOT a US citizen and the child was born on foreign soil, but that is not the case here.

What OhioRoadWarrior is completely disregarding is the fact, that even in his widely speculative theory, whether civil or criminal law was involved, that part of the proceedings would be a DNA test to determine the parentage of the child. A DNA test would simply prove that the birth certificate was correct, and therefore all other matters related would be moot.

Hence the reason I mentioned that the allegations of fraud are arguable. INTENT is an element of fraud/forgery, and I do not see that element existing here.

And, OH, I have seen the feds in action on complaints in this area ... they do NOT move at blazing speed even when the complain is clear and convincing. And in a case such as this I would be surprised if they moved at all. But, if the ex wants to try and report it, so be it. That won't change the fact that the OP and family can travel here without fear of an arrest since it is apparent that no report has been made or that no arrest warrant has been issued (nor is it likely to absent some fraud allegation sustained in a CA court where there appears to be little chance of proving the elements of the crime). But, the ex can toss the bitter pill and see what might happen. In the meantime, the OP would appear to have nothing to worry about.

Now, if the ex really wants to muddy the waters and spend a lot of money simply to screw with the ex-wife, he can always make a claim to paternity and go to court ... though that might result in HIM being charged for perjury, but if he is vindictive enough to want to jerk with his ex-wife, maybe he'll give that a go.

The facts here remain that the child does appear to be the OP's and it can apparently be substantiated by DNA. And without knowing what the Birth Certificate document said, it is not possible to say whether fraud or forgery occurred. i cannot find a blank form anywhere, nor can I recall from my own childrens' births whether it indicates that the name of a husband must be filled in or the space left blank absent a paternity test. I seem to recall it merely saying "father" ... if so, how could it be fraud? Even if that claim might later be required to be substantiated by a paternity test or the the mother signing a declaration of paternity, it would seem to be a truthful statement to say that he is the father. I just don't see any state court pursuing it or the feds wasting any time going after a case unless they can show that the OP and his wife lied on a passport application or declaration.

 

[Becoming]

Hence the reason I mentioned that the allegations of fraud are arguable. INTENT is an element of fraud/forgery, and I do not see that element existing here.

And, OH, I have seen the feds in action on complaints in this area ... they do NOT move at blazing speed even when the complain is clear and convincing. And in a case such as this I would be surprised if they moved at all. But, if the ex wants to try and report it, so be it. That won't change the fact that the OP and family can travel here without fear of an arrest since it is apparent that no report has been made or that no arrest warrant has been issued (nor is it likely to absent some fraud allegation sustained in a CA court where there appears to be little chance of proving the elements of the crime). But, the ex can toss the bitter pill and see what might happen. In the meantime, the OP would appear to have nothing to worry about.

Now, if the ex really wants to muddy the waters and spend a lot of money simply to screw with the ex-wife, he can always make a claim to paternity and go to court ... though that might result in HIM being charged for perjury, but if he is vindictive enough to want to jerk with his ex-wife, maybe he'll give that a go.

The facts here remain that the child does appear to be the OP's and it can apparently be substantiated by DNA. And without knowing what the Birth Certificate document said, it is not possible to say whether fraud or forgery occurred. i cannot find a blank form anywhere, nor can I recall from my own childrens' births whether it indicates that the name of a husband must be filled in or the space left blank absent a paternity test. I seem to recall it merely saying "father" ... if so, how could it be fraud? Even if that claim might later be required to be substantiated by a paternity test or the the mother signing a declaration of paternity, it would seem to be a truthful statement to say that he is the father. I just don't see any state court pursuing it or the feds wasting any time going after a case unless they can show that the OP and his wife lied on a passport application or declaration.

The thing that happened where the "fraud" occurred was the nurse asking my wife if she was married. My wife said no. If she would have said yes, either her ex or nobody could have been on the birth certificate. I could have then added my name to his birth certificate by going to the courts and having a paternity test. Her ex wouldn't have to even had known about it. I don't think we technically committed fraud because he is my son, there's no doubt about it, and it would have turned out the same way either way.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

There goes LdiJ running her mouth without a clue what the law is. It is irrelevant whether he is daddy or not. They conspired and falsified the birth certificate. They took the birth certificate they falsified and submitted it to the Federal gov't to obtain a passport. That is all the law requires.

 

[Proserpina]

There goes LdiJ running her mouth without a clue what the law is. It is irrelevant whether he is daddy or not. They conspired and falsified the birth certificate. They took the birth certificate they falsified and submitted it to the Federal gov't to obtain a passport. That is all the law requires.

Do me a favor.

Please give us some case law to back up your stance. For all the flapping you're accusing others of doing, it seems mighty drafty over where you're sitting.

And seriously - jump off the "LdiJ spoke so she must wrong" cart. She is NOT wrong here. You on the other hand? You're not even playing the same game, let alone being anywhere near the same ballpark.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I have provided the gov't link twice. If you are not smart enough to read it, I can't help you. Here is the CA penal code they broke also, it is good for a year in CA, in addition to the potential 10 Federal.

529a. Every person who manufactures, produces, sells, offers, or
transfers to another any document purporting to be either a
certificate of birth or certificate of baptism, knowing such document
to be false or counterfeit and with the intent to deceive, is guilty
of a crime, and upon conviction therefor, shall be punished by
imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by
imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170. Every
person who offers, displays, or has in his or her possession any
false or counterfeit certificate of birth or certificate of baptism,
or any genuine certificate of birth which describes a person then
living or deceased, with intent to represent himself or herself as
another or to conceal his or her true identity, is guilty of a crime,
and upon conviction therefor, shall be punished by imprisonment in
the county jail not to exceed one year.

 

[Becoming]

I have provided the gov't link twice. If you are not smart enough to read it, I can't help you. Here is the CA penal code they broke also, it is good for a year in CA, in addition to the potential 10 Federal.

529a. Every person who manufactures, produces, sells, offers, or
transfers to another any document purporting to be either a
certificate of birth or certificate of baptism, knowing such document
to be false or counterfeit and with the intent to deceive, is guilty
of a crime, and upon conviction therefor, shall be punished by
imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by
imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170. Every
person who offers, displays, or has in his or her possession any
false or counterfeit certificate of birth or certificate of baptism,
or any genuine certificate of birth which describes a person then
living or deceased, with intent to represent himself or herself as
another or to conceal his or her true identity, is guilty of a crime,
and upon conviction therefor, shall be punished by imprisonment in
the county jail not to exceed one year.

I don't know that it's false, and it isn't. Now if I wasn't the biological father and knew it, then I could understand. There's nothing on the birth certificate that is false.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I don't know that it's false, and it isn't. Now if I wasn't the biological father and knew it, then I could understand. There's nothing on the birth certificate that is false.

I suggest you read the CA courts viewpoint. According to the court, either the husband is the father or there is legally no father. You could attempt to argue you are the father by estoppel. Did you sign an affidavit of paternity? If you did, you might be okay.

http://www.courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-parentage.htm

 

[Proserpina]

I don't know that it's false, and it isn't. Now if I wasn't the biological father and knew it, then I could understand. There's nothing on the birth certificate that is false.

He's going to keep on at you, Becoming. Ignore him, or keep feeding into his very misguided (and inaccurate) game - your choice

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

He's going to keep on at you, Becoming. Ignore him, or keep feeding into his very misguided (and inaccurate) game - your choice

I was simply waiting for OP to supply any information that did not make him guilty. You and LDiJ often jump on the "feel good" wagon and refuse to discuss facts, rendering your opinions as exactly that opinions. I suggest you refer to the purpose of the forum, which is getting down to the facts in a situation.

 

[LdiJ]

I was simply waiting for OP to supply any information that did not make him guilty. You and LDiJ often jump on the "feel good" wagon and refuse to discuss facts, rendering your opinions as exactly that opinions. I suggest you refer to the purpose of the forum, which is getting down to the facts in a situation.

You ALWAYS do this. You pronounce something ridiculous, literally EVERYBODY tells you that you are wrong. You go out searching for citations to back you up and come up with things that doesn't even remotely apply to the situation at hand, and then you belittle those who state that you are wrong.

OP, PLEASE stop listening to him.