Corrupt Border Control

[Stevicus]

Once we had them Canada did not want them back.

This part reminded me of a funny scene from Slap Shot:

This young man has had a very trying rookie season, what with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada, and that country's refusal to accept him, well, I guess that's more than most 21-year-olds can handle. Number six, Ogie Oglethorpe.

 

[Cooky]

There is no unmarked road along 0 ave near Blaine for them to turn into. They are either stupid to the point of having a handicap or are lying.

I'm going to go with liars.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are signs all over that road. More so the road has to merge into the Langley border crossing which they were east of. It has signs even pointing out there is no access to the crossing itself from that road. If they came from Vancouver they passed multiple border (2 prob) crossings that 0 ave merges into and out of. More so 0 Ave itself starts at a border crossing along a highway that has signs pointing out there is a border cross all the way from Richmond. You have to leave the border crossing to get on ) ave...

These people are lying and banking on your ignorance which worked.

Yep, I don't see why some people have to hang onto a failed narrative. I am not in favor of Trump's wall, but we do need border security. When a person purposefully enters the U.S.. When some of the people in the car had already been rejected entry. When Canada won't take them back and the British consulate has not replied there is not much choice.

By the way, all of these claims of the border patrol could easily be refuted if false.

 

[Cooky]

Lyndon, Lyndon, don't run away... Come back and talk to us..!

I have more questions.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There was nothing accidental about this:

U.K. family who said they were held by ICE after crossing Canada-U.S. border are released

"The agency said in a statement released Tuesday that surveillance video shows the vehicle the Connors were in traveling "slowly and deliberately" through the ditch into Washington. The vehicle continued to travel on the U.S. side until it was pulled over, CBP said. The statement also said the incident occurred around 9 p.m. on Oct. 2, rather than Oct. 3 as the Connors' statement said.

"During processing, record checks revealed two of the adults were previously denied travel authorization to come to the United States," the agency's statement said.

"Attempts were made to return the individuals to Canada, however, Canada refused to allow their return and two attempts to contact the United Kingdom consulate were unsuccessful," the statement said.

The Canada Border Services Administration did not immediately return a request for comment."

So they deliberately crossed the border. Once we had them Canada did not want them back. They were eventually returned to England. I do not think that the U.S. border patrol was the one that dropped the ball here. They had to deliberately cross the border. There was no animal. Two of the people had been rejected permission to be here and it seems the Canadians once they knew what was going on wanted no part of it. The British consulate was slow in responding. How would else could this have been handled?

They deliberately crossed a ditch. Show me anything that says they realized the ditch was the border.

 

[Cooky]

They deliberately crossed a ditch. Show me anything that says they realized the ditch was the border.

Strange people denied entry to the US would be hanging around so close to the border to begin with, isn't it..? And then to "accidentally" stumble across..?

...I have no sympathy for such stupidity. Nobody should.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Strange people denied entry to the US would be hanging around so close to the border to begin with, isn't it..? And then to "accidentally" stumble across..?

I think you and @Subduction Zone are misunderstanding the reports. It's not that the carful of people were denied entry and then crossed somewhere else.

Two of the five people in the car had been denied entry at some point in the past.

Just because someone has been denied entry doesn't mean they're permanently - or even temporarily - inadmissible. It could just mean that they didn't have the proper visa for a trip years before, and were told to have their visas in order before they try to enter again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They deliberately crossed a ditch. Show me anything that says they realized the ditch was the border.

Seriously? You can't drive in that area without knowing that. For such a claim the burden of proof should be upon you. Also they lied about why they crossed the ditch or how they even did it. I will agree that there probably is more to this than has been released, but it is not good for the people that entered the U.S.. Without a trial the border patrol is very limited on why they were refused entry. I am betting that rather than facing a trial they were much happier going back to England.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think you and @Subduction Zone are misunderstanding the reports. It's not that the carful of people were denied entry and then crossed somewhere else.

Two of the five people in the car had been denied entry at some point in the past.

Just because someone has been denied entry doesn't mean they're permanently - or even temporarily - inadmissible. It could just mean that they didn't have the proper visa for a trip years before, and were told to have their visas in order before they try to enter again.

Two of the people were refused entry, Canada did not want them back. Don't forget that little detail. There is more to this than we know and one should be able to infer that the people from Britain are nowhere near as innocent as they tried to claim.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Two of the people were refused entry, Canada did not want them back. Don't forget that little detail.

When I was in university, my girlfriend's uncle came over from Scotland for a visit. While he was here, we took him to Niagara Falls. He wanted to go to the America side, too, but we checked and found out that if he left Canada, he would have difficulties coming back.

What horrible crime do you think my girlfriend's uncle committed?

There is more to this than we know and one should be able to infer that the people from Britain are nowhere near as innocent as they tried to claim.

An even better approach: don't rush to judgement the way you have been.

Being denied entry to a country isn't necessarily an indication of any wrongdoing at all. Border guards have broad discretionary power to deny entry, which they'll use if they have even a suspicion that something is weird.

BTW: I'm still waiting for what I asked for: any indication that they knew the ditch was the border.

 

[Cooky]

When I was in university, my girlfriend's uncle came over from Scotland for a visit. While he was here, we took him to Niagara Falls. He wanted to go to the America side, too, but we checked and found out that if he left Canada, he would have difficulties coming back.

What horrible crime do you think my girlfriend's uncle committed?


An even better approach: don't rush to judgement the way you have been.

Being denied entry to a country isn't necessarily an indication of any wrongdoing at all. Border guards have broad discretionary power to deny entry, which they'll use if they have even a suspicion that something is weird.

Interesting. What do you suppose would happen if a family of Brits were caught on Canadian land, having bypassed border patrol? And the United States refused to accept them back?

What would Canada do in this reverse scenario?

 

[Subduction Zone]

When I was in university, my girlfriend's uncle came over from Scotland for a visit. While he was here, we took him to Niagara Falls. He wanted to go to the America side, too, but we checked and found out that if he left Canada, he would have difficulties coming back.

What horrible crime do you think my girlfriend's uncle committed?

Bad analogy. Your girlfriend's uncle had not already been refused entry.

quote]


An even better approach: don't rush to judgement the way you have been.

Being denied entry to a country isn't necessarily an indication of any wrongdoing at all. Border guards have broad discretionary power to deny entry, which they'll use if they have even a suspicion that something is weird.

BTW: I'm still waiting for what I asked for: any indication that they knew the ditch was the border.[/QUOTE]

I am not the one that rushed to judgement in this case. The fact is that they were denied entry. It is very obvious that they entered purposefully and illegally. It is not as if the roads are curvy and hilly in that area. It is flat. The roads are straight. Where the border lies is rather obvious. One would have to be severely mentally impaired not to know this. This is why the burden of proof that they did not know this was the border no longer lies upon me. Don't you remember the image that you linked yourself?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Seriously? You can't drive in that area without knowing that.

Google Street View suggests otherwise.

For such a claim the burden of proof should be upon you.

For me to have a burden of proof, I'd have to be making a claim. All I'm asking is whether they knew the ditch was the border. You're insisting that they did know this and I'd like to know how you're so sure.

My mind isn't made up on the issue. I'm not rushing to judgement; I just want to know why you are.

Also they lied about why they crossed the ditch or how they even did it.

Did they? How do you know?

It's possible to come up with scenarios where the Brits' account and the CBP account can be reconciled with each other, so I don't see why we would assume that the CBP report necessarily even alleges that the family was lying.

I will agree that there probably is more to this than has been released, but it is not good for the people that entered the U.S.. Without a trial the border patrol is very limited on why they were refused entry.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean.

I am betting that rather than facing a trial they were much happier going back to England.

From all reports, their experience with ICE has left them feeling angry and violated, not happy.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Don't you remember the image that you linked yourself?

The one with absolutely no signs or markings indicating the border? Yes, I remember it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Bad analogy. Your girlfriend's uncle had not already been refused entry.

Not the point. If Canada would refuse re-entry to a Brit in the US who's done nothing wrong, then you can't take Canada's refusal to re-admit this British family as a sign that they've necessarily done something wrong.

I am not the one that rushed to judgement in this case. The fact is that they were denied entry.

When were they denied entry?

Not immediately before. We know this because only 2 people in the car had been denied entry; 3 of them weren't.

It is very obvious that they entered purposefully and illegally.

If it's so obvious, then why are you having such a problem actually establishing it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Google Street View suggests otherwise.

What!? You have to be kidding me.

For me to have a burden of proof, I'd have to be making a claim. All I'm asking is whether they knew the ditch was the border. You're insisting that they did know this and I'd like to know how you're so sure.

And you are. You are trying to claim that they could be innocent. I am sorry, but there has been more than enough evidence presented to the contrary.

My mind isn't made up on the issue. I'm not rushing to judgement; I just want to know why you are.

That does not appear to be the case.

Did they? How do you know?

It's possible to come up with scenarios where the Brits' account and the CBP account can be reconciled with each other, so I don't see why we would assume that the CBP report necessarily even alleges that the family was lying.

Because I am not an idiot and I am assuming that the people in that car were not idiots. I take it the CBP account is the Canadian Border Patrol's account. I do not even remember seeing that. Could you link it.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean.

Sorry, that was meant to say that it does not look good for the people that entered illegally.

From all reports, their experience with ICE has left them feeling angry and violated, not happy.

Yeah, that happens when people break a law that they did not take seriously but others did. From all accounts that I have seen they were largely the cause of their own problems. Do you think that NBC would not have checked the stories of both sides? There was no denial from Canada that they did not refuse to take them back. They could not be allowed to roam freely in the U.S.. Sadly temporary incarceration seems to be the only answer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The one with absolutely no signs or markings indicating the border? Yes, I remember it.

You did not see what I saw. Here is the first big clue. Two roads do not tend to run right next to each other like that. That is a big hint that this is not a normal circumstance. That is a sign that they were at the border right there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not the point. If Canada would refuse re-entry to a Brit in the US who's done nothing wrong, then you can't take Canada's refusal to re-admit this British family as a sign that they've necessarily done something wrong.

But leaving and entering the country is a bit restricted when it one is not dealing with U.S. or Canadian citizens. So the "nothing wrong" claim fails. Your girlfriend's Scottish uncle knew that it was not right since there are limits to it. That is why he did not push the law.

When were they denied entry?

Not immediately before. We know this because only 2 people in the car had been denied entry; 3 of them weren't.

How does that make a difference?

If it's so obvious, then why are you having such a problem actually establishing it?

No, no, no. In this case the problem is not on my part. You are refusing to see the obvious.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Also in between the two roads you will see one of these every so often. Border markers:

Google Maps

A close up of a border marker:

Google Maps

A sign along that road telling people that there is no access to the U.S. border along this part of the road:

Google Maps

I looked at that road and thought that it looked as if the maximum speed would be about 35 mph. I have to think of speeds in English units. I am not linking the sign but the speed limit on that road is 50 km/hr. About as close to 35 mph as it gets.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And last but not least, video of the crossing:

https://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/crime/article236336838.html