U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:49 PM
 
Location: The Commonwealth of Virginia
597 posts, read 310,514 times
Reputation: 871

Advertisements

Marie, please call me Bill!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmarie123 View Post
Bill790, yes. The Military can see expunged records. So can the FBI. Regular employeers (like Target/Walmart) can not see expunged records, but the military/FBI background checks done for security clearance purposes CAN.

This happens all the time, where people think they are safe because it is expunged, and then they get burned when the offense is found during the processing of a security clearance.

Now, you look like a liar because we ask if you have EVER been cited or arrested. Even if it was expunged, you were cited or arrested, so if you say "no" you are a LIAR, and your clearance may be denied for LYING on official forms and during an official investigation.

One should not lie just because they think they can get away with it.
Fair enough. I've been schooled. I was under the impression that one was legally able to deny the presence of an "expunged" record. I stand corrected.


Quote:
Regardless, even if you could hide it...it is still dishonest and it is still a lie, which makes you untrustworthy.
At the top you said, "One should not...." and above you said "Regardless, even if you could hide it...." Was that aimed at me? Certainly you don't know enough about me to say something like that. Or was that careless use of the impersonal "you"? In any case, I'd be mollified if you rephrased to, "Regardless, even if one could hide it..."


Quote:
Also, if getting a top secret clearance, they WILL check facebook, and forums like this, and there is an honest possibility they will discover this post, depending on how well you've hidden your username. People get caught all the time for social media postings.

It takes about $100,000 and up to a year to get a TS Clearance... they are VERY THOROUGH.
I've had clearances, and am familiar with process. I would never, ever advise somebody to lie on an SF86. But, you make a very interesting point about social media. I knew investigators (and potential employers in the private sector) checked social media (I don't have a Facebook or Twitter page, so that isn't an issue), but I hadn't considered they would check postings on internet forums.

Keep in mind, the folks who did most of the footwork for my clearances were contractors, and very, very overworked. Competent, yes. Diligent, yes. Maybe they'd check Facebook to see if I had an obvious presence. But I can't see them doing the kind of data-mining it would take to track down my anonymous ID on the citi-data forum to see if had, someplace within, copped to anything illegal. They are thorough. They did talk to my relatives and neighbors. But unless they can push the button on some super-secret NSA carnivore-type application, I just don't see them putting my actual name to this post.

Having said that, can we still be friends?

--
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2016, 02:39 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
3,182 posts, read 9,221,015 times
Reputation: 4716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill790 View Post
Marie, please call me Bill!

as that aimed at me? Certainly you don't know enough about me to say something like that. Or was that careless use of the impersonal "you"? In any case, I'd be mollified if you rephrased to, "Regardless, even if one could hide it..."

--
Friends for sure! :-)

It was a careless use of the impersonal "you" because it's an internet forum, not an english paper :-)

I get emotional about this because I'm a recruiter, and we CONSTANTLY tell applicants they have to disclose things. A few times a year, someone gets caught having hid something, and they will be LITERALLY in tears, in my office, with all manner of excuses for lying, including "I read online that I didn't have to disclose it." I could have gotten them a waiver, but now my commander won't approve the waiver because of the dishonesty, and they have completely altered the course of their life by that bad decision. It's heartbreaking, and they are usually devastated.

It happened to me just this last week, a 21 year old with a wife and 2 children, no job, no medical insurance, desperate to join, hid multiple law violations. They caught it in 1 day, when they ran his fingerprints through the FBI database. One day. He woke up that morning, joined the military, took and oath, and had a huge weight off his shoulders. He knew how he would care for his family. A mere day later, I had to call him and break his heart and tell him he could NEVER join the Air Force because of his lies. He sobbed, and his wife was crying, and he pleaded and pleaded about how he though he could say no, a judge told him he could say no, a lawyer told him he could say no, and the internet told him he could say no. I could have gotten him the waiver, but he listened to all those other sources instead of his recruiter.

It really saddens me that judges and lawyers don't do a better job with this subject as well, but I don't think they consider military service or security clearances if not specific asked about them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 04:02 PM
 
9,345 posts, read 15,780,146 times
Reputation: 17142
"You sure about that? I thought "expunged" meant it "never happened."

You need to do some research on what "expunged" means. If it's as if it never happened, I'd think seriously before disclosing it. Chance are they WON'T find out about it. Yes, talk to different recruiters and get their take on it. The military can afford to be very picky about who they recruit as officers. "


Bill, In most circumstances an expungement allows you to say you have never been arrested for most civilian jobs -- the feds (which includes the military), the police, and prosecutors have access to expunged records and will find them. The typical background check for most civilian jobs will not locate an expunged record and, in the states I am familiar with, will allow you to say that you have never been arrested. Likewise, if you want to be a police officer, a thorough background check will reveal the expunged record whether you admitted to it or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2016, 08:33 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
3,182 posts, read 9,221,015 times
Reputation: 4716
Joe from Dayton...

You're telling the OP to think twice about disclosing it because they likely won't find it during his Navy application, but then following that up with how the military has access to those records....

I think your post is a bit confusing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2016, 11:36 AM
 
Location: The Commonwealth of Virginia
597 posts, read 310,514 times
Reputation: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmarie123 View Post
Joe from Dayton...

You're telling the OP to think twice about disclosing it because they likely won't find it during his Navy application, but then following that up with how the military has access to those records....

I think your post is a bit confusing.
Marie, no, I think Joe fro D was agreeing with you. (And pointing out how wrong I was. Like you. ) But his post was a bit confusing.....

--
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2016, 11:38 AM
 
Location: The Commonwealth of Virginia
597 posts, read 310,514 times
Reputation: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmarie123 View Post
It was a careless use of the impersonal "you" because it's an internet forum, not an english paper :-)
Well, you have to be careful, even on internet forums, because some people are very sensitive about things like grammar......

--
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2016, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Northeast US
88 posts, read 48,289 times
Reputation: 115
Someone I know well, who joined the military in the 70s, was advised by their recruiter not to disclose a felony arrest that ended up being pleaded down to a misdemeanor, and all the records being "sealed" due to juvenile offender status. (The incident that led to the arrest took place when the person was a minor).

As it turned out they were accepted into the military and succeeded in serving their enlistment, so in a way the recruiter's advice seems to have been OK advice, for that particular person at that particular time and place. Not great advice, and a bit self-serving on the part of the recruiter to be sure - after all, then as now, the court could have provided "sealed" records to the military, had the records been requested. In those days the request would have entailed typing a form with carbon paper between the copies, carefully correcting any errors before folding it, licking the envelope and stamp (or using the moist little foam sponge reposing in every office desk) and submitting it in the mail through channels. And then wait for similar actions to be taken on the other end, allow time for the paperwork to come through the mail, along with other archaic hoops that need no longer be jumped through: in these modern times, any information can be exchanged between cooperating agencies as simple as click click scroll click click... enter enter tab enter.

Because it was significantly more of an effort, I would imagine that some recruiters of the 70s sometimes (officially sanctioned or not) waived that part of the process... maybe checked into it only if they suspected or had a gut feeling that the person had a shady past. Either way, then as now recruits who didn't disclose were taking a big risk. -- And, "My recruiter told me to do it" would not have been a valid excuse for the enlistee's dishonesty, should it happen to be exposed farther on down the line. (Of course, if the lie ended up being discovered later, the recruiter could easily claim innocence, saying that the person decided to lie of their own accord.)

Of course, another factor is it's generally considered "wrong" to lie about one's qualifications and limitations when applying for work, just like it is considered wrong to lie in most other situations. (Not the "do I look fat in this dress" situation, or the "isn't my baby adorable?!!" when the baby resembles a dancing cartoon raisin situation.) Some are more bothered by such moral dilemmas than others.


Totally irrelevant anymore though, as I would never recommend attempting any such deception in 2016 . Nowadays I would be surprised if the recruiters' software allows the form to progress past skipped steps, although I have no actual knowledge of this. Anyway -- I think there's much more likelihood of being discovered now than there's ever been, which means it's becoming a worse idea every day.

tl;dr: Deception has never been a preferred tactic for getting in to the military, although it has been done in the past, as what hasn't. In 2016, it's still a very bad idea and probably also carries a higher likelihood of getting caught, so I recommend disclosing from the start, even for those whose scruples allow them to consider attempting falsification.


Last edited by Claudia Dare; 07-10-2016 at 09:50 PM.. Reason: typo remediation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Wyoming
9,163 posts, read 16,510,896 times
Reputation: 13349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claudia Dare View Post
Someone I know well, who joined the military in the 70s, was advised by their recruiter not to disclose a felony arrest that ended up being pleaded down to a misdemeanor, and all the records being "sealed" due to juvenile offender status. (The incident that led to the arrest took place when the person was a minor)....
I'm not so sure anything would have kept one out of the Army during the Vietnam War, other than staying in college, running to Canada or enlisting in another branch. I enlisted in the Air Force. I was a pretty clean-cut kid in my youth but pulled some of the pranks that many kids do... like breaking and entering.

The "breaking and entering" was at the elementary school that we'd just graduated from. We jimmied a door lock (sort of), went in and wrote on the blackboard, tipped over a couple desks and that was it. We were seen by a neighbor who reported us to the sheriff, and a couple days later we were called out of high school to report to the sheriff's office. Nailed. We weren't "arrested/charged", just scared out of our wits.

I don't think it came up during recruiting, but when the A.F. wanted to run a top secret clearance on me, I was told to report everything. So I did -- all about being caught breaking and entering but not officially charged when I was 14. The FBI questioned my old neighbors, friends, school teachers, the works. I was granted a top secret cryptographic clearance and spent my enlistment in Air Force intelligence with access to information that even the base commander couldn't get. My point is, don't leave out ANYTHING. They want total honesty, and if you give them that, they're not likely to ********* over about some minor run-in with the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2018, 05:28 PM
 
3 posts, read 331 times
Reputation: 15
My son applied for officer candidate school in the air guard and was not admitted with revealing an expungement for unlawful arrest for DUI. He was not drinking, blew 0.000 and indicated he had amoxicilin prescription, which was written as a controlled substance in the arrest. Five years and $5000 later he applies to the military and is rejected over a farce of an arrest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2018, 05:52 PM
 
Location: New Mexico U.S.A.
24,126 posts, read 38,859,608 times
Reputation: 28082
Quote:
Originally Posted by PP2018 View Post
My son applied for officer candidate school in the air guard and was not admitted with revealing an expungement for unlawful arrest for DUI. He was not drinking, blew 0.000 and indicated he had amoxicilin prescription, which was written as a controlled substance in the arrest. Five years and $5000 later he applies to the military and is rejected over a farce of an arrest.
And what is your point? Your son may not have been qualified to begin with. Everyone who applies is not accepted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top