beeza said:
I have an upcoming meeting with a CJ which likely means they see reason to deny me. Here is a list of items I have or do not have as proof of actual physical presence in Canada . . .
I lost my passport and PR card in 2010 and did not get a new US passport until 2012 which means I was either stuck inside Canada or outside Canada
I have dated proof of my lost passport, I found a facebook status with date, a conversation with date mentioning I lost it both dated in 2010. Then I have a email from 2012 stating my appointment with the US consulate in Toronto then another emailing notifying me my passport is at the Toronto US consulate. I know this is not the greatest but it at least helps in showing I was in Canada between those two dates because I would have not been able to get back into Canada in 2010 after losing my passport.
Best that can be offered is to
Lawyer-up, but to be frank, it is probably too late for that, and too late in general to be putting your case together. Many of your explanations are not good, and the kind of evidence you are referring to might help fill in a small gap here and there but not more than that. Absence of a passport imposes a huge hurdle. You have problems. A lawyer might be able to help but there is no guarantee of that, and no time to get one before the hearing.
Moreover, what really matters at this stage is what evidence, what actual documentation you timely submitted in response to RQ.
Note what I previously posted in response to your queries in another topic (partial quote):
dpenabill said:
At this stage there is nothing to lose. Personally I would have a lawyer by now but many do not. If you are turned down because you did not apply with 1095 days, or the CJ does not conclude you have proven you were present for at least 1095 days (matter less whether you actually were present for 1095+ days, and much more whether you proved it . . . it is your burden to prove it, and IRCC and the CJ have no obligation to determine how many days you were actually in Canada, but only to assess the evidence submitted to determine whether you met your burden of proving it), you do not become a citizen. That has no effect on your PR status. To keep PR status you still need to comply with the PR RO. That could be difficult attending a full time PhD program abroad.
Beyond that, some further observations:
You have had difficulty obtaining provincial records showing utilization of heath care? Really? The process is so simple that it is highly unlikely a Citizenship Judge will buy this excuse. And unless you were using provincially provided health care a lot, these records are not likely to help all that much anyway.
In any event, again, it is rather late to be compiling evidence in support of your case.
Your opportunity to submit documentation to prove you met the residency obligation was in responding to RQ.
It is too complicated to get into the nuances of being prepared for a CJ hearing this morning, but the bottom-line is, if you did not make a strong case in a response to RQ showing presence and activity in Canada for all the months you declared you were in Canada, the odds are probably not good or perhaps even much worse.
A lost passport is a serious problem. Burden of proof is on you. Failure to bring forward and submit an important item of documentary evidence, like a passport covering a period of time, makes meeting your burden of proof difficult. Basically you needed (in the response to RQ) to have submitted strong proof of actual presence and activity in Canada for any time period for which the lost passport is potentially relevant.
Kind of like a prosecutor who does not have the murder weapon in a homicide trial: not absolutely necessary to put the murder weapon into evidence, but without it the jury is going to have a lot of questions, even doubts, unless the prosecution makes up for it with other evidence and there is a reasonable, credible reason the prosecutor has to give to the jury about why this evidence is not available.
"I lost it." No matter how true that is, it's a weak explanation. Police report from time you discovered it was lost would help some. Still would be a problem.
Regarding this:
"I lost my passport and PR card in 2010 and did not get a new US passport until 2012 which means I was either stuck inside Canada or outside Canada . . . [email with consulate] helps in showing I was in Canada between those two dates because I would have not been able to get back into Canada in 2010 after losing my passport."
Ouch. Ouch. No. Not at all. Makes little or no sense. Really, trust me on this, especially back in 2010 and 2011. No one is going to buy that not having a passport proves you did not cross the U.S and Canada border.
By the way, U.S. citizens do not need to show a passport to enter Canada. It is preferred, but in addition to other forms of enhanced identification, and especially so back in 2010, one could enter Canada with virtually any formal form of identification . . . this was true for both U.S. citizens and Canadian PRs. In fact, in my own experience it was not until later in 2010 that the border officers began requiring me to display identification every time I drove into Canada . . . before that I was only sporadically asked for identification (going the other way, into the States, they began requiring identification every time a couple years earlier than that, for me anyway, and they have been far more insistent, but not always, about having at least an enhanced form of identification).
For what it is worth:
Unless the documentation you have already submitted clearly showed regular employment in Canada for a large part of the period of time you claim you were in Canada, and included CRA documents (Notices of Assessment; T-4s), it is my impression your odds of a favourable decision are not at all good. The rest of the stuff you say you "have" (without referencing what was submitted in response already) does not add up to a whole lot if there are significant periods of time not documented as employed during which you have little direct evidence to show your stake in the place you lived (rental, roommate, or whatever).
As I said before, so long as you are truthful and do not engage in any misrepresentations by omission, there is nothing to lose in going to the hearing and making as good a case as you can (and sure, truthful statements from others might help, although it appears you need a lot more help than that). But I suspect you might as well look to the future anticipating you will not be getting citizenship now and making future plans based on whether it is worth your while to preserve your PR status.
