I think that he will be fine to go down the ESTA route.
In 1995 the question that was asked on paperwork was “have you ever been arrested for any offence (involving moral turpitude)
The problem was that this was not defined.
Now the question on the ESTA form, which was introduced in 2017 with the same question, but was amended a few years ago, is: “have you.been arrested for any offence which involved serious injury to a person, significant damage to property or been involved in serious loss to your Government?” (As in tax evasion)
It seems he can honestly answer “yes” to that and is therefore eligible to go down the ESTA route.
In 1995 the question that was asked on paperwork was “have you ever been arrested for any offence (involving moral turpitude)
The problem was that this was not defined.
Now the question on the ESTA form, which was introduced in 2017 with the same question, but was amended a few years ago, is: “have you.been arrested for any offence which involved serious injury to a person, significant damage to property or been involved in serious loss to your Government?” (As in tax evasion)
It seems he can honestly answer “yes” to that and is therefore eligible to go down the ESTA route.