Jump to content

Mass College Admission Cheating Scandal

Js1

By Js1
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

jimmyjazz
jimmyjazz

What do we have to do to get Shaka Smart on that list?

MirrOlure
MirrOlure

Meanwhile, the SEC scratches their collective head.... “PLAYERS pay the COACH?”  

C-Man
C-Man

SIAP

Posted Images

SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Not a cat said:

I admit I'm a bit of a dumbass, but if you asked me a month ago if bribing a college official to get into a private school was a crime, I'd have said no. Same for cheating on a college entrance exam.  Certainty morally reprehensible, but nothing illegal- kind of like cheering for OU.

I wonder how many of these people actually knew they were doing something illegal?  Obviously,  ignorance of the law is no excuse, but you've got to think that from a deterrence angle the mere fact that people now know it's a crime goes a long way to avoiding repeat episodes. That, plus the public shaming which is what is really hurting most of these arrogant assholes.

it is a bit borderline.   like we've been saying, the ones copping a plea are only on the hook for using the mail in doing it.  now it looks like the ones that aren't pleading out are on the hook for money laundering.  it's all *sorta* about bribing your way in, but not a direct law that says "it's a crime to bribe your way into a school."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105151

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

it's all *sorta* about bribing your way in, but not a direct law that says "it's a crime to bribe your way into a school."

Yeah, the "how you go about it" can get you in a lot of ways.

It's not a crime to have sex with a short female.  But if she's underage, and you drug her, and you use physical threats to do so....well, I'm guessing you're going to be charged with a crime.*

* This assessment not valid in Alabama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105151

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, XYZ said:

I hate that prosecutors do that shit. Cooperate and we’ll recommend a light sentence. Don’t cooperate and we’ll fuck you over. It’s thuggish behavior.

It is.

BUT....not being guilty of the crimes at issue takes a lot of arrows out of their quiver.  I agree that it is often abused on bullshit charges against really weak defendants who have no real choice and can't defend themselves.  But for material crimes, the best way to avoid having the prosecution use other crimes as leverage against you is...don't commit other crimes.

That's my advice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105151

Posted
Posted
Just now, NeverMarryAStripper said:

I'm willing to bet that every person on this board as done something that could be considered a Federal crime

Maybe.  But it's the stacked ones that will get you.  And I doubt many of us have committed more than one.  

But we hear you, man, and we know you THOUGHT she was 18.  It's cool, limitations have PROBABLY run on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

I'm willing to bet that every person on this board as done something that could be considered a Federal crime

I may or may not have rebroadcast an Astros game without the expressed written consent of MLB and the commissioner 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigup2dahorns

bigup2dahorns 3343

Posted
Posted

AAS:

The Texas men’s tennis team reached the No. 1 spot in the latest edition of the Oracle/Intercollegiate Tennis Association rankings, released on Tuesday.

The Longhorns have four individuals ranked in the singles list, with two doubles pairs also represented in doubles rankings.

It’s the first time Texas has been ranked No. 1, according to available records, the school announced. The Longhorns reached the No. 2 spot in 2009.

Texas has two players ranked in the Top 10. Yuya Ito sits at No. 7 while Christian Sigsgaard is one spot back at No. 8. Sigsgaard is the current Big 12 men’s co-player of the week. It’s the second straight week Sigsgaard has earned the honor, his third time this season overall.

The Longhorns moved to 20-2 after defeating No. 10 TCU 6-1 Saturday. That was their fifth win over a Top 10 team this season. Sigsgaard defeated a Top 5 opponent for the second time in a row in the victory.

Harrison Scott sits at No. 50 with Leonardo Telles at No. 73. In doubles, the duo of Scott and Sigsgaard sit at No. 5 while Colin Markes and Scott are No. 89.

Texas takes on No. 26 Oklahoma State Friday at 5:30 p.m. before facing No. 21 Oklahoma on Sunday at 12:30 p.m

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105151

Posted
Posted
AAS:

The Texas men’s tennis team reached the No. 1 spot in the latest edition of the Oracle/Intercollegiate Tennis Association rankings, released on Tuesday.

The Longhorns have four individuals ranked in the singles list, with two doubles pairs also represented in doubles rankings.

It’s the first time Texas has been ranked No. 1, according to available records, the school announced. The Longhorns reached the No. 2 spot in 2009.

Texas has two players ranked in the Top 10. Yuya Ito sits at No. 7 while Christian Sigsgaard is one spot back at No. 8. Sigsgaard is the current Big 12 men’s co-player of the week. It’s the second straight week Sigsgaard has earned the honor, his third time this season overall.

The Longhorns moved to 20-2 after defeating No. 10 TCU 6-1 Saturday. That was their fifth win over a Top 10 team this season. Sigsgaard defeated a Top 5 opponent for the second time in a row in the victory.

Harrison Scott sits at No. 50 with Leonardo Telles at No. 73. In doubles, the duo of Scott and Sigsgaard sit at No. 5 while Colin Markes and Scott are No. 89.

Texas takes on No. 26 Oklahoma State Friday at 5:30 p.m. before facing No. 21 Oklahoma on Sunday at 12:30 p.m

I don’t understand how this relates to how hot Lori Loughlin was back in the day, nor does it contain any pics of her. I’m very confused.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted (edited)

Anyone speculated on what penalty Singer will end up paying for this?

The possible penalties aunt Becky is at risk for is some bullshit.  What a dog and pony show.  I find it hard to believe that if the entirely of the accused were just regular folks that we’d be talking about penalties anywhere near the decades of prison time they are threatening. People get less time in prison for killing in some cases. 

Free aunt Becky. 

Edited by Lhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mulletpelini

mulletpelini 5211

Posted
Posted

 

15 hours ago, Asithappens said:

From all appearances, the Loughlin daughter is as dumb as a post, so yeah, I can see $500k being the going rate for that level of stupidity.

Really. That girl is dumb.

Seems genetic, mom ain't looking to bright right now either.

12 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

And apparently Olivia Jade is furious with her parents and blames them for "ruining her life."  Stupid little bitch.

Stupid little bitch is exactly what parents bought and raised.  You don't buy your kids way thru life, you let em fail and figure shit out.  If they're dumb they're dumb, better figure out a way to live being dumb.  Reality will smack you in the face when you get pushed out in it.  Why the hell parents want to penalize their kids by doing this shit is beyond me.  How many of us had little to nothing and turned into functioning, contributing adults based on our own failures and successes.

Fuck might as well put em in a wheelchair and push em around, feed em thru a tube.  Its a fucking joke what parents do these days.  

Fuck 'em, straight to prison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PilotsError

PilotsError 2287

Posted
Posted
Anyone speculated on what penalty Singer will end up paying for this?
The possible penalties aunt Becky is at risk for is some bullshit.  What a dog and pony show.  I find it hard to believe that if the entirely of the accused were just regular folks that we’d be talking about penalties anywhere near the decades of prison time they are threatening. People get less time in prison for killing in some cases. 
Free aunt Becky. 

I feel like if it was us there would be even more charges, assuming we're not wealthy. Prosecutors love padding the stat sheet with people who can't defend themselves.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17858

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Lhorn said:

Anyone speculated on what penalty Singer will end up paying for this?

The possible penalties aunt Becky is at risk for is some bullshit.  What a dog and pony show.  I find it hard to believe that if the entirely of the accused were just regular folks that we’d be talking about penalties anywhere near the decades of prison time they are threatening. People get less time in prison for killing in some cases. 

Free aunt Becky. 

Yeah, the rich and famous get so screwed by our legal system. If only they were poor and unknown.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Yeah, the rich and famous get so screwed by our legal system. If only they were poor and unknown.

I’m not generalizing that the wealthy get the short end of the stick from the legal system and I think you know that I’m not.  I also don’t think that I’m the only one who feels that the proposed punishment for Lori Loughlin seems a bit out of proportion to the crime.  I’m not a lawyer so maybe years to decades is prison is the norm. 

Factoring her likelihood to do something so blatantly criminal again, negligible harm to society, that the crime was non violent, etc I’m not sure that 20 plus years in prison is the best use of our system. 

Edited by Lhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17858

Posted
Posted
Just now, Lhorn said:

I’m not generalizing that the wealthy get the short end of the stick from the legal system and I think you know that I’m not.  I also don’t think that I’m the only one who feels that the proposed punishment for Lori Loughlin seems a bit out of proportion to the crime.  I’m not a lawyer so maybe years to decades is prisonis the norm. 

Factoring her likelihood to do something so blatantly criminal again, negligible harm to society, that the crime was non violent, etc I’m not sure that 20 plus years in prison is the best use of our system. 

I know. I was just being a flippant ass. I would agree with you.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Foosters said:

I know. I was just being a flippant ass. I would agree with you.

Lol. I was expecting to have a harder time agreeing. 

Again I don’t pretend to know what’s the norm, just what I see as a layman.  I might be wrong about this whole thing. Bribery cases aren’t usually so public.  I am also blinded by my childhood crush on Lori Loughlin, so there’s that. 

And to your point, I agree that poor and powerless are far more traditionally fucked by the criminal justice system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big D

Big D 249

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, mulletpelini said:

 

Seems genetic, mom ain't looking to bright right now either.

Stupid little bitch is exactly what parents bought and raised.  You don't buy your kids way thru life, you let em fail and figure shit out.  If they're dumb they're dumb, better figure out a way to live being dumb.  Reality will smack you in the face when you get pushed out in it.  Why the hell parents want to penalize their kids by doing this shit is beyond me.  How many of us had little to nothing and turned into functioning, contributing adults based on our own failures and successes.

Fuck might as well put em in a wheelchair and push em around, feed em thru a tube.  Its a fucking joke what parents do these days.  

Fuck 'em, straight to prison.

But the kid was living dumb.  That kid had a good thing going.  I bet she was making over a million (at least) just doing stupid YouTube shit.  Why attempt to go to college.  I think her parents might have ruined her dumb stupid YouTube shit that was making her money.  Why try to make her look smart by going to college, which the kid said she only wanted to experience college life without the school part.  I can see why the kid is pissed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13515

Posted
Posted

Agree that 4+ years seems excessive but we place cheating the system or breaking a trust as a very high crime.  Why not a criminal area itself, what gets an athlete banned for life? Not necessarily murder or assault but rather betting on the sport. You don’t even have to throw games to get that ban. You broke the trust in the sport being a fair game so you’re gone.

these parents broke the trust in that SAT and admission process. We all knew that some schools allowed for big donors to get their kids in but that was the system accepting exceptions.  These people went around that.

And you have prosecutors who see unsympathetic defendants...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HouTex

HouTex 1867

Posted
Posted
Yeah, I would be floored if she spent multiple years in prison.  But I might fantasize about being a prison guard.

Same here. It's a surly cliché but she has always been my ideal beauty (i.e wheel house). I'd give her probation on looks alone. All that said, and seriously, there's a huge difference in my view with a rich kid that didn't otherwise get into USC (often called University of spoiled children) vs someone taking bribes at a public university.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eastwood

Eastwood 4394

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TexasMan said:

Food for thought.. 

Eh, it's more of an incentive to save the state time, money, and effort for copping to the crimes that are the easiest for the state to put together. Accept and the state is happy that they were able to uphold the law and the perp gets to walk away with less on their rap sheet. Deny, and the state now has incentive to dig deeper and piece together even more charges for crimes that there is evidence of. The additional charges may not be as solid as the plea deal charges, but that's for a court of law to decide. It's also important to remember that this isn't a winner take all thing. She could still be found guilty of the original plea deal charges after many, many more thousands, if not millions of dollars in legal fees and be found not guilty of the additional charges.

It isn't as much of a "admit you are guilty or we will charge you with more" as it is a "make this cheaper and less time consuming for us by admitting the more obviously guilty crimes and we won't ring you up for everything that there is evidence of, thereby making it cheaper and less time consuming for you." It is mutually beneficial in most cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
XYZ

XYZ 2154

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

Eh, it's more of an incentive to save the state time, money, and effort for copping to the crimes that are the easiest for the state to put together. Accept and the state is happy that they were able to uphold the law and the perp gets to walk away with less on their rap sheet. Deny, and the state now has incentive to dig deeper and piece together even more charges for crimes that there is evidence of. The additional charges may not be as solid as the plea deal charges, but that's for a court of law to decide. It's also important to remember that this isn't a winner take all thing. She could still be found guilty of the original plea deal charges after many, many more thousands, if not millions of dollars in legal fees and be found not guilty of the additional charges.

It isn't as much of a "admit you are guilty or we will charge you with more" as it is a "make this cheaper and less time consuming for us by admitting the more obviously guilty crimes and we won't ring you up for everything that there is evidence of, thereby making it cheaper and less time consuming for you." It is mutually beneficial in most cases.

Good job rationalizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mulletpelini

mulletpelini 5211

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Big D said:

But the kid was living dumb.  That kid had a good thing going.  I bet she was making over a million (at least) just doing stupid YouTube shit.  Why attempt to go to college.  I think her parents might have ruined her dumb stupid YouTube shit that was making her money.  Why try to make her look smart by going to college, which the kid said she only wanted to experience college life without the school part.  I can see why the kid is pissed.

You're right and the kid should be pissed.  I just can't understand the fucking mentality of living your fucking kids life for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted

It’s not so much that Aunt Becky is being overpunished.

It’s that scores of anonymous non-violent offenders are currently crammed into cells all over our country serving much too severe sentences.

THEY are the ones being overpunished.

So when a case like this comes along, the prosecutor has to proportionally overpunish so they don’t get accused of giving the rich white defendant preferential treatment.

Don’t focus on the Aunt Beckys.

Focus on the guy you’ve never heard of doing 15 years for a minor non-violent drug offense.

If those sentencing practices get reformed, the Aunt Beckys will take care of themselves.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 4914

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't disagree, but Aunt Becky isn't the reason those non-violent offenders are in prison.  I find it just as reprehensible to over-punish a rich white chick as I do to over-punish a poor black man. 

I find it reprehensible to punish aunt Becky..... unless we’re talking about whips, ball gags, candle wax on the nipples, but that’s probably not what you meant. 

Edited by Lhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13515

Posted
Posted

I would guess that she didn’t have the contacts to bribe USC directly with a donation, and couldn’t be sure that if she just handed them a check that her kid would get in.  Then the Singer character told her that writing a check to him guaranteed it. In her eyes, it’s the same 500k, so who cares. 

But that’s also the lazy way. With her fame and money, she could have smoozed her way into a few major USC alum groups that would have informally told her what to do. But that would take some time and effort. Or maybe she did do that, and she got bad advice about Singer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I would guess that she didn’t have the contacts to bribe USC directly with a donation, and couldn’t be sure that if she just handed them a check that her kid would get in.  Then the Singer character told her that writing a check to him guaranteed it. In her eyes, it’s the same 500k, so who cares. 

But that’s also the lazy way. With her fame and money, she could have smoozed her way into a few major USC alum groups that would have informally told her what to do. But that would take some time and effort. Or maybe she did do that, and she got bad advice about Singer. 

Maybe her kid is so incredibly stoopid she wasn't able to make any inroads with that route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotActuallyALonghorn

NotActuallyALonghorn 4976

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Eastwood said:

Eh, it's more of an incentive to save the state time, money, and effort for copping to the crimes that are the easiest for the state to put together. Accept and the state is happy that they were able to uphold the law and the perp gets to walk away with less on their rap sheet. Deny, and the state now has incentive to dig deeper and piece together even more charges for crimes that there is evidence of. The additional charges may not be as solid as the plea deal charges, but that's for a court of law to decide. It's also important to remember that this isn't a winner take all thing. She could still be found guilty of the original plea deal charges after many, many more thousands, if not millions of dollars in legal fees and be found not guilty of the additional charges.

It isn't as much of a "admit you are guilty or we will charge you with more" as it is a "make this cheaper and less time consuming for us by admitting the more obviously guilty crimes and we won't ring you up for everything that there is evidence of, thereby making it cheaper and less time consuming for you." It is mutually beneficial in most cases.

But that quickly becomes accept this plea deal or we are going to start charging you with a bunch of frivolous junk we know should never stick. But you still get to pay to defend yourself from it. It's a huge part of the problem with our criminal justice system. The system has been perverted to charge people with as many things as possible just to make prosecutors and other elected officials look good when they throw the stats out there. Never mind that that just leads to more and more incarceration, often at the expense of the poor who can't afford to defend themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...