Mass College Admission Cheating Scandal

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

Classic baby split.  I wonder if she will actually even go to a BOP facility given that her sentence is less than most pretrial detention.

The most interesting thing is that the judge found no monetary loss. That bodes well for aunt Becky.

 

Edited September 13, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

31 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

this.  as a criminal lawyer, shit gets real extra fast when one of our more affluent clients realizes that life in the grey bar motel is on the horizon.

it's enough of a deterrent that only a certain segment commits prison worthy offenses, mostly those who are already institutionalized...but that's another conversation altogether.

Shit may get real, but it's long after the deed is done, so it's no real deterrent at all.

[SpiralOut 1,867]

Two weeks in the slammer ain't shit.  What's worse is that she has to get processed just like every other loser.  Which means stripping, bending over, and coughing. 

[Brisketexan 105,586]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Shit may get real, but it's long after the deed is done, so it's no real deterrent at all.

Not to that individual, not anymore.

But it is to their circle and their peers.  It really is.  Prison is not a deterrent to people who give zero fucks about going to jail.  To others, it IS a deterrent - the degree is different to different folks, but it IS a deterrent.  I would suggest that it's the ONLY deterrent with respect to wealthy people who can usually just write a check to get out of any situation.

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Not to that individual, not anymore.

But it is to their circle and their peers.  It really is.  Prison is not a deterrent to people who give zero fucks about going to jail.  To others, it IS a deterrent - the degree is different to different folks, but it IS a deterrent.  I would suggest that it's the ONLY deterrent with respect to wealthy people who can usually just write a check to get out of any situation.

I disagree.  We can never know exactly the thought processes of defendants, but I suspect that the notion that a) it isn't wrong and b) I won't get caught are the dominant thought processes in this type of crime, long before "If it is illegal, and I do get caught, oh shit I'm going to jail."

I don't doubt that two weeks in the hoosegow would be life changing for you, me, or Felicity Huffman, but as far as deterring as yet uncommitted crimes, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the publicity and embarrassment.

That is not to say that it's an inappropriate punishment.  I just disagree that it deters other crimes by other defendants.

[Huckleberry 33,564]

That sounds absolute. Are you saying that in an absolute sense? As in, do you believe that jail time never serves as a deterrent for anyone?

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

That sounds absolute. Are you saying that in an absolute sense? As in, do you believe that jail time never serves as a deterrent for anyone?

Rarely.

And, as to financial criminals, if you're a big enough greedhead to commit a crime that gets you $500MM, and you have to pay that in restitution and another $1MM or so in fines, that would seem to hit you where it hurts.

But it has no deterrent effect because more often than not, they don't think they'll get caught.

The scholarship generally agrees.

Edited September 13, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Asithappens 974]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But is has no deterrent effect....

Gotta call bullshit on that.

No effect? Not even some effect?

Bullshit.

[Beau Vine 54,881]

I remember seeing the movie Scared Straight way back when, and the one thing I remember was the producer bringing up the deterrent effect of jail.  Dudes in jail just laughed at him and one said, "There is not one single person in the prison right now who thought there was any chance of getting caught committing the crime that he's in here for."

Those guys literally thought that was the stupidest thing they'd ever heard.  

Edited September 13, 2019 by Beau Vine

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

3 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Gotta call bullshit on that.

No effect? Not even some effect?

Bullshit.

Minimal.  

Insufficient deterrent utility to justify jail sentences and long ones in particular.

To believe that it has more than minimal deterrent effect, you have to believe there's someone out there who is contemplating a bribery scheme to get their kid into college** but won't do it if someone gets jail time.

**or name your crime

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

6 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I remember seeing the movie Scared Straight way back when, and the one thing I remember was the producer bringing up the deterrent effect of jail.  Dudes in jail just laughed at him and one said, "There is not one single person in the prison right now who thought there was any chance of getting caught committing the crime that he's in here for."

Those guys literally thought that was the stupidest thing they'd ever heard.  

Yeah, most of the scholarship agrees that certainty of apprehension and punishment have far more deterrent effect than the type or severity of punishment.

Jail time could have a deterrent effect in theory, but it's too attenuated from the actual commission of the crime.  And, criminals of all stripes aren't big on super-rational thought, taking into account all consequences and the likelihood thereof.

Edited September 13, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[conVINCEd 21,474]

The thought of going to Huntsville has kept me from doing lots of things.  Just today, a tatted up sooner in an ou tank top and visor was walking down the middle of the parking lot at total wine.  I gave him a courtesy honk and he flipped me off.  If Huntsville isn’t on the table, he probably gets run over.

Edited September 13, 2019 by conVINCEd

[Brisketexan 105,586]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, most of the scholarship agrees that certainty of apprehension and punishment have far more deterrent effect than the type or severity of punishment.

That makes sense.  But I bolded the part that matters.  If you are worth $50 million, then a $500k "restitution" order isn't shit.  Quiet probation isn't shit.  So, if that's all that's on the table, you only have to fear apprehension...punishment isn't even in play.  So, it's necessary to have some punishment out there that matters in that calculus.  Yes, the biggest hurdle is "will I or won't I get caught," but "and what will happen to me IF I get caught" matters too -- as your own statement acknowledges.

I tend to agree that the severity is often given way to much weight.  For someone like Aunt Becky, 1 month in a cell is as humiliating as 1 year in a cell.  And while she'd hate the food and the crappy mattresses, the humiliation element is the biggest driver.

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That makes sense.  But I bolded the part that matters.  If you are worth $50 million, then a $500k "restitution" order isn't shit.  Quiet probation isn't shit.  So, if that's all that's on the table, you only have to fear apprehension...punishment isn't even in play.  So, it's necessary to have some punishment out there that matters in that calculus.  Yes, the biggest hurdle is "will I or won't I get caught," but "and what will happen to me IF I get caught" matters too -- as your own statement acknowledges.

I tend to agree that the severity is often given way to much weight.  For someone like Aunt Becky, 1 month in a cell is as humiliating as 1 year in a cell.  And while she'd hate the food and the crappy mattresses, the humiliation element is the biggest driver.

Pretty much agree with that last paragraph.

For some reason we're in love with over-long sentences and deterrence is frequently cited as the reason, because it's utilitarian and kind of value-neutral.  And it's way overblown.  Its effect is diminishingly small.

We need to admit that we're in love with retribution, face that fact and what it says about us, and recalibrate.

Edited September 13, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Brisketexan 105,586]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

We need to admit that we're in love with retribution, face that fact and what it says about us, and recalibrate.

I think that's connected with a frustration of watching folks do bad and get away with it.

For example, I play it straight, and we bust our ass to educate our kid and give him opportunities, and he makes it into Local State College.  But again, we play it straight.  Hell, we don't have the assets to do anything but that.

Hollywood Family doesn't really spend much effort on their kid, but writes a $500k check to get the badminton coach to give their kid a full scholarship to Rich Connections University.  And when they're busted, they have to pay a fine and hang their head, and that's it.

That's pretty rage-inducing -- people expect fairness.  And when the system demonstrates obvious unfairness, and blatant favoritism for certain folks, that understandably pisses people off.  So, your thoughts on retribution aren't wrong....you just need to expand them to include our frustration with unfairness.  A more fair system would go a long way to dialing down that desire for retribution.

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I think that's connected with a frustration of watching folks do bad and get away with it.

For example, I play it straight, and we bust our ass to educate our kid and give him opportunities, and he makes it into Local State College.  But again, we play it straight.  Hell, we don't have the assets to do anything but that.

Hollywood Family doesn't really spend much effort on their kid, but writes a $500k check to get the badminton coach to give their kid a full scholarship to Rich Connections University.  And when they're busted, they have to pay a fine and hang their head, and that's it.

That's pretty rage-inducing -- people expect fairness.  And when the system demonstrates obvious unfairness, and blatant favoritism for certain folks, that understandably pisses people off.  So, your thoughts on retribution aren't wrong....you just need to expand them to include our frustration with unfairness.  A more fair system would go a long way to dialing down that desire for retribution.

I agree that's infuriating.  But I think a lot of our criminal justice system is the result of a national fit of pique, if you will.  Egged along by lickspittle legislators happy to render statutory that fit of pique for a couple of votes.

We just have to be better and understand that getting nationally raked over the coals for a year or more, paying double what you put into the scheme in fine, and some probation or a couple weeks in jail or both are adequate punishment.  Along with having your kid kicked out of school and PNG everywhere.

Also convicts can't go to Canada.  🤬

Edited September 13, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Asithappens 974]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Minimal.  

Insufficient deterrent utility to justify jail sentences and long ones in particular.

To believe that it has more than minimal deterrent effect, you have to believe there's someone out there who is contemplating a bribery scheme to get their kid into college** but won't do it if someone gets jail time.

**or name your crime

You said it had no effect. 

To which I called bullshit. 

Now, if you want to argue minimal, that's another thing.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Besides just trying to be generally honest, the thought of ever having to spend a day in prison is more than enough to keep me on the straight and narrow.  I'd venture to say it's a deterrent for lots of people just like me.

[phdhorn 6,224]

So most of the parents who are involved in this thing that were rounded up together have to face the same judge in Boston.

Looks like a lot of fresh meat in the old clink.

[Sandman 3,420]

4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

I think that's connected with a frustration of watching folks do bad and get away with it.

For example, I play it straight, and we bust our ass to educate our kid and give him opportunities, and he makes it into Local State College.  But again, we play it straight.  Hell, we don't have the assets to do anything but that.

Hollywood Family doesn't really spend much effort on their kid, but writes a $500k check to get the badminton coach to give their kid a full scholarship to Rich Connections University.  And when they're busted, they have to pay a fine and hang their head, and that's it.

That's pretty rage-inducing -- people expect fairness.  And when the system demonstrates obvious unfairness, and blatant favoritism for certain folks, that understandably pisses people off.  So, your thoughts on retribution aren't wrong....you just need to expand them to include our frustration with unfairness.  A more fair system would go a long way to dialing down that desire for retribution.

Do you think the courts look at the cost of prosecuting this crime and think "Fuck it, take the $500K and we're outta here with minimal effort"? Honest question, because I always read about how the cost of drawn out trials is such a burden on the state, plus the cost of incarceration. Is taking a big fine from a rich person (even though they won't feel the sting) just a better business decision for the state? Especially for what many consider a "victimless crime"? 

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

31 minutes ago, Sandman said:

Do you think the courts look at the cost of prosecuting this crime and think "Fuck it, take the $500K and we're outta here with minimal effort"? Honest question, because I always read about how the cost of drawn out trials is such a burden on the state, plus the cost of incarceration. Is taking a big fine from a rich person (even though they won't feel the sting) just a better business decision for the state? Especially for what many consider a "victimless crime"? 

It's not so much the effort as the time.  A federal court probably has six month's trial time, annually, tops, tippy tops, waaaay conservative number.  And if even 50% of what's in the criminal (ignoring civil altogether) pipeline went to trial, it would swiftly grind to a screeching halt.

So, a prosecutor has to face the reality that s/he cant try everything, or even a significant percentage of cases indicted, no matter how badly they might want to.  Any decision to not offer a plea and force a trial probably means that at least two other cases that were trial candidates absolutely must be pled.

Then maybe stir in some laziness.  Trials are really fucking hard work, and they involve a group of people on your side, some of whom may not share your enthusiasm.

And there is some extra cost attendant to even the government trying a case, but most of it is "sunk" in salaries.

In some cases, particularly high-profile ones, the government gets a bit out over their skis with their indictments.  Generally only well-financed defendants can take them on, and if they do, theres a decent chance the government gets gouged.  See, e.g. Skilling.  Even Manafort wasn't convicted of some of his counts.  And the enhanced charges against Aunt Becky for money laundering and honest services fraud might actually be a bit of a stretch, possibly resulting in acquittal or bad law for the government on appeal, see again Skilling, see also Virginia Gov. McDonnell.

On the rare occasion the feds are taken to trial, they get their shit pushed in with some regularity.

Hell, in Huffman's case, the government lost a significant ruling, that could have broad implications, that the "bribe money" here didn't constitute a financial loss to any party (in the way a theft of $100 is a loss to the victim).  The loss figure is a big part of sentencing in any financial crime.  It's why Madoff got life.

All prosecutors, unfortunately, are politicians to one degree or another and are very much concerned with appearances and win-loss records, and how those things can be spun or otherwise utilized to further their political career.

So, you take all those factors encouraging the government to compromise with a plea and there you have it.

Similar factors apply in state court criminal cases, but it tends to be a more seat-of-the-pants thing because of the sheer volume. No case is usually that high-profile and there are just so many that individual junior prosecutors are given pretty wide discretion.

You notice in none of this is "justice," going either way, really a big factor or consideration.

Edited September 14, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[SquishMitten 10,463]

That is not to say that it's an inappropriate punishment.  I just disagree that it deters other crimes by other defendants.

You don’t think it deters any other celebrity from doing the same thing for their kid next year? Knowing that this stuff is being watched, and if caught, they’d go to jail?

[SquishMitten 10,463]

That is not to say that it's an inappropriate punishment.  I just disagree that it deters other crimes by other defendants.

You don’t think it deters any other celebrity from doing the same thing for their kid next year? Knowing that this stuff is being watched, and if caught, they’d go to jail?

[SquishMitten 10,463]

I remember seeing the movie Scared Straight way back when, and the one thing I remember was the producer bringing up the deterrent effect of jail.  Dudes in jail just laughed at him and one said, "There is not one single person in the prison right now who thought there was any chance of getting caught committing the crime that he's in here for."
Those guys literally thought that was the stupidest thing they'd ever heard.  

There’s another side to this...all the people that didn’t commit the crime because of the fear of being caught. Not sure there’s any way to really quantify that. But I’d bet every single one of us, at some point in our lives, thought “man, I’d really like to do X, but I won’t because I could go to jail.” Whether it’s drinking and driving, questionable business deals, or throwing a rock through the windshield of that asshole neighbor who flys down your street doing 50 while your kids are in the yard, we all eventually have those experiences where we chose not to take the risk.

[Eastwood 4,394]

But I’d bet every single one of us, at some point in our lives, thought “man, I’d really like to do X, but I won’t because I could go to jail.”

Every October at the Texas State Fair.

[MAUFRAIS 6,678]

It’s fun to do bad things.

[Armybrat 41,005]

double

Edited September 14, 2019 by Armybrat

[Armybrat 41,005]

22 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

The thought of going to Huntsville has kept me from doing lots of things.  Just today, a tatted up sooner in an ou tank top and visor was walking down the middle of the parking lot at total wine.  I gave him a courtesy honk and he flipped me off.  If Huntsville isn’t on the table, he probably gets run over.

Why would you want to get sooner shit all over your tires?

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

We're going international with this thing.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/17/us/college-admissions-scam-arrest/index.html

Quote

(CNN)A Chinese woman who allegedly paid $400,000 in bribes to get her son into UCLA as a fake soccer recruit was arrested in Spain as part of the sprawling college admissions scam, federal prosecutors said Tuesday.

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

On 9/14/2019 at 2:33 PM, SquishMitten said:

 

You don’t think it deters any other celebrity from doing the same thing for their kid next year? Knowing that this stuff is being watched, and if caught, they’d go to jail?

 

it certainly puts an end to this specific path for a lot of people, but whether it is the public shaming or the incarceration that ends it is less clear.

[Guest Lobo]

^
I'll pick up a year of tuition for your first born if you can tell me where in the Chinese mom's plan, the red lights should have gone off.  

Edited September 18, 2019 by Lobo

[Pescado_Rojo 19,454]

5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

^
I'll pick up a year of tuition for your first born if you can tell me where in the Chinese mom's plan, the red lights should have gone off.  

When my coke tasted funny? 

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

On 9/14/2019 at 2:33 PM, SquishMitten said:

 

You don’t think it deters any other celebrity from doing the same thing for their kid next year? Knowing that this stuff is being watched, and if caught, they’d go to jail?

 

I think jail is about last on the list.  Being exposed to public ridicule, trial, plea bargain, fine, etc. is plenty to deter anyone else.  Also, simply the fact that it is now known, through all of the foregoing, that doing this is illegal and will or may result in adverse consequences is a huge factor.  If you're gonna spend money, keep it to the endowing professorships and wings at the theater department.

 

This has a pretty good perspective on it, I think.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

#freefelicity

 

 

[Armybrat 41,005]

Who is that numbnut?

[MAUFRAIS 6,678]

You kiddin’ me?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,548]

More charges:  https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/us/college-admissions-scam-parents/index.html

Quote

Eleven parents -- Gamal Abdelaziz, Diane Blake, Todd Blake, Giannulli, Elisabeth Kimmell, Loughlin, William McGlashan Jr., Marci Palatella, John Wilson, Homayoun Zadeh, and Robert Zangrillo -- were charged in a superseding indictment with conspiracy to commit federal program bribery, prosecutors said.

No idea what deal Aunt Becky could have worked out before but a few months in jail sounds better against a strong chance of several years in federal prison.  I wonder if she and her husband are still taking this lightly.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

23 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

More charges:  https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/us/college-admissions-scam-parents/index.html

No idea what deal Aunt Becky could have worked out before but a few months in jail sounds better against a strong chance of several years in federal prison.  I wonder if she and her husband are still taking this lightly.

 

This is bullshit.  AFAIK, the essential character of the crimes committed by all of them is the same.  It's fine for it to vary with the amount of money involved, in most cases, and the sentences to date for those who pled have varied almost linearly with the amount involved.  But to keep adding on crimes and penalties for failure to OBEY is just bad business.  Prosecutors run amok.

[irishtexan 11,533]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

This is bullshit.  AFAIK, the essential character of the crimes committed by all of them is the same.  It's fine for it to vary with the amount of money involved, in most cases, and the sentences to date for those who pled have varied almost linearly with the amount involved.  But to keep adding on crimes and penalties for failure to OBEY is just bad business.  Prosecutors run amok.

your comments regarding jurisprudence are taking into consideration, but ultimately rejected when weighed against Aunt Becky confined for several years in a sexy minimum security prison with other dirty milfs and no men around to satisfy their ravenous libidos.

[El Diablo 4,232]

Objection - SUSTAINED!

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

21 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

your comments regarding jurisprudence are taking into consideration, but ultimately rejected when weighed against Aunt Becky confined for several years in a sexy minimum security prison with other dirty milfs and no men around to satisfy their ravenous libidos.

Go on.....

[jimmyjazz 46,479]

We had to watch that movie "Scared Gay", and I gotta tell you, it changed my life.

[hopkinsnhorns 533]

15 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

Erection Objection - SUSTAINED!

fify

[Fuck Tim Beck 3,855]

42 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

Objection - SUSTAINED!  CUMSTAINED

FIFY

[High Plains Drifter 11,057]

On 9/10/2019 at 2:02 PM, hayden_horn said:

agreed. jail time just for the sake of jail time is fucking stupid. 

we should only really lock up dangerous people, imo. that includes a danger to your property as well, again, just my opinion. this crime was stupid, and petty, but these ladies are not a danger to fucking society necessitating removing them and putting them in prison.

 

Every black person in jail for simple possession cries out "horseshit!"

 

Until they are released and records wiped clean, wealthy white women get the same hammer as the poor black man.

 

Lock them fuck up.

[High Plains Drifter 11,057]

On 9/18/2019 at 9:32 AM, TwiceHorn said:

I think jail is about last on the list.  Being exposed to public ridicule, trial, plea bargain, fine, etc. is plenty to deter anyone else.  Also, simply the fact that it is now known, through all of the foregoing, that doing this is illegal and will or may result in adverse consequences is a huge factor.  If you're gonna spend money, keep it to the endowing professorships and wings at the theater department.

 

This has a pretty good perspective on it, I think.

 

These people are celebrities, at least some of them. Do you actually believe they have any sense of shame, at all? Are you really that naive?

[hayden_horn 11,365]

1 hour ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

Every black person in jail for simple possession cries out "horseshit!"

 

Until they are released and records wiped clean, wealthy white women get the same hammer as the poor black man.

 

Lock them fuck up.

well, you see, i think that should also happen. doing the wrong thing again because we did the wrong thing before (and still do the wrong thing) because we want to maintain a foolish consistency doesn't seem right to me. let's start doing the right thing when and where we can.

Edited October 23, 2019 by hayden_horn

[High Plains Drifter 11,057]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, you see, i think that should also happen. doing the wrong thing again because we did the wrong thing before (and still do the wrong thing) because we want to maintain a foolish consistency doesn't seem right to me. let's start doing the right thing when and where we can.

 

If it takes some cute milfy white women getting locked up in prison to illustrate the injustice in our laws, sentencing, and justice system, so be it.

IOW, there is no incentive for society to change an obviously unjust system when the unjust system only hurts the poors and the blacks.

IOW again, letting white women off with a fine and "public shaming (lol)" for bribery but locking up blacks for years for a rock of crack is not starting to "do the right thing when and where we can".  Its only perpetuating an unfair, unjust, racist, and class-ist system.

 

I mean come on. The crime these people committed was basically paying a lot of money for something they shouldn't have. Their punishment is "pay more money"? If they cared about the money they wouldn't have paid the bribes in the first place. 

 

[TwiceHorn 31,686]

33 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, you see, i think that should also happen. doing the wrong thing again because we did the wrong thing before (and still do the wrong thing) because we want to maintain a foolish consistency doesn't seem right to me. let's start doing the right thing when and where we can.

Exactly.  And people in jail for simple possession is mostly a myth.  As far as what's filling our prisons, it's completely a myth.

[Brisketexan 105,586]

48 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

well, you see, i think that should also happen. doing the wrong thing again because we did the wrong thing before (and still do the wrong thing) because we want to maintain a foolish consistency doesn't seem right to me. let's start doing the right thing when and where we can.

While your thoughts make rational sense, they don't mean shit in the real world.

Let's say the system BUYS your argument, and gives Aunt Becky a slap on the wrist.  Will that action be:

1) the start of meaningful prosecutor and prison reform, or

2) just another sweetheart deal for a pretty, rich white person, and all will go back to normal when the next defendant shows up in court?

Come on.  You and I live on planet earth -- we know how this shit goes.  And KNOWING that scenario 2 is the truth....well, I think continuing the message of 'justice for thee, not for me" from the existing power structure of this country is destructive as hell, and we should avoid it.  I think it's much more likely that we deviate from that expected path to issue a real sentence than I think it's likely that we'll start giving people appropriately light sentences across the board.