Mass College Admission Cheating Scandal

[TwiceHorn 31489]

The real argument here is not whether Lori Loughlin or anyone connected to this scandal should get more or less jail time.

The real argument is the exposition here of needlessly aggressive and adversarial prosecution tactics that exemplify what has been going on at least as long as the "plea bargain era," when the ability to try criminal cases was outstripped by the number of criminal cases commenced.

[TwiceHorn 31489]

2 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

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?

I don't really get this argument at all.  If they weren't celebrities, no one would be talking about them at all.  They're losing roles, endorsement deals, being roundly made fun of and ridiculed at every turn.

Whether it's actually shame they're experiencing or not, they're getting a healthy ration of shit and celebrity is turning to ignominy.

[tx 3 putt 76980]

On 10/22/2019 at 2:25 PM, Nice Guy Eddie 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.

 

She's dumber than her daughters 

[High Plains Drifter 11050]

29 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

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.

 

OK, then edumacate me. Or give me a link or something. What is filling our prisons?

 

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31489]

30 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

OK, then edumacate me. Or give me a link or something. What is filling our prisons?

 

 

 

The usual suspects.  https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p17_sum.pdf  For more detail see page 14 of this.  https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p17.pdf

For drug offenses, it's mostly trafficking.

The two things most responsible for our astronomical prison population are overlong sentences for all crimes, and ridiculous probation/supervision policies.  The other thing, related to the first, is that prosecutors don't bring any more cases than they used to, but they bring more felonies (and, you can be sure, ones with increasingly higher penalties) for similar conduct.

The point being, we don't just need to address low-level possession offenses.  It's damn near everything.

And kind of a quick hitter from the Man on it, John Pfaff. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/rethinking-mass-incarceration/518229/

Edited October 23, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Brisketexan 105152]

39 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

For drug offenses, it's mostly trafficking.

Maybe....but the devil's in the details.  Check the rather low amounts that are necessary to turn "possession" into "trafficking."  Metaphorically, if I buy a beer to drink right now, I'm in possession, but if I buy a 6-pack to take home to drink over the weekend, I'm trafficking.

[Armybrat 40850]

Well, not really if it’s Bud Lite.

[Brisketexan 105152]

1 minute ago, Iceman said:

even though you're way the fuck more qualified than Simba

[Matuka 1310]

Wow...

[Iceman 2715]

We want fair admissions...as long as it favors our people/ kids, right?  That kind of fairness?

 

LOlz.  Money, race, gender... they all play a factor.  That's fucking life in the USA.

 

Acting as if it's an otherwise level playing field, aside from the bribery and shit is ludicrous.  

 

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by Iceman

[Bama Chick 28596]

Well, this discussion got gross.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Well, this discussion got gross.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Well, this discussion got gross.

Maybe your kid just wasn’t that special.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Well, this discussion got gross.

Maybe your kid just wasn’t that special.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Well, this discussion got gross.

Maybe your kid just wasn’t that special.

[Iceman 2715]

21 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Well, this discussion got gross.

Maybe your kid just wasn’t that special.

Of course he wasn't.  Just barely squeaked by at West Point. I know hardly anything about the process with regard to elite schools( USMA was not his only accepted application and yes, he did earn scholarships.  Some of the ones he did not get were laughable in their rejections.No, the expectation was never that any institution should come begging for his services.)

sorry the truth is gross to you...  Thought we were having a candid conversation about fairness in college admissions, but of course you take offense and take a personal shot.

 

Typical...

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by Iceman

[Bama Chick 28596]

Sorry for the multiple posts.

Saying your kid isn’t that special is getting personal???

And making a blanket statement and using the name “Simba” is not a real discussion - it’s a racist dogwhistle AKA slorched.

[Iceman 2715]

What race is Simba?

 

Lolz.  Look it up in your flowchart of responses.

 

 

The process is anything but fair.  Glad the rich folks got busted.  They are hardly the only culprits.

Edited October 24, 2019 by Iceman

[Brisketexan 105152]

What race is Simba?

I mean...it’s literally a Swahili word...so...yeah...you’re a piece of shit.

[TwiceHorn 31489]

4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Maybe....but the devil's in the details.  Check the rather low amounts that are necessary to turn "possession" into "trafficking."  Metaphorically, if I buy a beer to drink right now, I'm in possession, but if I buy a 6-pack to take home to drink over the weekend, I'm trafficking.

The people in federal prison, where drug crimes predominate, are fairly "serious" criminals.  The federal laws don't rely on presumptions of intent to distribute based on amount possessed. But they are serving, generally, extremely serious sentences out of proportion to their crimes.  If the unlucky defendant had been arrested by state authorities on state charges, s/he would be serving a more reasonable sentence.  Which is not to say that state sentences are more reasonable across the board.  They're all too high.

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

We need comprehensive criminal justice reform that results in fewer low level drug offenders being locked up and more stupid people like Iceman and his kid. 

[jimmyjazz 45963]

Should have gone with Kunta Kinte, Iceman.

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 hour ago, Iceman said:

Of course he wasn't.  Just barely squeaked by at West Point.

You should have encouraged him to skip more school and hold lowbrow signs during protest.  Special indeed. 

51 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I mean...it’s literally a Swahili word...so...yeah...you’re a piece of shit.

I often wonder who’s pussy hurts more often; yours or South Austin’s mom’s.  

[tx 3 putt 76980]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

For drug offenses, it's mostly trafficking.

Can’t they drop a trafficking charge on about anyone ?

[achooloco 1072]

9 hours ago, Iceman said:

 Just barely squeaked by at West Point. 

 

[TwiceHorn 31489]

8 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

Can’t they drop a trafficking charge on about anyone ?

No.  The evidence shows that, at the federal level, most defendants are involved in trafficking of significant quantities of drugs.  "Involved," though, is a key word.

What the feds are trying to do most of the time is get lower level people, whose involvement is peripheral, but real, to roll on kingpin types.  Kingpin in this instance is a real term, used, like "human trafficking," very loosely.  We aren't talking El Chapo, but we are talking people who make significant money trafficking large quantities of drugs.

The feds aren't making a dent in drug trafficking with these arrests, or arresting many "kingpins," but due to the charging and plea bargaining policies (see above), minor players (addicts and fools) are getting 10-20-30 years in the joint, and if there was a gun anywhere around, lucky to avoid life or a life-equivalent sentence.

While these are real, serious crimes, these defendants are pawns in the machine nevertheless.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

While these are real, serious crimes, these defendants are pawns in the machine nevertheless.

Just like Mongo.

[Brisketexan 105152]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The feds aren't making a dent in drug trafficking with these arrests, or arresting many "kingpins," but due to the charging and plea bargaining policies (see above), minor players (addicts and fools) are getting 10-20-30 years in the joint, and if there was a gun anywhere around, lucky to avoid life or a life-equivalent sentence.

While these are real, serious crimes, these defendants are pawns in the machine nevertheless.

And THAT'S a bingo.

On a criminal appointment, I represented a little low-level Honduran dude.  He was moving coke in the clubs.  Not a big-time player.  Kind of a doofus, liked to drink beer, bbq and fish with his buddies.  But the strategy was absolutely to get him to roll on the big guys....who had already fled back to Honduras...who he wasn't going to rat on anyway, because they would kill his family back home.  And he was dead serious, and I believed him.

And of course, when they arrested him, he was living in a house with three other guys.  One had an old .22 under his bed.  That was enough to get the "gun enhancement" on his sentence.  It was a complete and utter waste of everyone's time.

[TwiceHorn 31489]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

And THAT'S a bingo.

On a criminal appointment, I represented a little low-level Honduran dude.  He was moving coke in the clubs.  Not a big-time player.  Kind of a doofus, liked to drink beer, bbq and fish with his buddies.  But the strategy was absolutely to get him to roll on the big guys....who had already fled back to Honduras...who he wasn't going to rat on anyway, because they would kill his family back home.  And he was dead serious, and I believed him.

And of course, when they arrested him, he was living in a house with three other guys.  One had an old .22 under his bed.  That was enough to get the "gun enhancement" on his sentence.  It was a complete and utter waste of everyone's time.

While this is an anecdote, if you look at appellate decisions on federal drug crimes, you see that this is all too common.  The anecdote is the commonplace.

But one of the points of all this is, to fix the system, we have to address what we're doing with more serious criminals than a doofus with a baggie of weed.  They're still mostly doofuses, but they're involved in what most might consider "serious crime," if you are in a pearl-clutching frame of mind.

[Brisketexan 105152]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

While this is an anecdote, if you look at appellate decisions on federal drug crimes, you see that this is all too common.  The anecdote is the commonplace.

But one of the points of all this is, to fix the system, we have to address what we're doing with more serious criminals than a doofus with a baggie of weed.  They're still mostly doofuses, but they're involved in what most might consider "serious crime," if you are in a pearl-clutching frame of mind.

Oh, it's definitely the rule.  Literally a week before my appointment, I was having lunch with one of our judges, who explained the process and how it all worked.  He was not describing it in particularly glowing terms, mind you -- just pretty matter-of-fact.  And that's exactly the dynamic that I faced in court, along with 10 other defendants.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

There seems to be one rule when it comes to federal prosecution: stay out of the way of an US Attorney. Unless you have the funds to fight. The US Attorney has a lot of weight behind them so you need to hit them head on, OR accept a plea.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There seems to be one rule when it comes to federal prosecution: stay out of the way of an US Attorney. Unless you have the funds to fight. The US Attorney has a lot of weight behind them so you need to hit them head on, OR accept a plea.

I sit around a fish camp fire with a few of these guys every year.  They tell stories about their cases (very sanitized of course). They do their homework, and by the time they bring charges it's as good as done, you're going down.

[Brisketexan 105152]

I sit around a fish camp fire with a few of these guys every year.  They tell stories about their cases (very sanitized of course). They do their homework, and by the time they bring charges it's as good as done, you're going down.

Yeah....when they pull out three BOXES of tapes of recorded conversations of your guy (this was a while back)...and just the first three random tapes are plenty incriminating....they’ve got you.

[hayden_horn 11362]

haha, so slorch made a racist post and then deleted it?

is that what happened? 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah....when they pull out three BOXES of tapes of recorded conversations of your guy (this was a while back)...and just the first three random tapes are plenty incriminating....they’ve got you.

Triangulation, research, and investigation. They do it in triplicate it seems.  One of my lawyerly buds was fucking with me, said my name kept coming up in an investigation. Turns out they were investigating an embezzlement case, and any checks for $5k or more had to be followed up on.  Turns out my client was probably paying me with embezzled, state funds.

Edited October 24, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[Armybrat 40850]

11 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Should have gone with Kunta Kinte, Iceman.

Toby.

[Armybrat 40850]

50 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There seems to be one rule when it comes to federal prosecution: stay out of the way of an US Attorney. Unless you have the funds to fight. The US Attorney has a lot of weight behind them so you need to hit them head on, OR accept a plea.

They didn’t do crap with that POS Price up in Dallas

[Armybrat 40850]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

And THAT'S a bingo.

On a criminal appointment, I represented a little low-level Honduran dude.  He was moving coke in the clubs.  Not a big-time player.  Kind of a doofus, liked to drink beer, bbq and fish with his buddies.  But the strategy was absolutely to get him to roll on the big guys....who had already fled back to Honduras...who he wasn't going to rat on anyway, because they would kill his family back home.  And he was dead serious, and I believed him.

And of course, when they arrested him, he was living in a house with three other guys.  One had an old .22 under his bed.  That was enough to get the "gun enhancement" on his sentence.  It was a complete and utter waste of everyone's time.

There’s not much the feds can do to turn a useful idiot in a case like that. 
Most dudes will go to jail rather than get their families killed, and who can blame them? But I do blame them for going for the “easy money” in the first place..... even though it has to be extremely tempting for the poors.

[achooloco 1072]

16 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

haha, so slorch made a racist post and then deleted it?

is that what happened? 

Of course not. It was a thoughtful post in a candid conversation about fairness in college admissions, and WE ARE the gross uncivil ones who took offense over nothing.... 

Back on topic, put me in the high plains drifter camp for now. If poor people are getting fucked, I’m okay with rich people getting screwed until the system is corrected. And since we’ve always been screwing the poor people, looks like the only way to fix the system is to keep going forward, ie. screw the celebs and rich bc no one is pushing for reform when it’s just the poor being abused. If we have to over prosecute rich people until we get reform, so be it. 

 

[Brisketexan 105152]

2 hours ago, Armybrat said:

There’s not much the feds can do to turn a useful idiot in a case like that. 
Most dudes will go to jail rather than get their families killed, and who can blame them? But I do blame them for going for the “easy money” in the first place..... even though it has to be extremely tempting for the poors.

Sure....and the way to end that stupidity all around is to legalize it.

I mean, the case I was involved in was clearly a massive FBI and DEA operation -- the LEOs working on it were incredible, smart, methodical....I want them working the case if we're ever really worried about a terrorist movement, that sort of thing.  So what did we use them for? To bust a bunch of stubby little Hondurans selling coke in nightclubs.  And after all of that effort and expense (the gov't paid for my time -- not all of it, nor at my full rate, but they paid me money), what was the end result?  The day before the bust, it was easy to get coke in an Austin nightclub.  The day after....it was still just as easy.  

An utter waste of time.  The arrests, convictions, and long sentences deterred NOBODY from filling that void immediately.  The only thing we accomplished was paying some lawyers, occupying some cops, and filling some federal prison cells for a few years.

"Tough on crime" is generally a pretty stupid approach.  It's probably a stupid approach with the celebs in this thread, just like it is with little Honduran dudes.  Honestly, I think the crimes of these celebs are more serious than the crimes of the Hondurans -- if coke was legal, nobody would have been hurt, and everyone would have been participating voluntarily.  Here, the celebs occupied spaces that some other deserving student should have gotten.

We're dumb on crime.

[Armybrat 40850]

I agree.

Disclaimer: None of my family are illegal drug users....so far That weknow. Just a bunch of binge drinkers.

[TwiceHorn 31489]

33 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure....and the way to end that stupidity all around is to legalize it.

I mean, the case I was involved in was clearly a massive FBI and DEA operation -- the LEOs working on it were incredible, smart, methodical....I want them working the case if we're ever really worried about a terrorist movement, that sort of thing.  So what did we use them for? To bust a bunch of stubby little Hondurans selling coke in nightclubs.  And after all of that effort and expense (the gov't paid for my time -- not all of it, nor at my full rate, but they paid me money), what was the end result?  The day before the bust, it was easy to get coke in an Austin nightclub.  The day after....it was still just as easy.  

An utter waste of time.  The arrests, convictions, and long sentences deterred NOBODY from filling that void immediately.  The only thing we accomplished was paying some lawyers, occupying some cops, and filling some federal prison cells for a few years.

"Tough on crime" is generally a pretty stupid approach.  It's probably a stupid approach with the celebs in this thread, just like it is with little Honduran dudes.  Honestly, I think the crimes of these celebs are more serious than the crimes of the Hondurans -- if coke was legal, nobody would have been hurt, and everyone would have been participating voluntarily.  Here, the celebs occupied spaces that some other deserving student should have gotten.

We're dumb on crime.

If they were so fucking great, why didn't they get the Honduran El Chapo instead of your lil dude?  Or better yet, arrest someone who knew something and would be willing to talk?

Which is not to say it isn't a waste of time, but it's actually a bigger waste of time than your post implies.

I'm beginning to put the feds' "investigation by indictment" practice and policy into the immoral and unethical slot.

Interesting point on the crime comparison.  From a harm/victim standpoint, you are probably right.  From a moral degeneracy point of view (how depraved was the act itself, apart from consequences), probably about even.  Peddling misery for a quick buck is a bad moral choice, but mitigated by poverty and lack of opportunity.  Bribing a kid's way into college is pretty bad too, aggravated by the lack of necessity and mitigated by the legal avenues to do the same damn thing.

Edited October 24, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Genco 3041]

4 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I sit around a fish camp fire with a few of these guys every year.  They tell stories about their cases (very sanitized of course). They do their homework, and by the time they bring charges it's as good as done, you're going down.

Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeit

[Brisketexan 105152]

46 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

If they were so fucking great, why didn't they get the Honduran El Chapo instead of your lil dude?  Or better yet, arrest someone who knew something and would be willing to talk?

Which is not to say it isn't a waste of time, but it's actually a bigger waste of time than your post implies.

I'm beginning to put the feds' "investigation by indictment" practice and policy into the immoral and unethical slot.

Interesting point on the crime comparison.  From a harm/victim standpoint, you are probably right.  From a moral degeneracy point of view (how depraved was the act itself, apart from consequences), probably about even.  Peddling misery for a quick buck is a bad moral choice, but mitigated by poverty and lack of opportunity.  Bribing a kid's way into college is pretty bad too, aggravated by the lack of necessity and mitigated by the legal avenues to do the same damn thing.

Oh, I agree, the "get the kingpin" strategy was never going to work, so if that was the goal, it was wasted time.

And I just don't have a particular moral problem with mind-altering substances in general (and yes, I know that your experience is a big part of your moral calculus here).  The fact is, most folks can enjoy getting toasty/baked/wired for recreational purposes, and neither cause nor suffer any real harm.  I don't have any problem with the guy who sells me beer at the game.  

And there's definitely a component of choice/opportunity there.  My little Honduran dude wasn't going to be a stockbroker or surgeon.  He sold something that people wanted and used to have a good time.  It ain't for me, don't want my kids doing it, etc....but then, I feel the same way about motorcycles, but don't find them morally offensive.

The rich and entitled folks here actually took up someone else's place, and what they did was just pure arrogance.  Instead of using their vast resources to get the private tutoring and whatnot (hey, I'm paying for my kid to take an SAT prep class right now, and I damned well know that my ability to do so is because of my privilege), they cheated, without regard for how their unfair conduct hurts someone else.

My little Honduran dude was a decent enough fellow.  Never wanted to hurt anyone, and I really don't believe he ever would.  And he even felt real regret for his choices - "my mom told me that if I hang around bad people, I'll do bad things.  I was weak, and made some bad decisions.  I should have listened to my mom."  For real, he said that.

[Trey3216 15346]

On 10/23/2019 at 7:00 PM, Brisketexan said:

[ChickenSandwich 9840]

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.

Completely disagree. The public shame from a fine would be nothing. They were just trying to get the best for their kids. All of their peers pay to play through their everyday lives and this doesn’t move the needle. 
 

now jail on the other hand, is an outrage in their elite circles. Never never happen to them. The “shame” you speak of is from going to jail. Like Martha Stew throwing shade on Felicity’s prison style. 
 

the only other “shame” that would work besides jail time would be to shame the “kids”. Boot from school. Cancel all grades etc. 

No one is doing that. At this level of elite smugness/untouchable-ness, jail is literally their only fear from the government. 

[TwiceHorn 31489]

4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, I agree, the "get the kingpin" strategy was never going to work, so if that was the goal, it was wasted time.

And I just don't have a particular moral problem with mind-altering substances in general (and yes, I know that your experience is a big part of your moral calculus here).  The fact is, most folks can enjoy getting toasty/baked/wired for recreational purposes, and neither cause nor suffer any real harm.  I don't have any problem with the guy who sells me beer at the game.  

And there's definitely a component of choice/opportunity there.  My little Honduran dude wasn't going to be a stockbroker or surgeon.  He sold something that people wanted and used to have a good time.  It ain't for me, don't want my kids doing it, etc....but then, I feel the same way about motorcycles, but don't find them morally offensive.

The rich and entitled folks here actually took up someone else's place, and what they did was just pure arrogance.  Instead of using their vast resources to get the private tutoring and whatnot (hey, I'm paying for my kid to take an SAT prep class right now, and I damned well know that my ability to do so is because of my privilege), they cheated, without regard for how their unfair conduct hurts someone else.

My little Honduran dude was a decent enough fellow.  Never wanted to hurt anyone, and I really don't believe he ever would.  And he even felt real regret for his choices - "my mom told me that if I hang around bad people, I'll do bad things.  I was weak, and made some bad decisions.  I should have listened to my mom."  For real, he said that.

Fair point on mind-altering substances.  I don't really have an issue with them either, although I do have an extra measure of sym/empathy for those who suffer with them.  I have always harbored a belief that drug dealing is "peddling misery" and that long predates my own experience.  I probably need to rethink that a bit.  In a lot of circumstances, I think drug dealers do actively rely on an addicted customer base, but then so do liquor and convenience stores.

Regardless of the morality of selling illegal drugs, a whole lot of the low-level types are coerced by poverty and addiction.  Some of the higher-levels, too.

[TwiceHorn 31489]

3 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Completely disagree. The public shame from a fine would be nothing. They were just trying to get the best for their kids. All of their peers pay to play through their everyday lives and this doesn’t move the needle. 
 

now jail on the other hand, is an outrage in their elite circles. Never never happen to them. The “shame” you speak of is from going to jail. Like Martha Stew throwing shade on Felicity’s prison style. 
 

the only other “shame” that would work besides jail time would be to shame the “kids”. Boot from school. Cancel all grades etc. 

No one is doing that. At this level of elite smugness/untouchable-ness, jail is literally their only fear from the government. 

I didn't realize that I didn't use the term "shame." Others did.  

And I meant precisely the kind of stigma and ridicule that is occurring as stated in your third and fourth sentences.  Kids are being booted from school or withdrawing in humiliation before they can be booted.

While I don't think imprisonment is absolutely necessary, I do agree that it's a life-changer for those who aren't career reprobates.  Currently, "first offender" type status just means you maybe deserve a break.  But I think it should enter the calculus as "prison is going to totally fuck this person's world."  Six weeks, six months is plenty to accomplish that.  That's speaking in broader terms than this particular set of cases.

[ChickenSandwich 9840]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I didn't realize that I didn't use the term "shame." Others did.  

And I meant precisely the kind of stigma and ridicule that is occurring as stated in your third and fourth sentences.  Kids are being booted from school or withdrawing in humiliation before they can be booted.

While I don't think imprisonment is absolutely necessary, I do agree that it's a life-changer for those who aren't career reprobates.  Currently, "first offender" type status just means you maybe deserve a break.  But I think it should enter the calculus as "prison is going to totally fuck this person's world."  Six weeks, six months is plenty to accomplish that.  That's speaking in broader terms than this particular set of cases.

Agreed. Aunt Becky will feel the same remorse for a month away from her amazing life vs a year. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Pillaried in public....  bring that shit back !!!!!