Posted on 12/28/2020 11:35:04 AM PST by Vendome
Loughlin was released from the federal lockup in Dublin, California, where she had been serving her sentence for her role in the college admissions bribery scheme, the federal Bureau of Prisons said. Her husband, fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, is serving his five-month sentence at a prison in Lompoc near Santa Barbara, California.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
I’ve often heard that refusing to prosecute people for criminal behavior results in a wanton disregard for the law.
I would say that prosecuting people for stupid sh!t that doesn’t remotely harm anyone probably does more to undermine the rule of law than anything else.
She officially pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud.
Loughlin also opted to cheat so her children could steal two admissions spots from more capable, deserving students
Lying should be prosecuted where it’s appropriate. In this case they went way beyond lying.
2. They didn’t “steal” anything from other applicants, since none of those applicants were legally entitled to admission to USC. USC admits less-qualified students with such boring regularity that the whole school would be subject to prosecution as a criminal enterprise if this constitutes “fraud.”
3. Neither is the two daughters failed out of school. By all accounts they were USC students in good standing. That means they were certainly worthy of admission, and you can’t say with any certainty that any rejected applicants who you deem to be “more capable” than them wouldn’t have failed out of school within one semester.
Yipes!
She oughta spend a couple hundred grand getting a girlfriend out of the slam.
If that doesn’t get someone committed for psychiatric care — let alone prosecuted for LYING — then you can’t tell me with a straight face that lying on a college application is a crime.
“Lying on a college application doesn’t constitute “fraud” by any stretch.”
It was more than that.
But I agree it’s not a prison-worthy crime and the criminality was on the part of the university employees who were committing fraud.
Look up the legal definition of the word “fraud.” It means to use illegal means to deprive someone of money, property or legal rights that belong to him or her.
Then tell me who was defrauded in this case.
—
The universities and other students or potential students.
Mail fraud is punishable with up to twenty (20) years in prison, a fine, or both....A single act of wire fraud can result in fines and up to 20 years in prison. However, if the wire fraud scheme affects a financial institution or is connected to a presidentially declared disaster or emergency, the potential penalties are fines of up to $1,000,000 and up to 30 years in prison.
Not sure why you appear to want to excuse Loughlin.....but the facts do speak for themselves as well as the couple admitting their crime...which it was and remains a crime.
2. I’ve already demonstrated that other students or applicants are not victims of any kind of fraud here, since none of them was ever legally entitled to a USC admission.
3. Forget about a criminal case. Based on the information I posted above in Items #1 and #2, none of the alleged “victims” of this crime would even have standing to successfully sue the culprits in CIVIL court.
Look that term up. It’s ludicrous to apply it to private transactions instead of situations that it was originally intended to address: where public officials working in unpaid positions could be prosecuted if they engaged in criminal behavior. Under normal circumstances a fraud charge would never stand up because an unpaid official didn’t steal money from anyone in that case.
I never even heard the term “honest services fraud” until it showed up in almost every phone case Robert Mueller’s team prosecuted from 2017 to 2019. Buying Facebook ads under the name of a phony organization somehow qualifies as “honest services fraud.”
I’ve got news for you: Under that standard of “justice,” posting on Free Republic with a screen name would be considered “fraud,” too.
At least now you know why I’m defending these people. LOL.
The money went to an employee, not the university.
University was not aware of the scam.
There is no defense....just excuses.
I mean — seriously ...
This family got one of the daughters admitted as a student-athlete by sending photos of the kid on a rowing machine? LMAO. If they had a son and sent photos of him in a football uniform, would USC have considered him a Heisman Trophy candidate?
The only “fraud” I see here is USC’s process for reviewing applicants and admitting new students.
You’re not familiar with how it happened.
University employees took the bribes to admit the students on false information.
The university got none of the money.
It was done without knowledge of the university administration.
The university employees committed the major crime.
And again, it’s not Al Capone, but it was fraud.
“I DO understand how it happened. I don’t care who got the bribe money. The families paid the university for the full cost of the education. So USC clearly wasn’t defrauded here. THE SCHOOL DIDN’T LOSE ANY MONEY.”
And the honest student who lost admittance also would have paid.
No one said that was the fraud so there is no reason to keep bringing that up.
The fraud was on the university (fraudulently filling athletic spots with non-atheletes) and non-cheating students.
I said she is looking good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.