Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 120 posts

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#11

Post by driverdan »

microtherion wrote: post #6
denago wrote: post #2

seems silly to send people to prison for this

As a comparison, a homeless mother who deliberately enrolled her 5-year-old in the wrong school district was sentenced to 5 years in prison: https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/mom-went-prison-enrolling-he... I would argue that the kind of bribery at the heart of this case is considerably worse, as it fosters a mentality that everything is for sale at the right price.

While the charges are absurd people need to stop referencing this case. She was given 5 years for the drug charges so the judge tacked on a concurrent 5 year sentence for the school charges. It has no material impact. If she didn't have the drug charges she wouldn't have been given that sentence.

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#12

Post by gnicholas »

microtherion wrote: post #6
denago wrote: post #2

seems silly to send people to prison for this

As a comparison, a homeless mother who deliberately enrolled her 5-year-old in the wrong school district was sentenced to 5 years in prison: https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/mom-went-prison-enrolling-he... I would argue that the kind of bribery at the heart of this case is considerably worse, as it fosters a mentality that everything is for sale at the right price.

snopes has more background on this comparison, which isn't quite as simple as it is sometimes portrayed: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tanya-mcdowell-felicity-hu...

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#13

Post by js2 »

bleepblorp wrote: post #5

I have a very hard time getting even remotely upset about the college bribery scandal when it's both legal and encouraged for the truly rich to get their failsons 'legacy admissions' at selective colleges by donating multiple millions to the institutions. The people who have been prosecuted as part of this scandal aren't being prosecuted for devaluing earned degrees at selective colleges; they're being prosecuted for…

You don't see a difference between bribing someone under the table to get only your child in, vs a public donation that benefits the entire student body besides your child?

The rules may be unfair but at least in the latter case, everyone knows that they are up against.

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#14

Post by Aliabid94 »

bleepblorp wrote: post #5

I have a very hard time getting even remotely upset about the college bribery scandal when it's both legal and encouraged for the truly rich to get their failsons 'legacy admissions' at selective colleges by donating multiple millions to the institutions. The people who have been prosecuted as part of this scandal aren't being prosecuted for devaluing earned degrees at selective colleges; they're being prosecuted for…

Yes but "bribing" the college directly with donations subsidizes the cost of tuition for everyone else. Students don't benefit if the donations go to middlemen instead.

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#15

Post by rumcajz »

I have hard time understanding what goes for the bribery in US. Apparently, a lot of stuff that would be considered corruption in Europe is just business as normal in the US. In this particular case I would guess that what they did would be considered OK. Apparently it wasn't. Can someone from the US comment on where the boundary between what's OK and what's not lies?

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#16

Post by icantspellwell »

First, we don't know whether the children of the guilty were kicked out of school.

So, the only victims here are students and athletes who lost an earned spot in university. But they don't have any agency here.

The universities administration has no skin in the game - they get paid, the endowments are bountiful, and the professors keep on suffering on. There may even be a backslaps and high five deal to recapture any "lost" income.

The guilty here are resourceful and powerful, so really, the court case is more of a negotiation at best. Kiss the hand of the king and receive a small slap on the wrist sort of a deal.

The government has bigger fish to fry than worry about fairness.

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#18

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

driverdan wrote: post #11
microtherion wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a comparison, a homeless mother who deliberately enrolled her 5-year-old in the wrong school district was sentenced to 5 years in prison: https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/mom-went-prison-enrolling-he... I would argue that the kind of bribery at the heart of this case is considerably worse, as it fosters a mentality that everything is for sale at the right price.

While the charges are absurd people need to stop referencing this case. She was given 5 years for the drug charges so the judge tacked on a concurrent 5 year sentence for the school charges. It has no material impact. If she didn't have the drug charges she wouldn't have been given that sentence.

It has an impact on parole boards.

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#19

Post by fortran77 »

bleepblorp wrote: post #5

I have a very hard time getting even remotely upset about the college bribery scandal when it's both legal and encouraged for the truly rich to get their failsons 'legacy admissions' at selective colleges by donating multiple millions to the institutions. The people who have been prosecuted as part of this scandal aren't being prosecuted for devaluing earned degrees at selective colleges; they're being prosecuted for…

There's a big difference. I'm surprised you don't see it.

If a billionaire donates a new building to a college so his dim-witted son can get in, the entire school benefits because they have a new facility. And the school can see to it that nobody gets "displaced" by this dim-witted kid by increasing the class size by 1.

If a wealthy person bribes and athletic coach to get his kid into school, the school gets no money and no benefit, and someone else was actually displaced.

Re: Lori Loughlin and husband sentenced in college bribery scandal

#20

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

rumcajz wrote: post #15

I have hard time understanding what goes for the bribery in US. Apparently, a lot of stuff that would be considered corruption in Europe is just business as normal in the US. In this particular case I would guess that what they did would be considered OK. Apparently it wasn't. Can someone from the US comment on where the boundary between what's OK and what's not lies?

> where the boundary between what's OK and what's not lies?

It scales proportional to your wealth. The varsity blues parents were just too poor to issue a proper bribe.

Post reply on HN