General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDad receives 4 months in prison for paying $250K to get son into USC
BOSTON Devin Sloane, a Los Angles business executive, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison for paying $250,000 to get his son accepted into the University of Southern California as a fake water polo recruit.
He is the second parent to be sentenced in Boston federal court in the nation's college admissions scandal after actress Felicity Huffman received 14 days in prison this month.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani also sentenced Sloane to 500 hours of community service over two years and a $95,000 fine.
"Just because youre a good person doesnt mean you dont commit a crime when you do those things," Talwani said. I come back to the action you took in bribing a college official. Bribing a college official is a serious crime. You are not a repeat player, but what you did involved your child."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/dad-receives-4-months-in-prison-for-paying-dollar250k-to-get-son-into-usc/ar-AAHLUk0?li=BBnb7Kz
brooklynite
(94,464 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)LonePirate
(13,412 posts)He may have a seven or eight figure net worth but if he had a nine or more figure net worth, he could have donated a building or wing and his son would have been accepted without question. This is one of those situations where being rich but not insanely rich is not a whole lot different than being middle or lower class.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)is that the rich person donating the building does so publicly, it is transparent. Frequently, the name of the rich person appears somewhere on the building. Also, other college students benefit from having the building, and for many years.
I'm waiting to see the sentences handed down to those who took the bribes.
LonePirate
(13,412 posts)That is the core issue here. People going to extraordinary means to obtain an education for their kids - and education they would not receive otherwise.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)needs to be cleaned up. Certainly, taking away the ability of a coach in a non-revenue sport needs to be high on the list. I can see the possibility of doing away with it for child or grandchild of someone who endows a school with enough money to erect a building, but that's going to be tough. In that case, the loss of one admission to the general public is more than compensated by the benefit to many, many students over a long period of time.
And the whole monopolistic SAT, etc. organization needs a total revamp of procedures. If there were random assignment of proctors a week or two before an exam, the possibility of bribing a proctor gets eliminated. I've always felt that the Educational Testing Service has way too much power that can be abused.
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)mopinko
(70,067 posts)this one had a fake sports resume, and bribed the coach.
huffman bribed a proctor.
Mosby
(16,295 posts)And where is the money?
mopinko
(70,067 posts)hasnt been sentenced.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)There's a whole chain involved here -- Someone in the athletic department would have had to sign off on this, and someone in admissions at the minimum...
mopinko
(70,067 posts)and is cooperating.
those are the parents who are going to do time.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)the schools should have more of the blame, imo... (But I realize that doesn't draw the same headlines like Hollywood celeb parents caught cheating the system)
At some point in the timeline, some person or persons at USC would have had to FIRST let that middleman/fixer/agent/bagman know that they were "open for business" and interested in joining his "network"... Otherwise the parents with cash in hand wouldn't have even known where to go...