Another Black Eye for Penn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reddit and College Confidential have years and years of details on how to exploit these programs and the hooks required for elite college admissions. And they're full of ruthless 14, 15, and 16 year-olds obsessively studying them. You have to suspend reality to pretend this young woman was just an oblivious student who randomly stumbled upon QuestBridge and whatever else she applied to because the rich private school counselor told her to apply.

And her breakdown after bombing AP chemistry teases out she was precisely the sort of student who was gunning for an Ivy League university at least back in 10th or 11th grade. In contrast to your average UMC overachiver who merely wanted to go to in-state University of Missouri, they are not going to have a breakdown over a single AP test. But an elbowy Ivy League gunner is going to have that breakdown, worrying a single B may cost them a spot at Harvard.

And the transcripts all but prove the breakdown happened. The girl, per usual, spins and calls the mother a liar. Right. The mother totally made that up... and it's just a pure coincidence that happens to be one of the few B's on her transcript? You all are way too naive.

So it's easier to believe that a woman lied about her mother abusing her AND her stepfather molesting her all so she could....study social work than to actually just believe that a woman was abused? Cool, cool. I guess that explains why so many women don't report abuse.

You're just flooding the forum with non sequitur and red herrings. This thread needs to be locked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any mother who *laughs to investigators* when asked about her BF molesting her daughter has a screw loose. I cannot take the mom seriously at all after that. Then the BF denies it happened? Even though there’s contemporaneous evidence that it did? And he’s been reported to police *twice* previously by girlfriends? And yet the mom blew off her daughter’s concerns about him? This is a ducked up family.

Also, what was the bit about her mom calling police when the BF showed Mackenzie his gun? It was sort of dropped in there with no context.

Exactly.

This, exactly. And there are more than a few over-the-top, nasty, borderline vicious, posters on here who know jack sh-- about what actually happened. And know even less about sexual assault. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

Rich? She was away from family in FOSTER care when she went to PENN. All of her physical injuries, documented in real time. The mother's reactions -alone- make me believe the kid. You people are effing crazy.

Question: How many rich 17 y/o strivers would "enter the FOSTER system" for a few months, with no disruption to their elite private schooling, for admission to and a 100% free full ride scholarship valued at over $320,000 to an Ivy League university?

Answer: Most.

Question: How many GENUINE foster kids would trade places with her?

Answer: 100% all of them!

Only a fellow rich kid would defend this pampered brat or have the shameless audacity to pretend she was living in squalor. She wouldn't even give up the names of her supposed foster "siblings" because everything is a lie. A spoiled rich brat with a vivid imagination.

You have a distinctive voice and clearly have a strange and strong obsession with this young woman.

Most teenagers would not inflict such grievous injuries to themselves over the course of several years as a way to scheme their way into the foster system and then into an elite school.

Why do you keep infantilizing her with "young woman" and "girl"? Isn't she year 25 at this point.

Huh? The “rubbish” pp is the one who is calling Fierceton a rich “girl.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, Mackenzie hater, what do you have to say about her mom reacting with lolz about her boyfriends sexual abuse of her 15 year old?

Why are you trying to divert attention with salacious sexual assault hearsay? Seems to be a go-to.

From what I've read, it does actually sound like the "trainer" boyfriend was probably a loser, certainly sounds like the successful and attractive mother could and should be doing a lot better than what sounds like a mooch targeting the older and wealthy female MD. However, that does not make him a sexual abuser or whatever is being spread. And she is not the first kid, an only child at that, to go absolutely nuts when a mother (or father) starts dating someone. I believe the lip stick alley term for the mother's poor judgement is d***-notized, as in hypnotized by a new sexual partner. The mother probably needed better judgment. But the mooch guy has no criminal record, right? Was never charged with anything in this, right? I mean you think it's a huge conspiracy by everyone in STL and county and state's attorneys to cover up all of this for a random rich female doctor? Or is the center piece of this never-ending drama, from St Louis to Philly to Oxford, a theatrical spoiled brat?

The fact is that the courts found that there wasn’t enough evidence to support the charges. That’s a far cry from exoneration.

The fact is that an independent investigation by social service professionals found her allegations to be credible.

The fact is that she made contemporaneous notes, which always enhances a witness’s credibility.

Calling her names doesn’t enhance your credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we going to re-litigate this whole subject again? Two threads on this very same topic have already been locked.

You’re free not to participate. Why so anxious to shut it down?

I participated twice before, and it got locked twice, so I don't want to make all the same arguments again that have already been made.

Then don’t.

The reason the topic has been reopened is that the New Yorker article presents a lot of new information. Making the same arguments again would simply mean that you are ignoring the new information or didn’t bother to read the new article. In that case, please don’t participate.

Nothing is new here. Back and forth -- like the other threads. I'll wade back in, but I'm aware it might get shut down again.
Penn was right in informing Rhodes of the information it received about Ms. Fierceton, and Rhodes was right in revoking her scholarship.
That was all discussed ad nausum in the other two threads.

What’s new is information presented in the article. Have you read it?

Yes, nothing was new. Have you read her lawsuit? Do you know what she is alleging?

Yes. I read the tire lawsuit and know what she’s alleging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no explanation for this below which is why the New Yorker writer and the gals' sycophants pepper salacious hearsay and professional victim nonsense to divert everyone's attention. Read the actual court filings and evidence, not anonymous message boards and opinion stories:

Additionally, I partially support my younger sister, who will be starting college soon. I will then have the additional strain of working to put her through school and ensure her basic living expenses are met. Because she also has special needs, additional resources such as medication, testing, learning aids, and more create further expenses throughout this process.” She wrote the same in her 2018-2019 PFAS form. Ms. Shaw told OSC that Mackenzie has not provided, and that there was no reason to believe it would become necessary to provide, “basic living expenses” or medical costs for Cat (who does have learning challenges). Asked about this, Mackenzie told OSC (and it was separately confirmed) that Mackenzie set up a 529 account for her sister to use towards higher education. OSC understands that the account has approximately $6,000 in it at this point. According to Mackenzie, the seed money for this account may have come from her biological father, although she does not quite remember.

Was she trying to use a little sister to qualify for larger financial aid refunds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reddit and College Confidential have years and years of details on how to exploit these programs and the hooks required for elite college admissions. And they're full of ruthless 14, 15, and 16 year-olds obsessively studying them. You have to suspend reality to pretend this young woman was just an oblivious student who randomly stumbled upon QuestBridge and whatever else she applied to because the rich private school counselor told her to apply.

And her breakdown after bombing AP chemistry teases out she was precisely the sort of student who was gunning for an Ivy League university at least back in 10th or 11th grade. In contrast to your average UMC overachiver who merely wanted to go to in-state University of Missouri, they are not going to have a breakdown over a single AP test. But an elbowy Ivy League gunner is going to have that breakdown, worrying a single B may cost them a spot at Harvard.

And the transcripts all but prove the breakdown happened. The girl, per usual, spins and calls the mother a liar. Right. The mother totally made that up... and it's just a pure coincidence that happens to be one of the few B's on her transcript? You all are way too naive.

The mother claims she bombed AP chem. The record doesn’t support her. The student’s grade was B+. This was the mother’ cover story to explain the incident that was detrimental to her. Other parents described the smear campaign which the mother conducted against her own daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never say this (and realize it’s not at all likely) but it genuinely seems like Mackenzie’s mom may have found this thread.

I never say this but it genuinely seems like she's concealing her SAT score because it's rubbish and it exposes the fact that she never deserved to get into Penn in the first place. If the SAT is low, all she has is inflated private school grades and inflated Penn grades in one of the easiest majors at Penn SAS. Wow! Genius! Give her a Rhodes! Put her in congress! A dime a dozen mediocre rich white girl.

Concealing??? Who publishes thir SAT score? What relevance do they have to this story?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reddit and College Confidential have years and years of details on how to exploit these programs and the hooks required for elite college admissions. And they're full of ruthless 14, 15, and 16 year-olds obsessively studying them. You have to suspend reality to pretend this young woman was just an oblivious student who randomly stumbled upon QuestBridge and whatever else she applied to because the rich private school counselor told her to apply.

And her breakdown after bombing AP chemistry teases out she was precisely the sort of student who was gunning for an Ivy League university at least back in 10th or 11th grade. In contrast to your average UMC overachiver who merely wanted to go to in-state University of Missouri, they are not going to have a breakdown over a single AP test. But an elbowy Ivy League gunner is going to have that breakdown, worrying a single B may cost them a spot at Harvard.

And the transcripts all but prove the breakdown happened. The girl, per usual, spins and calls the mother a liar. Right. The mother totally made that up... and it's just a pure coincidence that happens to be one of the few B's on her transcript? You all are way too naive.

The mother claims she bombed AP chem. The record doesn’t support her. The student’s grade was B+. This was the mother’ cover story to explain the incident that was detrimental to her. Other parents described the smear campaign which the mother conducted against her own daughter.

What does any of this have to do with her lawsuit or the Rhodes Committe revocation of her scholarship? Who is bringing this stuff up again and why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never say this (and realize it’s not at all likely) but it genuinely seems like Mackenzie’s mom may have found this thread.

I never say this but it genuinely seems like she's concealing her SAT score because it's rubbish and it exposes the fact that she never deserved to get into Penn in the first place. If the SAT is low, all she has is inflated private school grades and inflated Penn grades in one of the easiest majors at Penn SAS. Wow! Genius! Give her a Rhodes! Put her in congress! A dime a dozen mediocre rich white girl.

Concealing??? Who publishes thir SAT score? What relevance do they have to this story?

Also, Penn wasn’t test-option when Mackenzie applied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I never say this (and realize it’s not at all likely) but it genuinely seems like Mackenzie’s mom may have found this thread.

We are talking about a woman who stalked her daughter at college and tried to destroy her college career for no reason other than that Mackenzie’s success in college and after meant her another would not be able to regain control over her. I have no doubt that Carrie Morrison stalks the internet for mentions of Mackenzie and jumps into message board discussions to try to destroy her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, Mackenzie hater, what do you have to say about her mom reacting with lolz about her boyfriends sexual abuse of her 15 year old?

Why are you trying to divert attention with salacious sexual assault hearsay? Seems to be a go-to.

From what I've read, it does actually sound like the "trainer" boyfriend was probably a loser, certainly sounds like the successful and attractive mother could and should be doing a lot better than what sounds like a mooch targeting the older and wealthy female MD. However, that does not make him a sexual abuser or whatever is being spread. And she is not the first kid, an only child at that, to go absolutely nuts when a mother (or father) starts dating someone. I believe the lip stick alley term for the mother's poor judgement is d***-notized, as in hypnotized by a new sexual partner. The mother probably needed better judgment. But the mooch guy has no criminal record, right? Was never charged with anything in this, right? I mean you think it's a huge conspiracy by everyone in STL and county and state's attorneys to cover up all of this for a random rich female doctor? Or is the center piece of this never-ending drama, from St Louis to Philly to Oxford, a theatrical spoiled brat?

The fact is that the courts found that there wasn’t enough evidence to support the charges. That’s a far cry from exoneration.

The fact is that an independent investigation by social service professionals found her allegations to be credible.

The fact is that she made contemporaneous notes, which always enhances a witness’s credibility.

Calling her names doesn’t enhance your credibility.

Agree on all accounts. And almost all sexual assault is hearsay. Very rarely -for reasons that should be obvious- are their witnesses (to the first PP's moronic comment).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never say this (and realize it’s not at all likely) but it genuinely seems like Mackenzie’s mom may have found this thread.

I never say this but it genuinely seems like she's concealing her SAT score because it's rubbish and it exposes the fact that she never deserved to get into Penn in the first place. If the SAT is low, all she has is inflated private school grades and inflated Penn grades in one of the easiest majors at Penn SAS. Wow! Genius! Give her a Rhodes! Put her in congress! A dime a dozen mediocre rich white girl.

Concealing??? Who publishes thir SAT score? What relevance do they have to this story?

I read the New Yorker piece. It details what a supposed amazing student she was, she went so far as to show the reporter her high school transcript. But no mention of her ACT or SAT score. I conclude if the score was amazing, she would brag about it and put it on the record, to further bolster her claim of being an amazing student, a student who warranted being admitted to Penn and winning the Rhodes.

Every UMC teen has all A's or darn close, so I'm not swayed or impressed when a reporter touts some rich kid's high school GPA. Those with fake inflated grades tend to be exposed on the ACT or SAT. It says a lot that she didn't provide the reporter with a score to go along with the transcript. And Penn was not test optional when she first applied seven or whatever years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never say this (and realize it’s not at all likely) but it genuinely seems like Mackenzie’s mom may have found this thread.

I never say this but it genuinely seems like she's concealing her SAT score because it's rubbish and it exposes the fact that she never deserved to get into Penn in the first place. If the SAT is low, all she has is inflated private school grades and inflated Penn grades in one of the easiest majors at Penn SAS. Wow! Genius! Give her a Rhodes! Put her in congress! A dime a dozen mediocre rich white girl.

Concealing??? Who publishes thir SAT score? What relevance do they have to this story?

I read the New Yorker piece. It details what a supposed amazing student she was, she went so far as to show the reporter her high school transcript. But no mention of her ACT or SAT score. I conclude if the score was amazing, she would brag about it and put it on the record, to further bolster her claim of being an amazing student, a student who warranted being admitted to Penn and winning the Rhodes.

Every UMC teen has all A's or darn close, so I'm not swayed or impressed when a reporter touts some rich kid's high school GPA. Those with fake inflated grades tend to be exposed on the ACT or SAT. It says a lot that she didn't provide the reporter with a score to go along with the transcript. And Penn was not test optional when she first applied seven or whatever years ago.

DP. It wouldn’t surprise me if her SAT score was lousy given that she was living in foster care after being removed from her mother’s home due to abuse when she likely was preparing for and taking the test. That kind of trauma and disruption might have distracted her just a little bit from the SAT.

[Anonymous]

You sit for exams in 10th and early 11th grade, so before she would have been technically in the foster system. No PSAT, no SAT, no ACT, no National Merit Semifinalist or Finalist? But she was quick to get the reporter a copy of her transcript to show off inflated A's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You sit for exams in 10th and early 11th grade, so before she would have been technically in the foster system. No PSAT, no SAT, no ACT, no National Merit Semifinalist or Finalist? But she was quick to get the reporter a copy of her transcript to show off inflated A's?

Inflated? She went to an elite private day school, ranked nationally. I thought those don’t do grade inflation and are supposedly eons better than public schools. What’s going on here? She applied pre-test-optional admissions.