Think she cheated on her SAT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Nice try, but as I mentioned, these are not criminal cases. When using these analogies, you must keep this in mind. Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation unfortunately. ACT is a private organization. They can administer these tests and decide when things look fishy. There is no court system or police involved. You are pretty much at their mercy, but the resolution is so simple. RETAKE THE TEST. Then you are done. Trying to fight it with a high profile lawyer in the media is over the top and a cop out for someone who clearly would never be able to get that score under the controlled conditions of a retake.

Nice try to you too. I understand these are not criminal cases. However your assertion that "Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation" is false as there is no case law on it yet, and that is what these lawsuits will decide. You don't get to decide where the burden is just because you own the testing company.

When did you stop beating your spouse, by the way?




(I know you don't beat your spouse, hope you get the point. Give the goddamned kid a break, it is possible she did not cheat. Let her have her day in court and live with the results. Why is that so hard?)

Some of you should visit here: https://www.fairtest.org/

[Anonymous]

Here's the thing... in this country, no one goes "to court to prove (their) innocence". Burden of proof is on the accuser. What she is doing with the court case is moving that burden back to them... which is not a thing you are likely to do if you are guilty.

Eh, I can think of situations where someone who is guilty might choose to do exactly this in hopes that the organization wouldn’t want to be bothered with going to court and might even be willing to make a settlement with the plaintiffs to make them go away. Being willing to go to court is not proof of either guilt or innocence.

And this is not a court case, not a criminal matter. It is a private business matter between the buyer of a service and the provider of that service. There was a contract and each party has to follow certain rules. In this situation, one party is saying that they have evidence that the other party did not follow the rules laid down in the contact and is asking for evidence that the buyer actually did follow the rules. That’s all. No criminal sanctions involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Eh, I can think of situations where someone who is guilty might choose to do exactly this in hopes that the organization wouldn’t want to be bothered with going to court and might even be willing to make a settlement with the plaintiffs to make them go away. Being willing to go to court is not proof of either guilt or innocence.

PP here -- re the part in bold -- this is the point I have been making. Don't assume she is guilty because of the path she chose. I am glad you agree. Your first point, however, is crazy. Have you ever hired a lawyer? Have you ever been part of a litigation? It's not easier than ANYTHING, let alone re-taking a test. And the cost, starting with the retainer...

Anonymous wrote:
And this is not a court case, not a criminal matter. It is a private business matter between the buyer of a service and the provider of that service. There was a contract and each party has to follow certain rules. In this situation, one party is saying that they have evidence that the other party did not follow the rules laid down in the contact and is asking for evidence that the buyer actually did follow the rules. That’s all. No criminal sanctions involved.

Its not a court case? Yes, it is a court case. A civil one. In which if the testing board can't provide sufficient evidence of cheating, is likely to result in a judgment for the plaintiff and a change in the cheating policy. if they can provide sufficient evidence of cheating, this young woman will pay the cost in her reputation and legal fees.

And to call the testing boards "the provider of that service" like a hairdresser, landscaper or a financial advisor is preposterous. Two testing companies have a joint monopoly on the space and you can't get admitted to many colleges without using them. The courts will find that that changes the nature of the relationship and the responsibilities therein, IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Eh, I can think of situations where someone who is guilty might choose to do exactly this in hopes that the organization wouldn’t want to be bothered with going to court and might even be willing to make a settlement with the plaintiffs to make them go away. Being willing to go to court is not proof of either guilt or innocence.

PP here -- re the part in bold -- this is the point I have been making. Don't assume she is guilty because of the path she chose. I am glad you agree. Your first point, however, is crazy. Have you ever hired a lawyer? Have you ever been part of a litigation? It's not easier than ANYTHING, let alone re-taking a test. And the cost, starting with the retainer...

Anonymous wrote:
And this is not a court case, not a criminal matter. It is a private business matter between the buyer of a service and the provider of that service. There was a contract and each party has to follow certain rules. In this situation, one party is saying that they have evidence that the other party did not follow the rules laid down in the contact and is asking for evidence that the buyer actually did follow the rules. That’s all. No criminal sanctions involved.

Its not a court case? Yes, it is a court case. A civil one. In which if the testing board can't provide sufficient evidence of cheating, is likely to result in a judgment for the plaintiff and a change in the cheating policy. if they can provide sufficient evidence of cheating, this young woman will pay the cost in her reputation and legal fees.

And to call the testing boards "the provider of that service" like a hairdresser, landscaper or a financial advisor is preposterous. Two testing companies have a joint monopoly on the space and you can't get admitted to many colleges without using them. The courts will find that that changes the nature of the relationship and the responsibilities therein, IMHO.

Interesting that you chose to omit the quote in which the pp indicated that you are unlikely to take a case to court if you are guilty.

It is only a court case because the student is making it one. ETS is not forcing her into court. She had two very simple options: a free retake of the test to show that she could get the same scores or to send in her school transcripts to show that this score lined up with the caliber of her usual work. Both of these options are free, as in no cost to her, no need for large outlay of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nice try, but as I mentioned, these are not criminal cases. When using these analogies, you must keep this in mind. Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation unfortunately. ACT is a private organization. They can administer these tests and decide when things look fishy. There is no court system or police involved. You are pretty much at their mercy, but the resolution is so simple. RETAKE THE TEST. Then you are done. Trying to fight it with a high profile lawyer in the media is over the top and a cop out for someone who clearly would never be able to get that score under the controlled conditions of a retake.

Nice try to you too. I understand these are not criminal cases. However your assertion that "Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation" is false as there is no case law on it yet, and that is what these lawsuits will decide. You don't get to decide where the burden is just because you own the testing company.

When did you stop beating your spouse, by the way?

(I know you don't beat your spouse, hope you get the point. Give the goddamned kid a break, it is possible she did not cheat. Let her have her day in court and live with the results. Why is that so hard?)

Some of you should visit here: https://www.fairtest.org/

Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nice try, but as I mentioned, these are not criminal cases. When using these analogies, you must keep this in mind. Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation unfortunately. ACT is a private organization. They can administer these tests and decide when things look fishy. There is no court system or police involved. You are pretty much at their mercy, but the resolution is so simple. RETAKE THE TEST. Then you are done. Trying to fight it with a high profile lawyer in the media is over the top and a cop out for someone who clearly would never be able to get that score under the controlled conditions of a retake.

Nice try to you too. I understand these are not criminal cases. However your assertion that "Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation" is false as there is no case law on it yet, and that is what these lawsuits will decide. You don't get to decide where the burden is just because you own the testing company.

When did you stop beating your spouse, by the way?

(I know you don't beat your spouse, hope you get the point. Give the goddamned kid a break, it is possible she did not cheat. Let her have her day in court and live with the results. Why is that so hard?)

Some of you should visit here: https://www.fairtest.org/

Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

Exactly. The fact that this person goes thru such lengths to avoid a retake or submission of transcripts is so blatantly a desperate attempt to change the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nice try, but as I mentioned, these are not criminal cases. When using these analogies, you must keep this in mind. Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation unfortunately. ACT is a private organization. They can administer these tests and decide when things look fishy. There is no court system or police involved. You are pretty much at their mercy, but the resolution is so simple. RETAKE THE TEST. Then you are done. Trying to fight it with a high profile lawyer in the media is over the top and a cop out for someone who clearly would never be able to get that score under the controlled conditions of a retake.

Nice try to you too. I understand these are not criminal cases. However your assertion that "Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation" is false as there is no case law on it yet, and that is what these lawsuits will decide. You don't get to decide where the burden is just because you own the testing company.

When did you stop beating your spouse, by the way?

(I know you don't beat your spouse, hope you get the point. Give the goddamned kid a break, it is possible she did not cheat. Let her have her day in court and live with the results. Why is that so hard?)

Some of you should visit here: https://www.fairtest.org/

Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

No, retaking the test isn't the student having her day in court. It is the exact opposite of it. For the life of me I don't know why that is so hard to grasp.

And yes I know there are easier ways -- none of which will result in any change in the system or assignation of guilt to the testing services. Court is her only option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

Exactly. The fact that this person goes thru such lengths to avoid a retake or submission of transcripts is so blatantly a desperate attempt to change the story.

What other way is there to change the system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She should be barred from college for cheating, she's done

Barred from college forever, huh? Let’s just throw her in jail. Life sentence. Jeez dude. You angry?

I cheated on a test once. Not proud of it. So did pretty much my entire (3rd period?) 9th grade American history class. Maybe we should all surrender ourselves.

I agree, any college that would accept her does not adhere to the honor code. She needs to look for another path forward in life that doesn't involve college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

Exactly. The fact that this person goes thru such lengths to avoid a retake or submission of transcripts is so blatantly a desperate attempt to change the story.

What other way is there to change the system?

Then why doesn’t she do both? Retake test and hire lawyers in the attempt to change the system. That’s what the ACT kid did. And now nobody is accusing hind of cheating. See how that works?

[Anonymous]

NP. Please pardon my ignorance-- my kid's still in ES--but I have a question. Is the SAT test still an old-school 'fill-the-bubbles' paper variety or is it computerized these days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. Please pardon my ignorance-- my kid's still in ES--but I have a question. Is the SAT test still an old-school 'fill-the-bubbles' paper variety or is it computerized these days?

Still a paper test as far as I know. Last kid I had take it was 3 years ago. Next one will be next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nice try, but as I mentioned, these are not criminal cases. When using these analogies, you must keep this in mind. Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation unfortunately. ACT is a private organization. They can administer these tests and decide when things look fishy. There is no court system or police involved. You are pretty much at their mercy, but the resolution is so simple. RETAKE THE TEST. Then you are done. Trying to fight it with a high profile lawyer in the media is over the top and a cop out for someone who clearly would never be able to get that score under the controlled conditions of a retake.

Nice try to you too. I understand these are not criminal cases. However your assertion that "Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation" is false as there is no case law on it yet, and that is what these lawsuits will decide. You don't get to decide where the burden is just because you own the testing company.

When did you stop beating your spouse, by the way?

(I know you don't beat your spouse, hope you get the point. Give the goddamned kid a break, it is possible she did not cheat. Let her have her day in court and live with the results. Why is that so hard?)

Some of you should visit here: https://www.fairtest.org/

Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

No, retaking the test isn't the student having her day in court. It is the exact opposite of it. For the life of me I don't know why that is so hard to grasp.

And yes I know there are easier ways -- none of which will result in any change in the system or assignation of guilt to the testing services. Court is her only option.

But she can't possibly win. The College Board gave her the facts, and her position is "no I didn't." That's not going to win in Court, indeed the Court will ask why she didn't accept the College Board's offer to re-take the test..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nice try, but as I mentioned, these are not criminal cases. When using these analogies, you must keep this in mind. Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation unfortunately. ACT is a private organization. They can administer these tests and decide when things look fishy. There is no court system or police involved. You are pretty much at their mercy, but the resolution is so simple. RETAKE THE TEST. Then you are done. Trying to fight it with a high profile lawyer in the media is over the top and a cop out for someone who clearly would never be able to get that score under the controlled conditions of a retake.

Nice try to you too. I understand these are not criminal cases. However your assertion that "Burden of proof is on the accused in this situation" is false as there is no case law on it yet, and that is what these lawsuits will decide. You don't get to decide where the burden is just because you own the testing company.

When did you stop beating your spouse, by the way?

(I know you don't beat your spouse, hope you get the point. Give the goddamned kid a break, it is possible she did not cheat. Let her have her day in court and live with the results. Why is that so hard?)

Some of you should visit here: https://www.fairtest.org/

Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

Exactly. The fact that this person goes thru such lengths to avoid a retake or submission of transcripts is so blatantly a desperate attempt to change the story.

Of course....why do you think she hired a civil rights attorney?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Isn’t retaking the test for free the student’s “day in court” and her chance to prove she did not cheat? Or just sending in her school transcript?

There are much easier ways of showing that she did not cheat that don’t involve lawyers and public fundraisers.

Exactly. The fact that this person goes thru such lengths to avoid a retake or submission of transcripts is so blatantly a desperate attempt to change the story.

What other way is there to change the system?

Then why doesn’t she do both? Retake test and hire lawyers in the attempt to change the system. That’s what the ACT kid did. And now nobody is accusing hind of cheating. See how that works?

Why should she have to take the test again if she didn't cheat? You think that is fair?