Wow Lori Laughlin has NO shame!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ every shit trick in the prosecutor's book because there really is no law against bribing your way into college.

are you actually defending this?

Defending "this" what? Define "this."

Exactly. It's the "this" that can't be defined as illegal activity. The "this" is why she's opting for a jury trial.

Felicity Huffman was just so embarrassed and wanted to deal with it and move on. She's also a really talented, trained, Oscar-nominated actor with a full career and I think she wants that back. The only way to get that back is to say, "I was wrong. I accept the consequences."

Lori and Mossimo are some ego maniacal tools. She will be convicted of something that will probably be overturned on appeal. But by that time, she will have been in the press for the wrong reasons and people will just want her to go away. No one will want to see her on Hallmark or Lifetime or Netflix. She may ultimately avoid jail time but the social damage will be permanent.

[Anonymous]

defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

Maybe what you are saying is that she is guilty in the court of public opinion -- I'll agree with that. But the legal case is something different entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

DP. But in the course of bribing her kids' way into college, she took actions that ARE crimes and those are the crimes with which she is being charged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

DP. But in the course of bribing her kids' way into college, she took actions that ARE crimes and those are the crimes with which she is being charged.

maybe. Money laundering? I have my doubts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

DP. But in the course of bribing her kids' way into college, she took actions that ARE crimes and those are the crimes with which she is being charged.

So you're the judge and jury, eh? We'll see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

DP. But in the course of bribing her kids' way into college, she took actions that ARE crimes and those are the crimes with which she is being charged.

So you're the judge and jury, eh? We'll see.

Fair point. I'll rephrase: she has been charged with certain crimes based upon her alleged conduct during the course of bribing her kids' way into college, and she is innocent until proven guilty. The point being that she's being charged with crimes based on her conduct even though her motive - getting her kids into college - isn't a crime in itself.

Some people on this thread seem to think that there's absolutely nothing wrong with what they did because all they wanted to do was get their kids into college. By that token, would it be ok to murder someone in order to get your kid into college? Of course not. The ends don't justify the means, even if we're "only" talking about white collar crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

DP. But in the course of bribing her kids' way into college, she took actions that ARE crimes and those are the crimes with which she is being charged.

maybe. Money laundering? I have my doubts.

Yes, I'm sure you are privy to all of the evidence that the prosecutors have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:defending bribing their kids way into college because it isn't "against the law"?

This may come as a big surprise to you, but the answer is no. Bribing your kid's way into college is not against the law. (And in fact she is not even being charged with that).

DP. But in the course of bribing her kids' way into college, she took actions that ARE crimes and those are the crimes with which she is being charged.

So you're the judge and jury, eh? We'll see.

Fair point. I'll rephrase: she has been charged with certain crimes based upon her alleged conduct during the course of bribing her kids' way into college, and she is innocent until proven guilty. The point being that she's being charged with crimes based on her conduct even though her motive - getting her kids into college - isn't a crime in itself.

Some people on this thread seem to think that there's absolutely nothing wrong with what they did because all they wanted to do was get their kids into college. By that token, would it be ok to murder someone in order to get your kid into college? Of course not. The ends don't justify the means, even if we're "only" talking about white collar crimes.

It's definitely wrong what she did, but is it illegal? That's the question I was addressing. Prosecutors tend to overcharge and sometimes that is their undoing.

[Anonymous]

Was Olivia Jade just dying to be friends with the USC official's kid or vice versa. Or were they basically on par socially/connections wise.

[Anonymous]

Isn't writing a check to a phony charity a crime? Especially if you plan to write that off on your taxes. Isn't that fraud?

I'm not sure which parts of this constituted mail fraud and money laundering or the other charges, but this did go beyond a mere bribe.

These were all sketchy, underhanded people doing sketchy and underhanded things. The feds have charged them with crimes and I think the charges are going to stick. There might even be some collateral damage to go along with it all. We'll see.

And, seriously, for what? That's the part that just boggles the mind.

[Anonymous]

^ I don't think they've been charged with tax fraud. And no, "planning" to write off a donation to a phony charity isn't a crime. If they did try to write it off on their taxes then that would likely be a crime. Haven't followed it close enough to know if they did actually do this on their tax returns.

[Anonymous]

Some on this thread seem to be confused about what constitutes criminal activity.

Lori is accused of: conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and honest services mail and wire fraud; conspiracy to commit money laundering

Here is a list of all the charges in the case:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/investigations-college-admissions-and-testing-bribery-scheme

Stop passively listening to mass media outlets that describe this as a "scandal". These types of schemes - falsifying documents, funneling money through charities - that they allegedly carried out are illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ every shit trick in the prosecutor's book because there really is no law against bribing your way into college.

are you actually defending this?

Defending "this" what? Define "this."

Exactly. It's the "this" that can't be defined as illegal activity. The "this" is why she's opting for a jury trial.

Felicity Huffman was just so embarrassed and wanted to deal with it and move on. She's also a really talented, trained, Oscar-nominated actor with a full career and I think she wants that back. The only way to get that back is to say, "I was wrong. I accept the consequences."

Lori and Mossimo are some ego maniacal tools. She will be convicted of something that will probably be overturned on appeal. But by that time, she will have been in the press for the wrong reasons and people will just want her to go away. No one will want to see her on Hallmark or Lifetime or Netflix. She may ultimately avoid jail time but the social damage will be permanent.

Their defense lawyers are trying to obstruct the charges!