UMC suburban college student lied about background to become prestigious Rhodes Scholar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean towards the kid having some sort of sociopathic mindset & whatever happened with her mother has been highly, even premeditatively, worked to her advantage. She's obviously intelligent, driven, ambitious & as described in at least one article, charismatic. (HS class president) It's her responses to being interrogated as a liar in her Rhodes application that are the tell. Stonewall defiance that the extensive lies she committed to paper are anything but the truth (well her personal truth, whatever the F that means). She lied. Period. Is this what any Ivy education allows one to do???

I also think she manipulated the people she had contact with during that hospital phase & later at Penn after being called out, and worked her perspective to sympathetic advantage. This whole scenario just doesn't pass the smell test. She was a teen wanting to be the boss of her life & figured out a way. She certainly isn't the first in the history of the world to do whatever she though it would take to achieve that.

She said she was in foster care in her college apps and she was. Kids that age have a skewed perspective-a boyfriend of a few months is “long-term” and it makes sense that when doing college essays, a year into being out of her mothers care, it felt like she had been in the system for ages. There is no indication she kept her other life before foster care secret as she gave interviews about her private school days to a newspaper (though she may not have discussed it in her essay, nor was she obligated to.)

Yes, all the facts seem to check out. Even representing herself as 1st gen according to Penn's definitions (though that one is the most stretched). Regarding the injuries, she was hospitalized, and the nurse is speaking on her behalf. My kids are dramatic and might think of a short time in a neck brace in more extreme terms. My daughter classified her asking repeatedly for something over the span of a couple years as "pleading incessantly." I was like, not quite. This kid was traumatized and not in full capacity of her faculties. She also had no parent caring for her with her in the hospital to quantify what happened. It's her qualitative experience.

[Anonymous]

Cheating in the college applications is more common than you think. Most are not caught and unknown to most people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“ She alleges that Penn conducted a “sham investigation” into her background, unjustifiably withheld her master’s degree and wrote a “secret letter” to the Rhodes committee to discredit her. The claim also accuses Wendy White, Penn’s general counsel, of threatening to “come after” both of Fierceton’s degrees if she did not give up her Rhodes Scholarship.

Furthermore, Fierceton claims in her suit that the school conducted its investigation because she had complained to administrators about insufficient access to emergency services at Penn after she had a seizure at school in early 2020.”

https://nypost.com/2022/01/11/rhodes-scholar-denied-honor-after-dishonesty-about-life-story/

Seems the school is really over reacting. Hope she wins her lawsuit. The school destroyed her life based on an admissions essay written when she was 17/18 years old? It seems like the facts in the essay back up her but there maybe be some embellishment? What is the right way to handle a promising 17 year old girl who is estranged from her family living in the foster care system writing an essay to get into college? Going Les Misérables on her is not productive.

She got into the school and did exceptionally well. What is the over all mission of the school and the Rhodes Scholarship? Does the school and Rhodes investigate and hold all students to the same standards- No.

"Going Les Mis" may be my new catch phrase - so good!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read the article. Her story didn't check out. The DA said he dropped the charges against the mom and the more he looked into it the less clear the story became. Whatever. She's not low-income or first generation. At least the Rhodes Committee didn't think so as they defined it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean towards the kid having some sort of sociopathic mindset & whatever happened with her mother has been highly, even premeditatively, worked to her advantage. She's obviously intelligent, driven, ambitious & as described in at least one article, charismatic. (HS class president) It's her responses to being interrogated as a liar in her Rhodes application that are the tell. Stonewall defiance that the extensive lies she committed to paper are anything but the truth (well her personal truth, whatever the F that means). She lied. Period. Is this what any Ivy education allows one to do???

I also think she manipulated the people she had contact with during that hospital phase & later at Penn after being called out, and worked her perspective to sympathetic advantage. This whole scenario just doesn't pass the smell test. She was a teen wanting to be the boss of her life & figured out a way. She certainly isn't the first in the history of the world to do whatever she though it would take to achieve that.

She said she was in foster care in her college apps and she was. Kids that age have a skewed perspective-a boyfriend of a few months is “long-term” and it makes sense that when doing college essays, a year into being out of her mothers care, it felt like she had been in the system for ages. There is no indication she kept her other life before foster care secret as she gave interviews about her private school days to a newspaper (though she may not have discussed it in her essay, nor was she obligated to.)

Yes, all the facts seem to check out. Even representing herself as 1st gen according to Penn's definitions (though that one is the most stretched). Regarding the injuries, she was hospitalized, and the nurse is speaking on her behalf. My kids are dramatic and might think of a short time in a neck brace in more extreme terms. My daughter classified her asking repeatedly for something over the span of a couple years as "pleading incessantly." I was like, not quite. This kid was traumatized and not in full capacity of her faculties. She also had no parent caring for her with her in the hospital to quantify what happened. It's her qualitative experience.

As a first gen kid, especially when schools did nothing for us and seemed kind of proud of it, this one rankles. But the various PPs' discussion of concept of time really rings true and kinda WTH, getting beaten by your parent and ending up in foster care would be pretty mind blowing for ANY kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read the article. Her story didn't check out. The DA said he dropped the charges against the mom and the more he looked into it the less clear the story became. Whatever. She's not low-income or first generation. At least the Rhodes Committee didn't think so as they defined it.

She was hospitalized for almost a month, but sure her mom didn’t do anything wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The power of victimhood.

+1 This. Victims are the new heroes. Pathetic.

Not at all. You stink.


The initial criminal complaint in 2014 includes a statement from a detective who noted that Fierceton was treated at a hospital for bruising and swelling that Fierceton claimed her mother caused by pushing her down the stairs. She also described an incident the previous day where her mother pushed her into a wall and an incident 7 months earlier where she slammed her face on a metal table, causing black eyes. Fierceton showed the detective a photograph of her injuries.

Original PP here. My point is broader than this single incident. I'm not doubting that the student was a victim of abuse, or suffered through hurtful circumstances. My point is that our society now has an unhealthy fetish with being a victim, as if that is a source of moral virtue, to be worn like a badge of honor, paraded and celebrated in the spotlight. Regardless of where you place the fault, whether it is with the student or the admissions officers - someone embellished the victim narrative. Why did they do this? Because in our society, being a victim is power, and this is not healthy.

This goes back to Louis L'Amour if not further. Americans have always been obsessed with the idea of pulling yourself up from your bootstraps, the self-made man, making something out of nothing. Of course to be fair, the idea that it's both brand new and contemptible because your kid doesn't benefit from the narrative is also pretty classically American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read the article. Her story didn't check out. The DA said he dropped the charges against the mom and the more he looked into it the less clear the story became. Whatever. She's not low-income or first generation. At least the Rhodes Committee didn't think so as they defined it.

She was hospitalized for almost a month, but sure her mom didn’t do anything wrong.

and the state must have just placed her in foster care for funsies!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read the article. Her story didn't check out. The DA said he dropped the charges against the mom and the more he looked into it the less clear the story became. Whatever. She's not low-income or first generation. At least the Rhodes Committee didn't think so as they defined it.

She was hospitalized for almost a month, but sure her mom didn’t do anything wrong.

So she should be a Rhodes Scholar? And I think the prosecutor who investigated and dropped the charges knows more about it than you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read the article. Her story didn't check out. The DA said he dropped the charges against the mom and the more he looked into it the less clear the story became. Whatever. She's not low-income or first generation. At least the Rhodes Committee didn't think so as they defined it.

He also said the abuse could very well have happened but that he didn't have the evidence to pursue it. The nurse testified on her behalf. She could be considered low-income and 1st gen by Penn's standards. That is not clear cut. Rhodes did not do a deep investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read from several sources with various bits of information that frame out the situation enough for me to form an opinion that this is a girl of sketchy character & she knows how to tilt a story for her benefit. If you have ever known someone cunning & capable of such behavior the little red flags start to pop up. Everything else aside, little Miss Victim is not deserving of Oxford, regardless of her "qualitative" interpretation of her victimhood. This whole situation is offensive on so many levels.

[Anonymous]

The girl does seem mentally ill. Whatever happened with her mother is one thing but lying about being first gen etc on college application seems like she was already planning to lie about herself and her background. She lied. Period.
Universities especially elite ones need to realize that the rich will keep coming up with ways to gain entry into their institutions by lying, cheating etc no matter what. They need to rethink admissions.. this is crazy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honest question to all the posters thinking this child is entirely justified in lying to gain another step on the ladder of prestige-is this someone you would enthusiastically hire & promote within your organization?

Yes I would. She was a young high school student at the time without family support. Desperate people do desperate things. Once she got the chance she proved herself by receiving exceptionally high marks over 4 years at Penn state who recommended her to the Rhodes committee.

But she's a relentless liar who invents her own truths and she is not in politics. May I ask what industry you are in?

Her story largely checks out. Did you read the full article?

I read the article. Her story didn't check out. The DA said he dropped the charges against the mom and the more he looked into it the less clear the story became. Whatever. She's not low-income or first generation. At least the Rhodes Committee didn't think so as they defined it.

He also said the abuse could very well have happened but that he didn't have the evidence to pursue it. The nurse testified on her behalf. She could be considered low-income and 1st gen by Penn's standards. That is not clear cut. Rhodes did not do a deep investigation.

How can she be first gen when her mom was a radiologist? And she grew up rich!

[Anonymous]

She's not first gen by my standards but it seems messed up for Penn to state that they consider "first at an elite institution" first gen and then say that her use of the designation is categorically untrue. They should have left the designation alone, and it seems like they introduced confusion in order to have it both ways (claim "look at all our [artificially inflated] first gen students" in literature, but then call those same kids connivers for going with Penn's definition if they want to punish them).