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

[Anonymous]

^ makes sense. Penn doesn't want to come out looking embarrassed for enabling her. But she'll still lose. A jury trial, really? So who's paying for all this? No way plaintiff's lawyer really thinks they can win this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are thousands of pathological lying rich kids in the Ivy League right now. There are countless articles, in national outlets to student newspapers, that admissions does not verify ANYTHING. You can write whatever make-believe bullshit you want and nobody fact checks a thing. And yes, it’s all rich kids scheming because they know how to scam and play the angles.

From personal experience, I know this to be false. The guidance counselor told me that admissions officers called to verify essay info for my kid. It was not UPenn. They were a couple of very top liberal arts colleges. But admissions offices do not unilaterally believe what is written if it is a dramatic story.

+1 they do call the school.

My kid goes to a public school with 600 kids per grade. Other than verifying information in their systems, they wouldn't know who my kid is let alone be able to speak to the content of an essay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure you felt sorry for her. Her reputation was completely trashed.

You shouldn't feel sorry for her as her life is now. Right?

Why would I feel sorry for someone who grew up top 1% rich, elite private schools, orthodontics, her own car, rich hobbies -- by all accounts she was mollycoddle by her wealthy mum -- then stole multiple scholarships she wasn't entitled to totaling well into the six figures, and arguably stole a seat at an Ivy League college? She is not a victim. She is a dime a dozen spoiled rotten white brat who is simply estranged from her mum. There is nothing compelling or unique about her, just a ruthless status-obsessed sociopath.

“Nothing compelling or unique about her . . .”

Hmmm . . . Something’s got you wasting your time posting here about her.

This paid for smear job is appalling. Take it somewhere else creeps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ makes sense. Penn doesn't want to come out looking embarrassed for enabling her. But she'll still lose. A jury trial, really? So who's paying for all this? No way plaintiff's lawyer really thinks they can win this.

Just curious. Are you an attorney? Trial lawyer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure you felt sorry for her. Her reputation was completely trashed.

You shouldn't feel sorry for her as her life is now. Right?

Why would I feel sorry for someone who grew up top 1% rich, elite private schools, orthodontics, her own car, rich hobbies -- by all accounts she was mollycoddle by her wealthy mum -- then stole multiple scholarships she wasn't entitled to totaling well into the six figures, and arguably stole a seat at an Ivy League college? She is not a victim. She is a dime a dozen spoiled rotten white brat who is simply estranged from her mum. There is nothing compelling or unique about her, just a ruthless status-obsessed sociopath.

“Nothing compelling or unique about her . . .”

Hmmm . . . Something’s got you wasting your time posting here about her.

This paid for smear job is appalling. Take it somewhere else creeps.

Right back at you, buddy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure you felt sorry for her. Her reputation was completely trashed.

You shouldn't feel sorry for her as her life is now. Right?

Why would I feel sorry for someone who grew up top 1% rich, elite private schools, orthodontics, her own car, rich hobbies -- by all accounts she was mollycoddle by her wealthy mum -- then stole multiple scholarships she wasn't entitled to totaling well into the six figures, and arguably stole a seat at an Ivy League college? She is not a victim. She is a dime a dozen spoiled rotten white brat who is simply estranged from her mum. There is nothing compelling or unique about her, just a ruthless status-obsessed sociopath.

“Nothing compelling or unique about her . . .”

Hmmm . . . Something’s got you wasting your time posting here about her.

This paid for smear job is appalling. Take it somewhere else creeps.

I don’t know what was with that last guy who was coming back at you, but you’re absolutely right about the smear job. Penn has their high paid lawyers and hatchet men smearing her, trying to make her the issue when the suit is about how they handled the situation and failed to follow their own policies and procedures.At least that’s how I read the article that was linked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A judge has denied UPenn’s request to have the Fierceton case moved from Common Pleas Court. See the linked article from Big Trial, “Penn Loses Round One in ‘Pillow Talk’ Conspiracy Case”:

https://www.bigtrial.net/2022/01/penn-loses-round-one-in-pillow-talk.html

This is no big deal one way or the other. It is normal to file a motion to remove, and normal for it to be denied. The histrionics used in this blog post are so over the top that it is impossible to take it seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure you felt sorry for her. Her reputation was completely trashed.

You shouldn't feel sorry for her as her life is now. Right?

Why would I feel sorry for someone who grew up top 1% rich, elite private schools, orthodontics, her own car, rich hobbies -- by all accounts she was mollycoddle by her wealthy mum -- then stole multiple scholarships she wasn't entitled to totaling well into the six figures, and arguably stole a seat at an Ivy League college? She is not a victim. She is a dime a dozen spoiled rotten white brat who is simply estranged from her mum. There is nothing compelling or unique about her, just a ruthless status-obsessed sociopath.

“Nothing compelling or unique about her . . .”

Hmmm . . . Something’s got you wasting your time posting here about her.

This paid for smear job is appalling. Take it somewhere else creeps.

I don’t know what was with that last guy who was coming back at you, but you’re absolutely right about the smear job. Penn has their high paid lawyers and hatchet men smearing her, trying to make her the issue when the suit is about how they handled the situation and failed to follow their own policies and procedures.At least that’s how I read the article that was linked.

Which article, the big trial one? That's a plaintiff lawyer blog and has some of the key facts wrong. I would be skeptical if I were you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure you felt sorry for her. Her reputation was completely trashed.

You shouldn't feel sorry for her as her life is now. Right?

Why would I feel sorry for someone who grew up top 1% rich, elite private schools, orthodontics, her own car, rich hobbies -- by all accounts she was mollycoddle by her wealthy mum -- then stole multiple scholarships she wasn't entitled to totaling well into the six figures, and arguably stole a seat at an Ivy League college? She is not a victim. She is a dime a dozen spoiled rotten white brat who is simply estranged from her mum. There is nothing compelling or unique about her, just a ruthless status-obsessed sociopath.

“Nothing compelling or unique about her . . .”

Hmmm . . . Something’s got you wasting your time posting here about her.

This paid for smear job is appalling. Take it somewhere else creeps.

I don’t know what was with that last guy who was coming back at you, but you’re absolutely right about the smear job. Penn has their high paid lawyers and hatchet men smearing her, trying to make her the issue when the suit is about how they handled the situation and failed to follow their own policies and procedures.At least that’s how I read the article that was linked.

Which article, the big trial one? That's a plaintiff lawyer blog and has some of the key facts wrong. I would be skeptical if I were you.

Interesting. Thanks. If I might ask, which facts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are thousands of pathological lying rich kids in the Ivy League right now. There are countless articles, in national outlets to student newspapers, that admissions does not verify ANYTHING. You can write whatever make-believe bullshit you want and nobody fact checks a thing. And yes, it’s all rich kids scheming because they know how to scam and play the angles.

From personal experience, I know this to be false. The guidance counselor told me that admissions officers called to verify essay info for my kid. It was not UPenn. They were a couple of very top liberal arts colleges. But admissions offices do not unilaterally believe what is written if it is a dramatic story.

+1 they do call the school.

Okay, sure, anonymous dcum commenters. Again, there are countless articles on google with admissions reps on the record saying there's no time to fact check kids' apps. Kids are lying their butts off and it works. Nobody is calling counselors, how the hell would the lazy counselor know personal details about the 1 of 500 kids he or she has met maybe once for 5 minutes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are thousands of pathological lying rich kids in the Ivy League right now. There are countless articles, in national outlets to student newspapers, that admissions does not verify ANYTHING. You can write whatever make-believe bullshit you want and nobody fact checks a thing. And yes, it’s all rich kids scheming because they know how to scam and play the angles.

From personal experience, I know this to be false. The guidance counselor told me that admissions officers called to verify essay info for my kid. It was not UPenn. They were a couple of very top liberal arts colleges. But admissions offices do not unilaterally believe what is written if it is a dramatic story.

+1 they do call the school.

Okay, sure, anonymous dcum commenters. Again, there are countless articles on google with admissions reps on the record saying there's no time to fact check kids' apps. Kids are lying their butts off and it works. Nobody is calling counselors -- and how the hell would the lazy counselor know personal details about the 1 of 500 kids he or she has met maybe once for 5 minutes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure you felt sorry for her. Her reputation was completely trashed.

You shouldn't feel sorry for her as her life is now. Right?

Why would I feel sorry for someone who grew up top 1% rich, elite private schools, orthodontics, her own car, rich hobbies -- by all accounts she was mollycoddle by her wealthy mum -- then stole multiple scholarships she wasn't entitled to totaling well into the six figures, and arguably stole a seat at an Ivy League college? She is not a victim. She is a dime a dozen spoiled rotten white brat who is simply estranged from her mum. There is nothing compelling or unique about her, just a ruthless status-obsessed sociopath.

“Nothing compelling or unique about her . . .”

Hmmm . . . Something’s got you wasting your time posting here about her.

This paid for smear job is appalling. Take it somewhere else creeps.

I don’t know what was with that last guy who was coming back at you, but you’re absolutely right about the smear job. Penn has their high paid lawyers and hatchet men smearing her, trying to make her the issue when the suit is about how they handled the situation and failed to follow their own policies and procedures.At least that’s how I read the article that was linked.

Which article, the big trial one? That's a plaintiff lawyer blog and has some of the key facts wrong. I would be skeptical if I were you.

Interesting. Thanks. If I might ask, which facts?

I don't have it right in front of me, but I remember the blog stated as fact that Fierceton's mother was the anonymous reporter, but that's wrong. It was former acquaintances of Fierceton, as stated in the Penn filing. I also seem to remember it got some of the facts from her HS background wrong but I would have to go back and check.

I would rely on the court filings of both sides, not the blog post.

[Anonymous]

How come all of her defenders ignore the part where she tried to scam more financial aid from Penn by claiming she supported a special needs half-sister who actually lives with her estranged dad?

[Anonymous]

I think because there are so many posts here no one saw the that. I haven’t read every comment here but have been following.

It is a flood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How come all of her defenders ignore the part where she tried to scam more financial aid from Penn by claiming she supported a special needs half-sister who actually lives with her estranged dad?

+1