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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Just in the interests of accuracy, the claim that she has a special needs half sister, according to UPenn, was made on her FAFSA application. On their own website, UPenn separates FAFSA, an application for federal financial aid from “Penn’s financial aid application, that determines eligibility for Penn funds” so, as a point of fact the purported claim of a half sister was not used “to scam more financial aid from Penn”.

I’m not justifying the claim if in fact she made it. Just saying that she didn’t scan Penn with such a claim and they can’t be viewed as an injured party by such a claim.

I don’t agree. UPenn relied upon FAFSA in giving financial aid to the student. It’s “fruit of the poison tree”. So although FAFSA is separate it is a source heavily relied on by the college. It’s fraud.

In RE: to the bold, are you purposely distorting what was alleged? A "PFAS" form is internal to Penn, not FAFSA, is it not? Why precisely did she make these claims? How precisely does a young lady allegedly estranged from both parents know about some college savings account dad has for her half-sister? It sounds like greed got the best of her and she is caught red-handed and can't lie her way out of this:

"29 “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."

[Anonymous]

I thinking brilliant but mentally ill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Just in the interests of accuracy, the claim that she has a special needs half sister, according to UPenn, was made on her FAFSA application. On their own website, UPenn separates FAFSA, an application for federal financial aid from “Penn’s financial aid application, that determines eligibility for Penn funds” so, as a point of fact the purported claim of a half sister was not used “to scam more financial aid from Penn”.

I’m not justifying the claim if in fact she made it. Just saying that she didn’t scan Penn with such a claim and they can’t be viewed as an injured party by such a claim.

I don’t agree. UPenn relied upon FAFSA in giving financial aid to the student. It’s “fruit of the poison tree”. So although FAFSA is separate it is a source heavily relied on by the college. It’s fraud.

The doctrine you are trying to cite is called “the fruit of the poisonous tree” but that is an evidentiary rule re the exclusionary rule governing what evidence can be introduced at trial. It has no bearing here. But it does sound like she committed fraud.

[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 -- 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?

Well, my kid didn't have "lazy counselors" and you must not know much about schools if you think the guidance counselors don't know which kids are in foster care.

In my kid's case (since this is an anonymous board), the school was BCC (so a big public school) and the counselor told us both Vassar and Wesleyan called to confirm details. I see no reason why the counselor would lie. To be fair, my kid applied to a lot of schools and, as far as I know, only those two called - but that was our experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Just in the interests of accuracy, the claim that she has a special needs half sister, according to UPenn, was made on her FAFSA application. On their own website, UPenn separates FAFSA, an application for federal financial aid from “Penn’s financial aid application, that determines eligibility for Penn funds” so, as a point of fact the purported claim of a half sister was not used “to scam more financial aid from Penn”.

I’m not justifying the claim if in fact she made it. Just saying that she didn’t scan Penn with such a claim and they can’t be viewed as an injured party by such a claim.

I don’t agree. UPenn relied upon FAFSA in giving financial aid to the student. It’s “fruit of the poison tree”. So although FAFSA is separate it is a source heavily relied on by the college. It’s fraud.

In RE: to the bold, are you purposely distorting what was alleged? A "PFAS" form is internal to Penn, not FAFSA, is it not? Why precisely did she make these claims? How precisely does a young lady allegedly estranged from both parents know about some college savings account dad has for her half-sister? It sounds like greed got the best of her and she is caught red-handed and can't lie her way out of this:

"29 “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."

Nobody biting on this suggests it's actually her in here aggressively defensive for the last 100 pages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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 -- 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?

Well, my kid didn't have "lazy counselors" and you must not know much about schools if you think the guidance counselors don't know which kids are in foster care.

In my kid's case (since this is an anonymous board), the school was BCC (so a big public school) and the counselor told us both Vassar and Wesleyan called to confirm details. I see no reason why the counselor would lie. To be fair, my kid applied to a lot of schools and, as far as I know, only those two called - but that was our experience.

You are full of sh*t. I've worked in higher ed for 25 years, most high school counselors are lazy as all hell and don't even answer their phones. And even if they did answer (unlikely) and even if they knew the kid (even more unlikely), they legally can't reveal jack squat to some random person, allegedly from a college, who calls them and asks for a minor child's personal details. The extent of the fact checking is maybe looking up the kids social media. Maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 -- 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?

Well, my kid didn't have "lazy counselors" and you must not know much about schools if you think the guidance counselors don't know which kids are in foster care.

In my kid's case (since this is an anonymous board), the school was BCC (so a big public school) and the counselor told us both Vassar and Wesleyan called to confirm details. I see no reason why the counselor would lie. To be fair, my kid applied to a lot of schools and, as far as I know, only those two called - but that was our experience.

You are full of sh*t. I've worked in higher ed for 25 years, most high school counselors are lazy as all hell and don't even answer their phones. And even if they did answer (unlikely) and even if they knew the kid (even more unlikely), they legally can't reveal jack squat to some random person, allegedly from a college, who calls them and asks for a minor child's personal details. The extent of the fact checking is maybe looking up the kids social media. Maybe.

^ plus that, there's is no way they'd know if she actually "bounced around from foster hime to foster home" or her mom pushed her down the stairs, or is she had a breathing tube and braces for her body in the hospital. They could confirm she went to the school, and her grades maybe, but that's about it.

[Anonymous]

Seems to me like she would have sailed through if she hadn't decided to piggyback on the grad student's death in 2018. If she was having a seizure and continued to have a seizure during the hour it took medical support to reach her (I don't quite get this, EMTs are pretty good at navigating steps and stairs, presumably they had maps of the campus and access to campus security to assist with locating her) this would have constituted status epilepticus, which is a serious emergency as it can lead to oxygen deprivation and death. My niece has epilepsy so I have some awareness about epilepsy. Now, she could have had multiple brief seizures during that time or, more likely, she did not have actual epileptic seizures, but I have not seen anything saying what her condition was established to have been. It's possible that her hospital stay lasted longer than she medically needed because they were hoping to see a seizure occur, a process my niece went through as a child (at a children's hospital with a specific specialty in childhood epilepsy) and as an adult in a local hospital.

I wonder if she continued to attend the same basement class after she was released from the hospital, if it was so dangerous for her to be there. And if it is true that the grad student's family only filed suit because of her influence--again, piggybacking, seeing an opportunity for a dramatic story as well as money--that's pretty vampirish of her.

[Anonymous]

^^in fact, the threshold for status epilepticus is 5 minutes--at that point the seizure can become self-sustaining, leading to neurological damage and possibly death. Pseudoseizures (psychogenic) do not affect the brain in that way at all.

[Anonymous]

Yep. You can throw sand as much as you want, but none of this has anything to do with Fierceton's lies, deliberate fraud, and/or inability to stay in touch with reality.

And none of this has anything to do with her court case, at which disclosures will have to be made. Sucks to be her.

[Anonymous]

Sure. Bullying and threatening students is exactly the responsible way for a university to treat its students - whether it’s a Rhodes Scholar or members of the swim team. Obviously some of you haven’t read the letter to the editors of Big Trial in which a couple of Penn professors suggested more responsible alternative ways that the university could have handled this case.

As for the ridiculous allegations of fraud, which are accepted as fact on this echo chamber, I’ll simply note that she has not been found guilty of fraud and in fact hasn’t even been sued for fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sure. Bullying and threatening students is exactly the responsible way for a university to treat its students - whether it’s a Rhodes Scholar or members of the swim team. Obviously some of you haven’t read the letter to the editors of Big Trial in which a couple of Penn professors suggested more responsible alternative ways that the university could have handled this case.

As for the ridiculous allegations of fraud, which are accepted as fact on this echo chamber, I’ll simply note that she has not been found guilty of fraud and in fact hasn’t even been sued for fraud.

Penn isn’t bullying or threatening anyone. I’m an Education lawyer. Matters like this are handled with extreme care and diligence by the university’s on campus lawyers and their outside counsel. Penn would not be making this move unless they had the requisite proof in hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. Bullying and threatening students is exactly the responsible way for a university to treat its students - whether it’s a Rhodes Scholar or members of the swim team. Obviously some of you haven’t read the letter to the editors of Big Trial in which a couple of Penn professors suggested more responsible alternative ways that the university could have handled this case.

As for the ridiculous allegations of fraud, which are accepted as fact on this echo chamber, I’ll simply note that she has not been found guilty of fraud and in fact hasn’t even been sued for fraud.

Penn isn’t bullying or threatening anyone. I’m an Education lawyer. Matters like this are handled with extreme care and diligence by the university’s on campus lawyers and their outside counsel. Penn would not be making this move unless they had the requisite proof in hand.

Absurd of this woman to sue Penn, when Penn was perfectly happy to let all this fly under the radar, and then get upset that Penn answered the complaint. At this point I assume her mother is wholly innocent: Mackenzie Fierceton clearly cries “abuse!” whenever she doesn’t get her way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. Bullying and threatening students is exactly the responsible way for a university to treat its students - whether it’s a Rhodes Scholar or members of the swim team. Obviously some of you haven’t read the letter to the editors of Big Trial in which a couple of Penn professors suggested more responsible alternative ways that the university could have handled this case.

As for the ridiculous allegations of fraud, which are accepted as fact on this echo chamber, I’ll simply note that she has not been found guilty of fraud and in fact hasn’t even been sued for fraud.

Penn isn’t bullying or threatening anyone. I’m an Education lawyer. Matters like this are handled with extreme care and diligence by the university’s on campus lawyers and their outside counsel. Penn would not be making this move unless they had the requisite proof in hand.

So threatening a group of swimmers into silence by telling them that they’ll never work again isn’t bullying???

Anyone can claim to be a lawyer on an anonymous Internet forum, so I don’t know how you can justify this kind of intimidation. I spent a career as a school administrator and sat on a Board of Education as well. Never did one of our attorneys recommend this kind of tactic.

[Anonymous]

I don't get why a Penn lawyer threatened to turn her in for Federal Pell Grant fraud. If she committed fraud and they have it on good authority she did, aren't they obligated to turn her in to the authorities? I don't get how they can hold crimes (?) in their pocket. Seems they ought to be obligated to turn in any fraud, not use it as leverage or some bargaining chip. It's strange. I recall reading, I think on this forum, a wealthy man was being pursued for felonies because his daughter faked their home address to get in state tuition rate at I want to say University of Georgia. The sum he was accused of unlawfully taking was $37,000; this gal bamboozled Penn out of several times that.

Father lies about residency to obtain in-state tuition, faces felony charges
https://www.redandblack.com/uganews/father-lies-about-residency-to-obtain-in-state-tuition-faces-felony-charges/article_e64dd228-4518-11e5-9daf-2f4d119925d7.html