Anonymous wrote:What Huffman did (cheating on standardized test) isn’t quite as egregious as what Loughlin did. It wasn’t bribery and and the doctoring was limited to the SAT. Her daughter may have been a hard working student who didn’t do well on standardized tests and they justified it to themselves. I’m not excusing her, I still think it’s appalling — it’s just not in the same league as Loughlin and her DH, who bribed (500k) and [b]lied about their daughter’s achievements.[/b]

I have to disagree. What Huffman did was exactly that - the outcome was that her child's SAT scores were a LIE. A lie is a lie, is a lie....

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t believe it til I saw it - Loughlin and her husband "agreed to pay bribes totaling $500,000 in exchange for having their two daughters designated as recruits to the USC crew team -- despite the fact that they did not participate in crew -- thereby facilitating their admission to USC."

Sad on so many levels!!

When you have money, you think $1000 donation will help with something. And it keeps adding on. There should be NO CONFLICT of interest when it comes to giving money. Some people don't know the difference. And it's hard when you are a celebrity/ and have wealth to figure out if the organization/school wants you for your talent or for your celebrity status or money.

That goes the same for those who treat athletes like gods and thinks they are the world when their grades sucks or behavior is immoral. It makes education look insignificant.

Anonymous wrote:Who knew USC was in the same league as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.?

I mean, loughlin's kid could have gotten in somewhere on her own---and she could have easily paid whatever tuition. I don't get it: usc?

because you're in the DC/East Coasts bubble. It's common knowledge that USC is one of the most prestigious private universities in the US.

Humility is a rare gift. Trying to instill gratitude and humility into my 3DC. Too late for the Singer crowd.

Such trash people!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who knew USC was in the same league as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.?

I mean, loughlin's kid could have gotten in somewhere on her own---and she could have easily paid whatever tuition. I don't get it: usc?

its ranked 23 on USNWR; and in LA it's definitely No. 1.

No, don't say UCLA is much better. Probably 45% or more of the people holding the best jobs in entertainment, law, medicine and government are from USC. It's like a union card in some professions there.

Wow 23?! What’s the cutoff where this frenzy is worth it? Top 25, 30 ... top 50? It also has like 30,000 kids, which is 4 or 5 times exclusive Ivies. It’s hilarious, to me, that anyone would put this effort into USC. Send your bimbo to Pepperdine or SMU like everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:What Huffman did (cheating on standardized test) isn’t quite as egregious as what Loughlin did. It wasn’t bribery and and the doctoring was limited to the SAT. Her daughter may have been a hard working student who didn’t do well on standardized tests and they justified it to themselves. I’m not excusing her, I still think it’s appalling — it’s just not in the same league as Loughlin and her DH, who bribed (500k) and lied about their daughter’s achievements.

I disagree that Huffman didn't do this. That's exactly what she did by cheating on the SAT for her daugter. It was a lie and was not her daughter's achievement.

What Huffman did (cheating on standardized test) isn’t quite as egregious as what Loughlin did. It wasn’t bribery and and the doctoring was limited to the SAT. Her daughter may have been a hard working student who didn’t do well on standardized tests and they justified it to themselves. I’m not excusing her, I still think it’s appalling — it’s just not in the same league as Loughlin and her DH, who bribed (500k) and lied about their daughter’s achievements.

If anyone has seen the video of Lori Lauhglins daughter and her cavalier ( I am being kind) attitude towards school and education in general and her declaration that she only wants to attend for the parties and tailgating- it will make this even more infuriating.

I hope the parents and the kids are held accountable for this. It is disgusting to think of the hardworking and honest kids who lost admission because of this entitled Hollywood brats.

Anonymous wrote:Who knew USC was in the same league as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.?

I mean, loughlin's kid could have gotten in somewhere on her own---and she could have easily paid whatever tuition. I don't get it: usc?

its ranked 23 on USNWR; and in LA it's definitely No. 1.

No, don't say UCLA is much better. Probably 45% or more of the people holding the best jobs in entertainment, law, medicine and government are from USC. It's like a union card in some professions there.

Who knew USC was in the same league as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.?

I mean, loughlin's kid could have gotten in somewhere on her own---and she could have easily paid whatever tuition. I don't get it: usc?

Wow.
Lori Loughlin has always had a very squeaky clean, girl-next-door image.

And she married a handsome designer & was blessed w/two drop-dead gorgeous daughters.

She was still getting acting gigs plus her hubby was very successful in his career.

Why toss all of that away?
That is the downside to being wealthy.
Your mind-set is that you can buy success, etc. all w/the drop of a dime.

But it’s not okay.
Perhaps a kid who deserved to attend that same school lost out on a chance for future career success because his parents didn’t have $500,000 to bribe someone with.
And they likely didn’t have the connections that celebrities have.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:haven't read all the posts - but what are your thoughts on how this will end for them. I know they can afford the best of the best to "defend" them but there's no real defense for their actions, so I would have to think SOMETHING has to happen...hefty fines, kids are expelled etc.

or am I just being naive. probably am, forget I asked.

If I were Huffman's lawyer, I'd argue entrapment.

I don’t think you know what entrapment is ? Singer wore a wire , the feds likely wouldn’t wiretap without a warrant . Carry on.

Actually I do know exactly what entrapment is as I was a defense attorney for over a decade. The fact that someone wore a wire is not relevant. It could still be argued that Huffman was induced to commit the crime. Maybe you don't know that grounds for an indictment does not equate with actual guilt.

Induced to commit a crime by who ? Where’s your law degree from ? The now defunct faculty of law at trump university ? ?

By Singer. But really--you are not worth arguing with. Good night to you, sir.

New poster (and a lawyer who went to a legit law school) and even I know that entrapment is only a defense against the government, not a private person. Yikes dude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:haven't read all the posts - but what are your thoughts on how this will end for them. I know they can afford the best of the best to "defend" them but there's no real defense for their actions, so I would have to think SOMETHING has to happen...hefty fines, kids are expelled etc.

or am I just being naive. probably am, forget I asked.

If I were Huffman's lawyer, I'd argue entrapment.

I don’t think you know what entrapment is ? Singer wore a wire , the feds likely wouldn’t wiretap without a warrant . Carry on.

Actually I do know exactly what entrapment is as I was a defense attorney for over a decade. The fact that someone wore a wire is not relevant. It could still be argued that Huffman was induced to commit the crime. Maybe you don't know that grounds for an indictment does not equate with actual guilt.

Induced to commit a crime by who ? Where’s your law degree from ? The now defunct faculty of law at trump university ? ?

By Singer. But really--you are not worth arguing with. Good night to you, sir.