[ad_1]
In 2019, the “college blues” became an instant hit, and dozens of parents across the United States were arrested on suspicion of paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for their children to enter elite universities.
Now, the first batch of parents are on trial in Boston. They are accused of participating in a scandal that exposed the vulgar weaknesses in the admissions process of American universities, in which “donations” filled the pockets of middlemen, fake athletic ability or tampered test scores. They opened the door. The children of the rich go to the school of their choice.
The jury election is scheduled to begin on Wednesday and will file lawsuits against 62-year-old private equity investor John B. Wilson and 64-year-old former Wynn Resorts executive Gamal Abdelaziz (Gamal Abdelaziz). Have chosen to defend their case in court. The other 33 parents accused of participating in the scandal have pleaded guilty, and their sentences range from two weeks to nine months. Four more parents will be tried next year.
“People are so desperate that they are willing to spend a lot of money and risk going to jail,” said Daniel Golden, who wrote “The Price of Enrollment: How the U.S. Ruling Class Enters Elite Colleges—and Who will leave the door of the author of the book. “The message from this is: These universities are ideal places for you to have children. “
If the Department of Justice claims this is the largest college admissions fraud ever, Wilson and Abdulaziz are convicted, and they will face up to 20 years in prison. Those who have already pleaded guilty include former Pacific Investment Management CEO Douglas Hodge (Douglas Hodge) and actors Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin (Lori Loughlin). Athletic ability or falsified entrance exam scores allow children to enter college. The huge prosecution has also swept college sports coaches. One parent received a pardon from then-President Donald Trump.
The defense of this trial indicated that it may be partly dependent on the idea that the parents did nothing wrong, because donating and trying to get a child to be designated as a sports recruit is part of the university’s system of recognition and encouragement. Their lawyers also accused William “Rick” Singer, the plan’s planner (who may or may not testify in this case) of misleading parents to believe that his actions were sanctioned by the school.
Wilson is the founder of Hyannis Port Capital, a private equity and real estate development company. He allegedly paid Singer US$200,000 in 2014 to bribe a water polo coach from the University of Southern California to designate his son as the school’s new team. member. He was also accused of paying more than $1 million to Singh to get a place at Stanford University and Harvard University for his twin daughters and become a so-called sports recruit.
Wilson’s lawyer, Michael Kendall, did not respond to emails and phone calls seeking comment.
‘Widely accepted’
In court documents, Wilson’s defense team stated that he believed the funds were a legitimate donation. Singer assured him that this was a “widely accepted” practice to help students get admitted. The University of Southern California even thanked him for doing so. Its sports project donated 100,000 U.S. dollars. In addition, his lawyer said that Wilson’s son is a talented water polo player who played for the University of Southern California team. Wilson also argued that his daughters are excellent students, and if there is no help, they will enter these schools.
Abdelaziz is accused of paying Singer $300,000 and tens of thousands of dollars to a USC sports official to make his daughter a so-called basketball recruit. Abdulaziz argued that his daughter is a talented basketball player, and the University of Southern California stated that $200,000 will be spent on the school arena for basketball and volleyball. Abdelaziz’s lawyer Brian Kelly declined to comment on the matter.
Parents stated in court documents that donating to the school is an acceptable but unclear way of enrolling wealthy applicants. They cited an electronic form kept by USC officials, which classified some applicants as “VIP” because their family members made a large amount of donations to the school, were friends or had some kind of connection.
The spreadsheet edited the names of applicants, citing how a student’s family donated “$15 million”, while another checklist stated that the student “provided $3 million for men’s golf.” Another applicant was identified as a “close friend” of Pat Harden, the former University of Southern California athletic director.
Although the judge in the case stated that “The University of Southern California is not being tried here,” he provided evidence to his parents that the school “is suspected of corrupt admissions policies, if the information provided has been informed and affected his or her mentality in some way.”
Neither the college nor the applicant was charged in the case.
Most of the defense may also focus on Singh, who made at least $25 million by instructing his parents to bribe certain officials and even falsify the sports data of some of his clients’ children from 2011 to 2018. Prosecutors said that Singh sometimes hired test-taking experts to correct the results in order to charge fees to improve students’ college committee scores.
Star witness
Singh eventually became a cooperating witness for the government and secretly recorded phone calls with many of the defendant’s parents. Singh admitted to extortion, money laundering, fraud and obstruction in 2019. He has not yet been sentenced.
Prosecutors have not yet said whether they will call Singh as a witness, and their spokesperson declined to comment. Singer’s lawyer, Donald Heller, would only say “this is the government’s decision” whether his client will testify and declined to comment further. Regardless of the decision, the United States still wants to play recorded calls.
Abdulaziz’s lawyer Kelly said at a hearing last month that Singh was a “star witness” for the prosecution, and the entire investigation was based on this. Prosecutor Stephen Frank retorted: “We don’t think any witness is particularly different from another. We will decide who we call at the time of the game based on how the evidence is entered.”
The parents argued that Singer was a liar. Pointing to the notes on his iPhone, Singer wrote in the notes that FBI agents told him to “lie” and “distort facts” when talking to his parents while the government was listening. In another article, Singh wrote that an agent raised her voice and insisted that customers admit “the lie I told them”-their payment was not a donation to the school, but a payment to corrupt employees. bribe.
Legal experts say that turning the head of a crime into a key cooperating witness can be difficult for jurors. They may think that Singh is more guilty than his parents, but treat them as victims without his knowledge. Singer’s bragging and his dealings with parents, coaches, and school officials may also make him a disgusting character for jurors. In the telephone recording, he quoted the Harvard president, boasting about his relationship with powerful people.
“If I’m doing this case, I don’t want to call him,” said Patricia Pileggi, a former federal prosecutor in Brooklyn, who is now a partner at Schiff Harden. . It would be an option to avoid witnesses who “have a lot of baggage” by playing the recorded call without taking him to the stands.
“From the government’s point of view, it certainly makes sense to try to tell their story without Singh,” Pilege said.
morning Call
The trial may last up to a month.
Becky Munsterer Sabky, former admissions officer at Dartmouth College and author of the book “Farewell Speaker at the Door”, said that the case was a wake-up call and exposed the family’s willingness to do Efforts to gain a place in the admissions process. . “
“The singer is a mouse, he exposed the mouse hole,” Sabki said in a recent interview. “In the final analysis, the silver lining of this case is that the parents on trial have shown us that character is important and the country needs to realize that enrollment is not a judgment of the value of students.”
Andrew Lelling, who served as the lead office of the US Attorney in Boston during the investigation, agreed, calling the case a “warning story.”
“What the public should say is,’Wow, maybe we all need to take a step back and reflect on how much weight and unconscious anxiety we put on the name of my child’s college entrance,'” Lelling said, he is now a public Partner of Jones Day. “It’s not entirely healthy.”
[ad_2]
Source link