This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/21/us/lori-loughlin-mossimo-giannulli-sentencing.html

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Lori Loughlin Gets 2 Months in College Admissions Case Lori Loughlin and Mossimo Giannulli Get Prison in College Admissions Case
(about 2 hours later)
A federal judge on Friday sentenced the actress Lori Loughlin to two months in prison for her role in the college admissions scandal, expressing astonishment that someone who already had what he called “a fairy-tale life” would corrupt the college admissions system out of a desire for even more status and prestige. A federal judge on Friday sentenced the actress Lori Loughlin to two months in prison for her role in the college admissions scandal, expressing astonishment that someone who had what he called “a fairy-tale life” would corrupt the college admissions system out of a desire for even more status and prestige.
Ms. Loughlin, who pleaded guilty to involvement in a scheme to pass her daughters off as rowers so that they would be admitted to the University of Southern California, tearfully apologized. She said she had believed that she was acting out of love for her children but that she now realized that she had only undermined them, as well as contributed to inequities in society. Ms. Loughlin, who has acknowledged conspiring to pass her daughters off as rowers so that they would be admitted to the University of Southern California, tearfully apologized. She said she had believed that she was acting out of love for her children but that she now realized that she had only undermined them, as well as contributed to inequities in society.
“That realization weighs heavily on me,” Ms. Loughlin said, “and while I wish I could go back and do things differently, I can only take responsibility and move forward.”“That realization weighs heavily on me,” Ms. Loughlin said, “and while I wish I could go back and do things differently, I can only take responsibility and move forward.”
Ms. Loughlin’s sentencing brings to an end to a closely watched chapter of the sprawling scandal, which underscored the power of wealth in American college admissions. Ms. Loughlin and her husband, the fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, had both pleaded guilty to fraud. Prosecutors have said that they paid $500,000 as part of the scheme, although on Friday one of the couple’s lawyers suggested that the money was Mr. Giannulli’s alone, not joint money of the couple’s. Prosecutors said that Mr. Giannulli took a more active role in the fraud than Ms. Loughlin, and the judge sentenced Mr. Giannulli earlier on Friday to five months in prison.
Ms. Loughlin and her husband, the fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, both pleaded guilty to fraud charges, acknowledging that they paid $500,000 as part of the scheme to get their daughters admitted to U.S.C. The judge sentenced Mr. Giannulli earlier on Friday to five months in prison. Prosecutors said Mr. Giannulli took a more active role in the fraud than Ms. Loughlin. Ms. Loughlin and Mr. Giannulli had fought the charges for more than a year. And at times, the focus on the boldfaced names involved in the case — which also included the actress Felicity Huffman and Douglas Hodge, the former chief executive of Pimco — eclipsed larger questions about inequities in the admissions process.
Ms. Loughlin and Mr. Giannulli had fought the charges for more than a year. At times, the focus on the boldfaced names involved in the case — including the actress Felicity Huffman and Douglas Hodge, the former chief executive of Pimco — eclipsed larger questions about inequities in the admissions process and the role of colleges themselves in permitting wealthy parents to game the system. In response to the scandal, which began unfolding more than a year ago, some colleges and universities have drawn new lines between fund-raising and admissions or athletic recruitment. Others put in place safeguards to ensure that students admitted as athletes are, in fact, athletes.
In response to the admissions scandal that began unfolding in 2019, some colleges and universities drew new lines between fund-raising and admissions or athletic recruitment. Others put in place safeguards to ensure that students admitted as athletes are, in fact, athletes. The case also stirred conversations around the many advantages wealthy students enjoy in admission to selective schools, including help from high-priced tutors and coaches, opportunities to excel in sports that provide a leg-up in admissions, preference given to legacy applicants, and even the option of large donations that can buy access.
More broadly, the case stirred conversations around the many advantages wealthy students enjoy in the college admissions process, including help from high-priced tutors and coaches, opportunities to excel in sports that open college doors, preference given to legacy applicants, and even the option of large donations that can buy access. For all of the changes, however, the nation’s largest college admissions prosecution, which federal law enforcement authorities called Operation Varsity Blues, did not spur as sweeping an overhaul to the admissions system at elite schools as some had expected.
For all of the changes, however, the nation’s largest college admissions prosecution, which federal law enforcement authorities called Operation Varsity Blues, did not spur as sweeping an overhaul to the admissions system as some had expected.
“In some ways, the bad news about the Varsity Blues scandal was that it was so extreme, it enabled people to think it was ‘them’ — and not us,” said Richard Weissbourd, a senior lecturer on education at Harvard who leads a national effort to reform college admissions as part of the Making Caring Common Project. Mr. Weissbourd said he had hoped the case would prompt a deeper self-examination by schools, in which “it would all be on the table — athletes, donors, legacy, the whole thing.”“In some ways, the bad news about the Varsity Blues scandal was that it was so extreme, it enabled people to think it was ‘them’ — and not us,” said Richard Weissbourd, a senior lecturer on education at Harvard who leads a national effort to reform college admissions as part of the Making Caring Common Project. Mr. Weissbourd said he had hoped the case would prompt a deeper self-examination by schools, in which “it would all be on the table — athletes, donors, legacy, the whole thing.”
More than 50 people were charged in the admissions case, which involved cheating on admissions tests and bribes to college coaches to falsely designate students as athletic recruits. More than 40 people have pleaded guilty or agreed to plead guilty, including William Singer, the college admissions consultant who worked with almost all of the families in the case. More than 50 people were charged in the case, which involved cheating on admissions tests and bribes to college coaches to falsely designate students as athletic recruits. More than 40 people have pleaded guilty or agreed to plead guilty, including William Singer, the college admissions consultant who worked with almost all of the families in the case.
No school was more deeply embroiled in the scandal than U.S.C., where a former top athletics official was among those indicted. This week, the school acknowledged for the first time that the athletic department had passed off wealthy or connected applicants as recruits even more frequently than even the college admissions case had revealed. No school was more deeply embroiled in the scandal than U.S.C.. This week, the school acknowledged for the first time that the athletic department had passed off wealthy or connected applicants as recruits even more frequently than even the college admissions case had revealed.
In a statement issued on Thursday, the university said that it had discovered that, dating back to 2012, roughly a dozen students a year had been admitted as recruited athletes but ultimately did not play on a team. Some did not play for legitimate reasons, the school said, but others were clients of Mr. Singer who were falsely presented as athletic recruits in exchange for donations to the athletic department or bribes. And still others, not tied to Mr. Singer, were also falsely presented as athletes, “due to the past giving and/or potential future generosity of their families, or personal connections with employees in our athletics department,” the university said. In a statement issued on Thursday, the university said that it had discovered that, dating back to 2012, roughly a dozen students a year had been admitted as recruited athletes but ultimately did not play on a team. That included students who were not tied to Mr. Singer, but who were falsely presented as athletes “due to the past giving and/or potential future generosity of their families, or personal connections with employees in our athletics department,” the university said.
The university said that the admissions department was unaware of the fraud, which was perpetrated by “a small number of athletics department employees,” all of whom “have been disciplined and/or are no longer employed by the university.” The university said that the admissions department had been unaware of the fraud, which was perpetrated by “a small number of athletics department employees,” all of whom “have been disciplined and/or are no longer employed by the university.”
Since the case was announced in March 2019, U.S.C. has made changes to its admissions process for athletes, including requiring each head coach to certify in writing that a student is being recruited for athletic ability, and mandating that an Office of Athletic Compliance confirm that each admitted student ultimately joins a team. The university said that a task force led by Charles Zukoski, the new provost, and Mike Bohn, the new director of athletics, was examining whether to make further reforms to the admissions process. Since the case was announced in March 2019, U.S.C. has made changes to its admissions process for athletes, including requiring each head coach to certify in writing that a student is being recruited for athletic ability, and mandating that an Office of Athletic Compliance confirm that each admitted student ultimately joins a team.
Other schools, including Harvard, have put in place new, or newly official, policies around fund-raising. Harvard was not involved in the admissions case but has come under scrutiny for issues involving donations. This year the university codified its policies on gifts; under the new rules, it will not solicit gifts from any donor known to have a family member applying for admission to Harvard. Other schools, including Harvard, have put in place new, or newly official, policies around fund-raising. Harvard was not involved in the admissions case but has come under scrutiny for other issues involving donations. This year the university codified its policies on gifts; under the new rules, it will not solicit gifts from any donor known to have a family member applying for admission to Harvard.
The University of Virginia now asks students being recruited for athletic teams to sign a pledge that they will actually join the team. It also prohibits its athletic department from soliciting or accepting gifts from families of student-athletes while they are being recruited.The University of Virginia now asks students being recruited for athletic teams to sign a pledge that they will actually join the team. It also prohibits its athletic department from soliciting or accepting gifts from families of student-athletes while they are being recruited.
The scandal may also have contributed to growing criticism of standardized tests in college admissions. But it ultimately took a more disruptive force — the coronavirus pandemic — to cause what appears likely to be a sea change in the use of those tests. The scandal may also have contributed to growing criticism of standardized tests in college admissions. But it ultimately took a more disruptive force — the coronavirus pandemic — to cause a sea change in the use of those tests.
With many students unable to take the SAT or ACT because of cancellations, hundreds of schools, including all of the Ivy League, have made submitting SAT or ACT scores optional for the coming admissions cycle. The University of California, which had already been under pressure to stop requiring the tests, voted in May to phase them out permanently. While other schools have described the change as temporary, admissions officers said it was unlikely that schools would revert to their old policies, given evidence that the tests advantage wealthy students. With many students unable to take the SAT or ACT because of the pandemic, hundreds of schools, including all of the Ivy League, have made submitting scores from such tests optional for the coming admissions cycle. The University of California, which had already been under pressure to stop requiring the tests, voted in May to phase them out permanently. While other schools have described the change as temporary, admissions officers said it was unlikely that schools would revert to their old policies, given evidence that the tests advantage wealthy students.
Updated Aug. 21, 2020Updated Aug. 21, 2020
The latest on how schools are reopening amid the pandemic.The latest on how schools are reopening amid the pandemic.
“There’s not very many examples of colleges and universities moving to test-optional that then move right back,” said Jonathan Burdick, the vice provost for enrollment at Cornell University, adding that he expected to see “a real reset” on the use of standardized tests. Cornell has announced only that it will be test-optional for this year, and has said that it will evaluate its experience before deciding on a permanent policy. “There’s not very many examples of colleges and universities moving to test-optional that then move right back,” said Jonathan Burdick, the vice provost for enrollment at Cornell University, adding that he expected to see “a real reset” on the use of standardized tests.
Ms. Loughlinpleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud. Her husband, Mr. Giannulli, who prosecutors say was more involved in the scheme, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud and honest services wire and mail fraud. Ms. Loughlin pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud. Mr. Giannulli pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud and honest services wire and mail fraud.
“If I have to send to jail those that who commit crimes yet did not know better,” Judge Gorton told Mr. Giannulli, “surely it is equitable that I send you, who knew full well the criminality of your conduct, to jail.” Prosecutors have said that the couple involved their daughters in the fraud. At Mr. Singer’s instruction, the couple had each daughter pose in a photograph on a rowing machine to further the ruse that she was an athlete. The daughters were also copied on emails about fake rowing profiles and registration with the NCAA, prosecutors said.
Prosecutors have said that the couple’s daughters were both involved in the fraud, though what exactly they understood is not clear. At Mr. Singer’s instruction, the couple had each daughter pose in a staged photograph on a rowing machine to further the ruse that she was a genuine athlete. The daughters were also copied on emails about fake rowing profiles and registration with the NCAA, prosecutors said. Prosecutors said that the couple also advised their younger daughter, Olivia Jade Giannulli, on how to keep the scheme from her college counselor at school. When Ms. Giannulli asked her parents whether she should list U.S.C. as her top-choice college, Ms. Loughlin said that she should, but added, referring to the counselor, that “it might be a flag for the weasel to meddle.” Subsequently, prosecutors say, Ms. Loughlin told her daughter, “Don’t say too much to that man.”
Prosecutors say that the couple also advised their younger daughter, Olivia Jade Giannulli, on how to keep the scheme from her college counselor at school. When Ms. Giannulli asked her parents whether she should list U.S.C. as her top-choice college, Ms. Loughlin said that she should, but added, referring to the counselor, that “it might be a flag for the weasel to meddle.” Subsequently, prosecutors say, Ms. Loughlin told her daughter, “Don’t say too much to that man.” The couple’s attorneys told the judge that being the face of the scandal had already taken a devastating toll on the family. It ended Ms. Loughlin’s acting career, they said, made it nearly impossible for her to leave her house without being trailed by paparazzi, and led to so much bullying of the couple’s daughters — on social media and in person — that the family had hired security for them.
One of the couple’s attorneys, Sean Berkowitz, said during Mr. Giannulli’s sentencing that the case had taken an “overwhelming toll” on the family, adding that the couple’s daughters had been bullied both on social media and in person and that the family as a whole “has been the face of the crisis and the scandal in a way disproportionate to their overall role.” The attorneys said that Mr. Giannulli and Ms. Loughlin had not hired Mr. Singer with an intent to commit fraud. Rather, they said, Mr. Singer had been recommended to them as a reputable college counselor by the chairman of the board of trustees of their daughters’ school, a man named Mark Hauser.
Mr. Giannulli and Ms. Loughlin had not hired Mr. Singer with an intention to commit fraud, Mr. Berkowitz said. Instead, Mr. Berkowitz said, Mr. Singer had been recommended to them by the chairman of the board of trustees of their daughters’ school. Mr. Berkowitz said Mr. Singer had provided legitimate counseling services for nearly a year before proposing the athletic scheme. On Friday, federal prosecutors announced that Mr. Hauser, an insurance and private equity executive, had agreed to plead guilty to a newly-filed fraud charge for having conspired with Mr. Singer to cheat on the ACT test of Mr. Hauser’s daughter. Mr. Hauser’s attorney, Robert A. Fisher, declined to comment.
While OK! Magazine reported in recent days that Olivia Jade Giannulli, was throwing a “going away party” for her parents on Thursday night, complete with cake and farewell speeches from friends and family, Mr. Giannulli and Ms. Loughlin will not be going to prison immediately. During the hearing, which was held over videoconference because of coronavirus concerns, Judge Gorton ordered Ms. Loughlin and Mr. Giannulli to report to prison on Nov. 19. The couple’s lawyers asked the judge to request that Ms. Loughlin be sent to a low-security prison camp in Victorville, Calif., and that Mr. Giannulli go to a similar camp in Lompoc, Calif.
Judge Gorton ordered Ms. Loughlin and Mr. Giannulli to report to prison on Nov. 19. The couple’s lawyers asked the judge to request that Ms. Loughlin be designated to a low-security prison camp in Victorville, Calif., and that Mr. Giannulli be designated to a similar camp in Lompoc, Calif. Earlier this year, the camp in Lompoc had the largest outbreak of the coronavirus inside any federal prison, with more than 70 percent of inmates testing positive and two inmates dying, prison officials said. Currently, only two staff members are known to have the virus, officials said, and no inmates are. The facility in Victorville has had significantly fewer cases and no deaths.
Earlier this year, the camp in Lompoc had the largest outbreak of the coronavirus inside any federal prison, with more than 70 percent of inmates testing positive. Two inmates died, according to the Bureau of Prisons. There are currently two known positive cases among staff members, officials said, and none among inmates at the prison. The facility in Victorville has had significantly fewer cases and no deaths. At least two defendants in the admissions case have been released from prison early because of conditions they were being held in or because they were at risk for more severe complications from the virus.
The coronavirus has spread widely in the nation’s jails and prisons, and so far more than 1,000 prisoners and correctional officers have died. At least two defendants in the admissions case have been released from prison early in recent months because of conditions they were being held in or because they were at risk for more severe complications from the virus. It is unclear if Ms. Loughlin and Mr. Giannulli, whose hearings were conducted by videoconference because of virus concerns, will seek to have their sentences shortened.
Timothy Williams contributed reporting.Timothy Williams contributed reporting.