College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

[GoldenGate]

24 students × $20,000 per bribe (which is likely low) = $480,000

And this is on top of his regular USC coaches salary. (Which is almost guaranteed to be over 100k)

Bribes or "Donations" if they go to the school are one in the same. However a small percentage of donations will likely make it back to the players, fields, or coaching programs.

Huh? A bribe to a coach is very different than a donation to a school. There is nothing unlawful about USC admitting a student because a parent donated millions. Honestly, there isn't even anything wrong with that either since USC gets to decide who gets to go to school there, and the money is likely to benefit other students. Plus, no one gets denied admission because they created an additional spot for a student whose parents dropped $10 million. A bribe to a coach who keeps the money and dupes the school into admitting the student on false pretenses, on the other hand, is a crime as it should be.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Huh? A bribe to a coach is very different than a donation to a school. There is nothing unlawful about USC admitting a student because a parent donated millions. Honestly, there isn't even anything wrong with that either since USC gets to decide who gets to go to school there, and the money is likely to benefit other students. Plus, no one gets denied admission because they created an additional spot for a student whose parents dropped $10 million. A bribe to a coach who keeps the money and dupes the school into admitting the student on false pretenses, on the other hand, is a crime as it should be.

Bribes, one and the same.

In both cases a student was accepted into the school because a large amout of $$$ changed hands.

Also in both cases a deserving student was bumped out of line by another with $$$.

 

[crush]

Bribes, one and the same.

In both cases a student was accepted into the school because a large amout of $$$ changed hands.

Also in both cases a deserving student was bumped out of line by another with $$$.

Pay to enter!!!

 

[lafalafa]

Pay to enter!!!

Where all paying or subsiding universities in CA through our federal, state, and local assessments, taxes, etc.

Favorable admission terms for people with more $ or connections could be viewed as economic discrimination with moral and ethical ramifications. Buying priority or a faster pass might work for Disneyland but not really a fair or equitable approach to higher education opportunities.

 

[crush]

How to pay to play at the next level by crush: First, make sure you have enough money to participant. Then you must "Pay to Play" soccer in this country, especially after High School. Pay for private coaching. Pay for tutors so be best student. Pay for travel ball. Work hard at your sport. Work super hard at School. Education is like a religion for most in this country so they have private school for that as well for those with lot's of cash. Work all the angles and make sure you know the, "whose who" of "you know who" (("Middleman Rick" or someone else with ties and keys to the kingdom)) can make it happen and unlock doors that most us will never have keys to. Once at the door, get the cash out to take it to the next level. That's the key from what I have learned. What a mess and so unfair to the real student/athlete. I will end with this: My good pal dd got a full ride to a big time P5 school. Played soccer since she was 5. Her ride was 100% academic and has no plans to tryout for the soccer team because she wants to be a doctor. 4.7 GPA gets your full ride at most places.

 

[MacDre]

I was a public defender when I first started practicing law. I know quite a bit about how prosecution decisions are made. In a high profile case like this, there is no way on Earth that prosecutors would not have charged Cromwell if they they thought they had a winnable case against her. None. Accordingly, I conclude that she is factually innocent.

1. Prosecutors did not need Cromwell as a primary witness. The evidence needed to show the fraud was easily acquired. There were many witnesses. There were bank and brokerage records. There was provable evidence that the player did not have a true soccer provenance. This was a slam dunk. Cromwell was probably a minor witness whose testimony might have been useful, but not necessary. Therefore, there was no need to offer Cromwell a plea, because she had no real leverage.

2. What crime, anyway? Is there any evidence that she took money? Is there any evidence that she doctored paperwork? Is there any evidence that she made a false representation? I have not seen anything like this. What I hear is that she turned a blind eye, and did not do any investigation of her own. That is not a prosecutable crime.

3. The idea that Cromwell got a secret plea deal is astonishingly ignorant. If a plea deal of this type were offered, then it had to be in writing, and there has to be a public record of it. Pleas are part of the court record. If there is no court record, then there is no plea. It is true that there can be "no prosecution" agreements, but these are written, and usually available by request. (For example, in Los Angeles County, you can get them from the City Attorney.) Otherwise, they are available through a FOIA request. If Cromwell had a "no prosecution" agreement, we would know it.

4. In high profile cases, just as a matter of practice, nobody is let off the hook. If anybody did anything wrong that rose to the level of a crime, that person would have been prosecuted.

The people on this board who claim that Cromwell was somehow given preferential treatment, or was let off the hook, are just talking out of their ass. They probably base their opinions on a deep study of television drama. In the real world of criminal law, Cromwell would have been prosecuted if there were (1) legally tenable grounds to do so; and (2) a realistic possibility of obtaining a conviction.

You are making some very strong statements while avoiding the issue of CONSPIRACY. Generally speaking Counselor, how hard is it for a prosecutor to prove up a conspiracy charge? In your professional opinion, do you think there was enough evidence for a prosecutor to substantiate a conspiracy charge here? If not, why not?

FYI, I don’t know Cromwell or have anything against her. From what I’ve heard and seen, she’s a very likable and respectable person. I’m just “turning stone’s” and something seems off to me.

 

[crush]

 

[lafalafa]

I was a public defender when I first started practicing law. I know quite a bit about how prosecution decisions are made. In a high profile case like this, there is no way on Earth that prosecutors would not have charged Cromwell if they they thought they had a winnable case against her. None. Accordingly, I conclude that she is factually innocent.

1. Prosecutors did not need Cromwell as a primary witness. The evidence needed to show the fraud was easily acquired. There were many witnesses. There were bank and brokerage records. There was provable evidence that the player did not have a true soccer provenance. This was a slam dunk. Cromwell was probably a minor witness whose testimony might have been useful, but not necessary. Therefore, there was no need to offer Cromwell a plea, because she had no real leverage.

2. What crime, anyway? Is there any evidence that she took money? Is there any evidence that she doctored paperwork? Is there any evidence that she made a false representation? I have not seen anything like this. What I hear is that she turned a blind eye, and did not do any investigation of her own. That is not a prosecutable crime.

3. The idea that Cromwell got a secret plea deal is astonishingly ignorant. If a plea deal of this type were offered, then it had to be in writing, and there has to be a public record of it. Pleas are part of the court record. If there is no court record, then there is no plea. It is true that there can be "no prosecution" agreements, but these are written, and usually available by request. (For example, in Los Angeles County, you can get them from the City Attorney.) Otherwise, they are available through a FOIA request. If Cromwell had a "no prosecution" agreement, we would know it.

4. In high profile cases, just as a matter of practice, nobody is let off the hook. If anybody did anything wrong that rose to the level of a crime, that person would have been prosecuted.

The people on this board who claim that Cromwell was somehow given preferential treatment, or was let off the hook, are just talking out of their ass. They probably base their opinions on a deep study of television drama. In the real world of criminal law, Cromwell would have been prosecuted if there were (1) legally tenable grounds to do so; and (2) a realistic possibility of obtaining a conviction.

Well that's sounds like your own conspiracy version but a large part of the conversation is about ethic's, morals, equal admission opportunities, and preferential treatment.

When one considers the 50+ different actions done over many years supporting a student athlete the was brought in and stayed for many quarters under false pretenses, crime or not doesn't make it excusable for those that enabled, participated, turned a blind eye or whatever the case was.

 

[lafalafa]

Talk about moving the goalposts. First you wanted Cromwell to be prosecuted. Now chastened, you want to condemn her for her ethics and morals. The applicant you champion is an unidentifiable person who did not get into UCLA as an undergraduate, and whose life is supposedly ruined because she had to attend UC Irvine instead. UCLA has 31,500 undergraduate students. You crusade for the 31,501st. [Insert long yawn here.]

Why not spend your outsized righteousness on something more important. Bitch about the governments in Africa whose moral turpitude causes millions of deaths from starvation and poor medical infrastructure. Whinge about Ibn Saud Mohammed in Saudi Arabia, who has dissidents killed. Strike at corrupt officials in Mexico. Pursue oil polluters, people who destroy our aquifers, or those who chop down the rain forests.

Going after a single soccer coach - who has not committed a single documented act of misfeasance - makes us all roll our eyes. You make Javert look like a slacker.

Nope that's your imaginary goal post. She was named in the federal briefs in post #90 as having participated in 2017 as one of the first two individuals from UCLA.

Systematic problems is what it is and still going on, guess you missed by latest two posts about USC.

AC is but one small bit player, you care more about ignoring what went down vs doing anything so these types of things don't continue.

Have no idea about the rest of your PC rants about other countries and tangents, never was about a single coach but your too focused on some legal fantasies and can't see the wood for the trees.

 

[lafalafa]

I read post #90, and her name is not there. Let me know if there is another post I should read.

But the important thing is that Cromwell was not indicted. You ought not accuse people of crimes unless you have proof they committed them.

I guess you need to do more research, read through the posts.

You made a bunch of excuses defending somebody that I did not accuse of commiting a crime. You should be more careful.. kettle

The topic this week was about USC and the two articles I posted about that. Your guilty or some other kind of conscious popped up with the AC stuff out of nowhere and some other weird stuff about foreign countries.

 

[crush]

I have a solution that can fix all the confusion and misperception one could conclude in their brain based on what they see and read about regarding all this sandal stuff and the likes of this middleman "Rick" and those like him. Be HOT is my advice!!! Honest, Open & Transparent, duh!!! Lot's of local kids dream of balling at SC or UCLA and why shouldn;t they. We're all watching how the Unicorns and the others make it. What sacrifice did these players and parents make to make the grade at Big U? You know, how they get into the school for sport. Inquiring minds would like to know because we all have kids playing sport at highest level in club. It amazes me how freaking defensive people get when you start asking a few questions. I have a solution.

Crush's Solution: 100%, everyone just needs to be transparent and honest about every roster spot and why that spot is given. Not rocket science. Fake bio and fake the rest is where many like Lafalala and crush take issue, because we have personal experience in this arena. Why not just be honest and have a few players on the team with rich parents that pay $100,000+ each to be on the team. That makes so much sense and will help pay for the program along the way. Or, let's say a rich dad pays $1,000,000 for a building. I would think it would be fair to offer this rich person's kids admittance to the school and ifd kid wants to be on the team, why not. It plays to pay

 

[Carlsbad7]

I have a solution that can fix all the confusion and misperception one could conclude in their brain based on what they see and read about regarding all this sandal stuff and the likes of this middleman "Rick" and those like him. Be HOT is my advice!!! Honest, Open & Transparent, duh!!! Lot's of local kids dream of balling at SC or UCLA and why shouldn;t they. We're all watching how the Unicorns and the others make it. What sacrifice did these players and parents make to make the grade at Big U? You know, how they get into the school for sport. Inquiring minds would like to know because we all have kids playing sport at highest level in club. It amazes me how freaking defensive people get when you start asking a few questions. I have a solution.

Crush's Solution: 100%, everyone just needs to be transparent and honest about every roster spot and why that spot is given. Not rocket science. Fake bio and fake the rest is where many like Lafalala and crush take issue, because we have personal experience in this arena. Why not just be honest and have a few players on the team with rich parents that pay $100,000+ each to be on the team. That makes so much sense and will help pay for the program along the way. Or, let's say a rich dad pays $1,000,000 for a building. I would think it would be fair to offer this rich person's kids admittance to the school and ifd kid wants to be on the team, why not. It plays to pay

Hahaha... You think you're the only ones with experience in corruption and $$$ changing hands for advantage in the soccer world.

I expected this kind of thing in college. I didnt expect it at the youth club level. When people said "pay to play" I expected expensive to be the primary way it manifested. What I didnt expect + makes complete sense now is that once ethics are thrown out the window all types of corruption can occur.

Want your kid to play on a certain team. Start doing privates at $100 per hour with the coach.

Issues with play time? Start going to every group training (outside of regular practice) the coach offers.

Club doesn't allow coaches to do privates with their players? Find out who the coach buddies with and throw money at that coach. (While your coach does the same for his players)

Bla bla bla... Gets old

 

[crush]

Hahaha... You think you're the only ones with experience in corruption and $$$ changing hands for advantage in the soccer world.

I expected this kind of thing in college. I didnt expect it at the youth club level. When people said "pay to play" I expected expensive to be the primary way it manifested. What I didnt expect + makes complete sense now is that once ethics are thrown out the window all types of corruption can occur.

Want your kid to play on a certain team. Start doing privates at $100 per hour with the coach.

Issues with play time? Start going to every group training (outside of regular practice) the coach offers.

Club doesn't allow coaches to do privates with their players? Find out who the coach buddies with and throw money at that coach. (While your coach does the same for his players)

Bla bla bla... Gets old

Hey now, I never said I was or Lalala were the only one's with some grips and rants. Did you have to deal with a Golden Gate type for two years? How about a Doc that just lied all the time? I forgot about the "pay for privates for play time" model. Yes, I know all about the Docs that pulled that crap. I saw it unfold before me eyes. True story form the past: One day this dads kid was bench player. After signing up for "extra, extra" one on one private development training by the Guru ((Coach and doc too)) himself, dd became full time starter all the time because of the paid development. Plus Doc's connections to the next level makes this model one way to make it. Their are so many slices to this pie that I'm sure others have stories of their slice of the soccer pie. Look man, the assholes will now come after me and tell me it's all my fault for not STFU when told and all the other threats I've gotten over the years for asking a question or two.

 

[lafalafa]

I'm not going to read over 1000 posts hoping to find the one you want to cite. If you don't want to tell me which one it is, well, there is an obvious conclusion.

The obvious conclusion is you want to ignore the many articles, facts, already posted and I'm not going rehash them for you. I could point out about a dozen of them exactly but you already made up your mind that some people who willing participated in a charade for many years did nothing wrong.

You know that's not the case and so does everyone else, the Sargent Shultz "idiot" defense is assuming but the most obviously conclusion is one can't act alone to perpetuate 50+ different things including running players through compliance that took place over multiple years.

Denial of responsibility, facts, accountability for a program doesn't change the fact that people in charge let that happen for a extended period of time.

Systemic problems continue unless there is change,. USC being the latest. Dean's who give out unchecked admission waivers.

 

[crush]

The obvious conclusion is you want to ignore the many articles, facts, already posted and I'm not going rehash them for you. I could point out about a dozen of them exactly but you already made up your mind that some people who willing participated in a charade for many years did nothing wrong.

You know that's not the case and so does everyone else, the Sargent Shultz "idiot" defense is assuming but the most obviously conclusion is one can't act alone to perpetuate 50+ different things including running players through compliance that took place over multiple years.

Denial of responsibility, facts, accountability for a program doesn't change the fact that people in charge let that happen for a extended period of time.

Systemic problems continue unless there is change,. USC being the latest. Dean's who give out unchecked admission waivers.

The problem with some people is they dont care about others and want things to be swept under the rug and go back to normal. Some rich folk people are willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars all so they can and their kid can look good on Instagram and Meta. I just want fair access and fair play for all children. If that's too much to ask for, can they at least tell us that things are not equal and you better know some folks and you better build some close relationships with the right folks and make sure you got cash at the door to play along. That kind of honesty will give the rest of us and our kids time to reevaluate this soccer and college process. It's not a true contest when others have access to the team because of their relationships and money and not soccer abilities. I mean at least this is all embarrassing for all these smart cats to pull stunts like this.

 

[lafalafa]

The problem with some people is they dont care about others and want things to be swept under the rug and go back to normal. Some rich folk people are willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars all so they can and their kid can look good on Instagram and Meta. I just want fair access and fair play for all children. If that's too much to ask for, can they at least tell us that things are not equal and you better know some folks and you better build some close relationships with the right folks and make sure you got cash at the door to play along. That kind of honesty will give the rest of us and our kids time to reevaluate this soccer and college process. It's not a true contest when others have access to the team because of their relationships and money and not soccer abilities. I mean at least this is all embarrassing for all these smart cats to pull stunts like this.

All three of our young adults are attending or graduated from their university of choices and where treated fairly and admitted on their own merit. I'm proud of them for that, as a parent they did it all themselves and have earned exactly what they have from their own work and efforts.

We never even spoke or correspondent with any of the athletic recruiters, coaches, people, or anybody for that matter, our students did all that.

Surprising earlier his year coaches promised admission "help" and told our youngest even though he wasn't interested or needed that. Only wanted to attend a university that accepted him first before committing to Athletics. The NCAA requirements are much less vs what Universities require in many cases. Football players with GPA 2.x's are getting in while some mid 3.x soccer player are not for the ones without the "helpers"

Not just about Bribes either, systematic problems exist.

Contributor: As a USC professor, I can't stay quiet about the administration's toxic culture

The latest scandal, with allegations of rape at the Sigma Nu fraternity house, arises after apparently willful ignorance by a new regime of campus leaders.

www.latimes.com

its the sweep it under the rug culture.

". administration actually appeared not to want to know the truth.

When they don't have a choice there is a investigation and some panel or committee says they're going to be some changes but nothing really changes

"Meanwhile, a new administration took over...but they kept up the pattern of secrecy and denial in handling fallout from a series of cases: the involvement of several officials in an admissions cheating scam, the School of Social Work dean indicted for allegedly paying bribes to secure millions of dollars in Los Angeles County contracts, and a Student Health Center doctor accused of assaulting young men. In each case, the fallout and costs will affect the ... faculty, staff and students for decades to come"

This is the reality and it goes on, hopefully for future generations we can do better and clean up the systematic problems. I have no bone to pick with anybody just want to see our young adults thrive and become the leaders of tomorrow.

 

[GoldenGate]

I was a public defender when I first started practicing law. I know quite a bit about how prosecution decisions are made. In a high profile case like this, there is no way on Earth that prosecutors would not have charged Cromwell if they they thought they had a winnable case against her. None. Accordingly, I conclude that she is factually innocent.

1. Prosecutors did not need Cromwell as a primary witness. The evidence needed to show the fraud was easily acquired. There were many witnesses. There were bank and brokerage records. There was provable evidence that the player did not have a true soccer provenance. This was a slam dunk. Cromwell was probably a minor witness whose testimony might have been useful, but not necessary. Therefore, there was no need to offer Cromwell a plea, because she had no real leverage.

2. What crime, anyway? Is there any evidence that she took money? Is there any evidence that she doctored paperwork? Is there any evidence that she made a false representation? I have not seen anything like this. What I hear is that she turned a blind eye, and did not do any investigation of her own. That is not a prosecutable crime.

3. The idea that Cromwell got a secret plea deal is astonishingly ignorant. If a plea deal of this type were offered, then it had to be in writing, and there has to be a public record of it. Pleas are part of the court record. If there is no court record, then there is no plea. It is true that there can be "no prosecution" agreements, but these are written, and usually available by request. (For example, in Los Angeles County, you can get them from the City Attorney.) Otherwise, they are available through a FOIA request. If Cromwell had a "no prosecution" agreement, we would know it.

4. In high profile cases, just as a matter of practice, nobody is let off the hook. If anybody did anything wrong that rose to the level of a crime, that person would have been prosecuted.

The people on this board who claim that Cromwell was somehow given preferential treatment, or was let off the hook, are just talking out of their ass. They probably base their opinions on a deep study of television drama. In the real world of criminal law, Cromwell would have been prosecuted if there were (1) legally tenable grounds to do so; and (2) a realistic possibility of obtaining a conviction.

Thank goodness there is another person with some brains here.

 

[outside!]

Thank goodness there is another person with some brains here.

Just because the prosecutors did not think they had a winnable case here does not mean there was no wrong doing. It simply means they could not find enough evidence that would stand up in court.

My personnel opinion is that she looked the other way while all of this happened. Not very ethical, but not against the law.

 

[younothat]

Just because the prosecutors did not think they had a winnable case here does not mean there was no wrong doing. It simply means they could not find enough evidence that would stand up in court.

My personnel opinion is that she looked the other way while all of this happened. Not very ethical, but not against the law.

Yup exactingly my thoughts as well.

I'm a UCLA supporter so I was disappointed in the whole situation. No statement or anything by the people in charge about doing better in the future or preventing these kinds of things from happen. Stonewalling is not a good approach to me for a public university.

 

[lafalafa]

Ex-USC dentistry professor gets six weeks prison in U.S. college admissions scandal

Ex-USC dentistry professor gets six weeks prison in U.S. college admissions scandal

A former University of Southern California associate professor of dentistry was sentenced on Wednesday to six weeks in prison for filing a false tax return related to the sprawling U.S. college admissions fraud scheme. Homayoun Zadeh, 60, had been charged by federal prosecutors in Boston with...

news.yahoo.com

Some accountability for those who cheated or double cheated in this case with a tax deduction. Talk about trying to game the system.

 

[crush]

I just read where a dad pleaded guilty for paying the middle man dude $75,000 to get his connection to switch a few answers on the "Smart Ass Test." for his boy. I think it was the math part, go figure....lol. Today, a mom got sentenced for paying the middle man $250,000 for one kid as a Pole Vaulter and another kid as a Tennis star for another $250,000. $500K to get her kids on the team or just to get in the darn school? We have to fix this. This is an easy fix too. Just be HOT folks and we can work all this out fairly. Both kids did not play either sport by the way which really is lame, moo!!!