|
Post by Mocha on Dec 9, 2019 23:50:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gobruins on Jan 15, 2020 9:42:18 GMT -5
Wow. Lopes, Orr, and Jacobson look way different that I would have imagined.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Jan 15, 2020 11:59:04 GMT -5
Wow. Lopes, Orr, and Jacobson look way different that I would have imagined. I LOL’d so hard I literally had tears.
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jan 15, 2020 13:59:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by colonial2415 on Jan 17, 2020 12:43:29 GMT -5
What do you think is going to happen to Bill Ferguson? Think he will ever coach again?
|
|
|
Post by blastingsand on Jan 17, 2020 14:46:12 GMT -5
Are the kids still going to try to make a social media career after all this? I can imagine they must be the laughingstock of LA right now
|
|
|
Post by Mocha on Jan 20, 2020 9:41:36 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2020 15:29:31 GMT -5
What do you think is going to happen to Bill Ferguson? Think he will ever coach again? This is an interesting question. I have read a ton on this scandal because I know a couple of the parents and I am curious in a rubber-necking kind of way. The WF situation struck me as one of the cases that might be dismissed but you do not know what else they are basing their case on (or what evidence of innocence they are not providing that will come out). I am not sure there is a crime there (assuming proper disclosure and reporting on tax returns). The college student was on the wait list on her own academic merits and WF has a good percentage admission off the wait list. The girl DOES play volleyball and articles say that she also played at the school. The money was paid to the Deacon's club (50K) which eliminates WF from being injured at all (similar to the judge's comment of disbelief at the Stanford Club Sailing coach's sentencing about Stanford). Some other money went to BF's camp business (did he report it? did he tell school?). I am not sure there is a crime here and the govt is trying to prove that BF prevented someone else from "getting in". That is pretty weak. You need a defined victim. WF benefited from this admission, she is an actual SA at the school AND they likely would have admitted her anyway PLUS they received money. Unless, the feds have the one other person that was on the wait list and was a PROVABLE better volleyball player etc. etc. there is no victim/damages. The judge that sentenced the stanford club coach to basically nothing gave clear signals that she likely would have acquitted him if he had pled not guilty. I really do not see that a crime happened in the WF case. Unless there is more to it. heck, if he told the school that WF would receive a donation AND disclosed they also donated to his camp, I do not even see an offense that would justify the firing. Here is a good summary of the Stanford sentence. www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/06/12/ex-stanford-sailing-coach-be-sentenced-admissions-bribery-scandal/
|
|
|
Post by pepperbrooks on Jan 20, 2020 15:49:35 GMT -5
I think it all depends on whether schools perceive Ferguson's part in the scandal as a nothing-burger, or if they're afraid they'd be making an eyebrow-raising hire that will bring unwanted publicity to the school.
|
|
|
Post by turk182 on Jan 25, 2020 8:13:25 GMT -5
some rather disturbing info coming out of UCLA yesterday...
|
|
|
Post by winesalot on Jan 25, 2020 10:36:36 GMT -5
some rather disturbing info coming out of UCLA yesterday... Are you talking about the motion filed by Salcedo's attorneys? I thought all those claims were already out there. Was there new information?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jan 25, 2020 11:54:49 GMT -5
What do you think is going to happen to Bill Ferguson? Think he will ever coach again? This is an interesting question. I have read a ton on this scandal because I know a couple of the parents and I am curious in a rubber-necking kind of way. The WF situation struck me as one of the cases that might be dismissed but you do not know what else they are basing their case on (or what evidence of innocence they are not providing that will come out). I am not sure there is a crime there (assuming proper disclosure and reporting on tax returns). The college student was on the wait list on her own academic merits and WF has a good percentage admission off the wait list. The girl DOES play volleyball and articles say that she also played at the school. The money was paid to the Deacon's club (50K) which eliminates WF from being injured at all (similar to the judge's comment of disbelief at the Stanford Club Sailing coach's sentencing about Stanford). Some other money went to BF's camp business (did he report it? did he tell school?). I am not sure there is a crime here and the govt is trying to prove that BF prevented someone else from "getting in". That is pretty weak. You need a defined victim. WF benefited from this admission, she is an actual SA at the school AND they likely would have admitted her anyway PLUS they received money. Unless, the feds have the one other person that was on the wait list and was a PROVABLE better volleyball player etc. etc. there is no victim/damages. The judge that sentenced the stanford club coach to basically nothing gave clear signals that she likely would have acquitted him if he had pled not guilty. I really do not see that a crime happened in the WF case. Unless there is more to it. heck, if he told the school that WF would receive a donation AND disclosed they also donated to his camp, I do not even see an offense that would justify the firing. Here is a good summary of the Stanford sentence. www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/06/12/ex-stanford-sailing-coach-be-sentenced-admissions-bribery-scandal/Bribery is still wrong even if you are bribing someone to do something they might have done anyway. The mitigating factor here is that many of these schools openly have a mechanism by which significant donors receive preference for their kids to get admitted. It already walks a line close to bribery -- close enough that a few steps closer may strike people as being essentially the same thing. For "honest services fraud" you do not necessarily need to show that there was some other kid who didn't get in because this one did. All you need to show is that Ferguson was involved in a conspiracy to deprive Wake Forest of the "honest services" they were already paying him to provide to them. There are, however, higher burdens to establish this for private-sector employees than public-sector employees. This is from a court decision involving some Baylor coaches who helped players cheat to stay academically eligible: Under the standards for the crime, there has to be *some* harm to the school. That harm can be as little as "Wake Forest would have done something different if they had known". It apparently can even include the need to conduct a costly investigation, although that gets a little into the realm of "a crime of being charged with a crime" circularity.
|
|
|
Post by turk182 on Jan 25, 2020 15:30:02 GMT -5
some rather disturbing info coming out of UCLA yesterday... Are you talking about the motion filed by Salcedo's attorneys? I thought all those claims were already out there. Was there new information? I believe the actual compliance report that was buried is fresh. Maybe not. I’m getting really good at being wrong the older I get.
|
|
|
Post by winesalot on Jan 25, 2020 15:39:33 GMT -5
I believe the actual compliance report that was buried is fresh. Maybe not. I’m getting really good at being wrong the older I get. I really don't know what is old news in regards to UCLA. I just thought I had heard the 2014 mess before, but now I'm doubting myself. That getting old thing can be a real problem.
|
|
|
Post by Mocha on Jan 27, 2020 13:06:53 GMT -5
Yay, 100 pages! 😀
|
|