Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2020 22:08:56 GMT -5
Maybe I misunderstand the story. Didn't the person giving the money WANT to give the money? That's how it's different than stealing an expensive car. Typically people don't WANT their car to be stolen. The victim isn't the person making the donation (aka bribe). It's the university, the students there, and the students who didn't get in. If Wake Forest wanted Ferguson to take that money for his camp instead of the person donating that amount to them, I agree with you. Otherwise the victim did not WANT the money to go to Ferguson. That is similar to my thoughts before I read the Judge's comments on the Stanford case. The student that did not get in --- You would have to find and prove that person is the victim. Impossible for the feds to do. WF received benefit $50,000 plus the student's tuition each year. Arguing that Stanford's reputation was harmed did not hold water for the judge either. The person that gave the money, gave it directly to the Deacon's Club and to Ferguson's Camp so that argument does not really hold up either. Look, I do not have a dog in this fight. I know nothing of Ferguson, his case was just outside the clusters so I read it. I did not know of the USC connection until later. I have only followed the cases because I know (distantly) two of the accused and am morbidly curious what is going to happen to them. If I was one of the accused, I would definitely have wanted Zobel to be my judge vs. the other one. If you are interested I encourage you to search for the record of the Stanford case or look for the reporter that was in court that day tweeting. (boston globe maybe?). Her comments were very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by luckydawg on Feb 6, 2020 22:15:09 GMT -5
If the allegations are true, he "diverted" $50,000. How is it better that it was a white collar crime than if it was regular theft? Would you feel the same about a coach who had stolen an expensive car?
He also lied to his own school. By itself, that should give any employer serious pause bc they know he's a dishonest employee so they can't trust him. Players should wonder about his honesty with them as well. IMO this is why Vandemoer needed to leave Stanford. What he did was probably legal but it was not only unethical, it showed the administrators that he'd lie to them. (Plus it's bad for Stanford's reputation, which may be their most valuable asset.)
Maybe I misunderstand the story. Didn't the person giving the money WANT to give the money? That's how it's different than stealing an expensive car. Typically people don't WANT their car to be stolen. And universities typically don't want students admitted under false pretenses and their employees being enriched by it.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Feb 6, 2020 22:39:18 GMT -5
The victim isn't the person making the donation (aka bribe). It's the university, the students there, and the students who didn't get in. If Wake Forest wanted Ferguson to take that money for his camp instead of the person donating that amount to them, I agree with you. Otherwise the victim did not WANT the money to go to Ferguson. That is similar to my thoughts before I read the Judge's comments on the Stanford case. The student that did not get in --- You would have to find and prove that person is the victim. Impossible for the feds to do. WF received benefit $50,000 plus the student's tuition each year. Arguing that Stanford's reputation was harmed did not hold water for the judge either. The person that gave the money, gave it directly to the Deacon's Club and to Ferguson's Camp so that argument does not really hold up either. Look, I do not have a dog in this fight. I know nothing of Ferguson, his case was just outside the clusters so I read it. I did not know of the USC connection until later. I have only followed the cases because I know (distantly) two of the accused and am morbidly curious what is going to happen to them. If I was one of the accused, I would definitely have wanted Zobel to be my judge vs. the other one. If you are interested I encourage you to search for the record of the Stanford case or look for the reporter that was in court that day tweeting. (boston globe maybe?). Her comments were very interesting. I tried to find the comments earlier but couldn't. I don't have access to PACER.
In any event, I was talking about ethics, not legalities. The standard of proof in a criminal case is very high; failing to meet standard that doesn't mean ppl weren't harmed or that Ferguson did nothing wrong.
I don't understand your comment about Ferguson's camp. I'm saying that WF would want the money to go to them instead of Ferguson.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 6, 2020 22:52:34 GMT -5
The other day I parked on the street. I went to the parking meter and put in my credit card. I swear, I tried to pay. I am not a neophyte when it comes to using computers. But apparently I didn't do it correctly and I didn't correctly pay for public parking. I got a ticket.
I'm appealing to the court, but if they decide against me, it's not a big deal.
The law is the law.
|
|
|
Post by turk182 on Feb 7, 2020 6:44:49 GMT -5
The other day I parked on the street. I went to the parking meter and put in my credit card. I swear, I tried to pay. I am not a neophyte when it comes to using computers. But apparently I didn't do it correctly and I didn't correctly pay for public parking. I got a ticket. I'm appealing to the court, but if they decide against me, it's not a big deal. The law is the law. In this scenario, are you Ferguson or Wake?
|
|
|
Post by dgo on Feb 7, 2020 8:25:04 GMT -5
That is similar to my thoughts before I read the Judge's comments on the Stanford case. The student that did not get in --- You would have to find and prove that person is the victim. Impossible for the feds to do. WF received benefit $50,000 plus the student's tuition each year. Arguing that Stanford's reputation was harmed did not hold water for the judge either. The person that gave the money, gave it directly to the Deacon's Club and to Ferguson's Camp so that argument does not really hold up either. Look, I do not have a dog in this fight. I know nothing of Ferguson, his case was just outside the clusters so I read it. I did not know of the USC connection until later. I have only followed the cases because I know (distantly) two of the accused and am morbidly curious what is going to happen to them. If I was one of the accused, I would definitely have wanted Zobel to be my judge vs. the other one. If you are interested I encourage you to search for the record of the Stanford case or look for the reporter that was in court that day tweeting. (boston globe maybe?). Her comments were very interesting. I tried to find the comments earlier but couldn't. I don't have access to PACER.
In any event, I was talking about ethics, not legalities. The standard of proof in a criminal case is very high; failing to meet standard that doesn't mean ppl weren't harmed or that Ferguson did nothing wrong.
I don't understand your comment about Ferguson's camp. I'm saying that WF would want the money to go to them instead of Ferguson.
I know absolutely nothing about the arrangement between WF and Ferguson, but that's not necessarily true. Many colleges specifically allow and encourage coaches to supplement their income from camps. It can be very beneficial to a athletic department's budget to reduce university salary but encourage outside income that is paid by third parties. I strongly suspect that when in-demand coaches are interviewing for jobs, they want to know all about how the camps work and what kind of attendance they have. They just throw their name on it and can make quite a bit of money. Or, it's my understanding that at some schools, camp money helps supplement the salaries of assistant coaches. In short, it wouldn't shock me at all if a college would be perfectly happy to have donor money go to camps because camp money can help reduce the money that the school has to pay to the staff.
|
|
|
Post by gobruins on Feb 7, 2020 16:51:00 GMT -5
The other day I parked on the street. I went to the parking meter and put in my credit card. I swear, I tried to pay. I am not a neophyte when it comes to using computers. But apparently I didn't do it correctly and I didn't correctly pay for public parking. I got a ticket. I'm appealing to the court, but if they decide against me, it's not a big deal. The law is the law. Would you be a little less casual ("the law is the law") if the penalty for that parking ticket was 6 months in jail, instead of a $50 fine?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 7, 2020 17:05:58 GMT -5
The other day I parked on the street. I went to the parking meter and put in my credit card. I swear, I tried to pay. I am not a neophyte when it comes to using computers. But apparently I didn't do it correctly and I didn't correctly pay for public parking. I got a ticket. I'm appealing to the court, but if they decide against me, it's not a big deal. The law is the law. Would you be a little less casual ("the law is the law") if the penalty for that parking ticket was 6 months in jail, instead of a $50 fine? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by winesalot on Feb 10, 2020 12:20:58 GMT -5
Resume of Lori Loughlin’s daughter surfaces in college admissions scandal The document, released by federal prosecutors, doesn’t name which daughter, Olivia Jade or Isabella Giannulli, it refers to, but the high-school graduation date listed for the unnamed girl, 2018, aligns with Olivia Jade. Either way, the resume claims that the then-teen was an award-winning crew athlete — even though neither daughter is believed to have ever participated in the sport. Boasting about gold-medal wins at the San Diego Crew Classic as far back as 2014 and a “skill set” that includes “awareness, organization, direction and steering,” the resume adds that the Loughlin daughter “is highly talented and has been successful in both men’s and women’s boats.” pagesix.com/2020/02/10/heres-the-fake-resume-lori-loughlins-kid-allegedly-used-to-get-into-usc/?_ga=2.186375969.905544678.1581354030-957348612.1581354030I hope all of the athletes who ACTUALLY participated in those competitions see this. Even if it's just on paper, I'd be furious if I worked my butt off to win and someone else claimed my victory as their own.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 14, 2020 16:27:08 GMT -5
The other day I parked on the street. I went to the parking meter and put in my credit card. I swear, I tried to pay. I am not a neophyte when it comes to using computers. But apparently I didn't do it correctly and I didn't correctly pay for public parking. I got a ticket. I'm appealing to the court, but if they decide against me, it's not a big deal. The law is the law. Would you be a little less casual ("the law is the law") if the penalty for that parking ticket was 6 months in jail, instead of a $50 fine? It was a $44 fine, actually. But I just got a letter today that the magistrate dismissed it. Reason: "1st ticket"
|
|
|
Post by ilalum92 on Feb 25, 2020 16:19:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Feb 25, 2020 16:22:50 GMT -5
I don't know anything about rowing but Olivia Jade's rowing credentials look impressive.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 25, 2020 17:01:21 GMT -5
I don't know anything about rowing but Olivia Jade's rowing credentials look impressive. I was kind of admiring that resume. First of all, it says she's a coxswain, which would explain why she's not buff. Then it didn't claim she was on the winning boats in her claimed races, which might have made it easier for people to check up on.
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Feb 25, 2020 17:18:31 GMT -5
The entire "Hot Pocket" family should be sentenced to jail because of the quality of it's product.
|
|
|
Post by azvolleydad on Feb 25, 2020 17:25:03 GMT -5
The entire "Hot Pocket" family should be sentenced to jail because of the quality of it's product. snob
|
|