COLLEGE SCANDAL DEVELOPMENTS - Page 16

shoekitty · ‎03-10-2010

I have family in the business, and Lori Laughlin is mud that town. I mean mud, and laughing stock. They are as angry as many of us are. People form opinions quick, and it sticks! Right or wrong, it happens. That town is pretty brutal. You are either liked or not liked. I Think Lori is clueless In regards to the law, and wants to clear her name. she thinks everything will come back if her name is cleared. She is guilty. she did it. Her one daughter knows she did it. Lori and Mossimo know they did it. They really lost a lot because of their pride. Her ego is very big, not as big as Mossimo's though. Their daughters are so upset. It is said they wanted the parents to fess up and get everything over with. They cant go back and get the same deal.

lori will not get her job back, even if they are found not guilty on a technicality. Maybe in 15 years,, then she will be too old for any part according to Hollywood. If they had pleaded guilty and manned up, things would be swept under in a couple years. What they did was call more attention to themselves, and they made many people furious. There are some who still remember Leona Helmsley for one thing. 🙀

Where they really erred imo, was claiming the bribe a donation. Now she is saying she really thought she was donating! Oh give me break!! Oh what tangled webs we weave, when first we practice to deceive

i don't think a jury would let them go. However, it depends on what they are tried on. I heard her lawyers are working on a technicality. It won't prove she is innocent, but it may get her off with a penalty fine. .but that is hearsay

Johnnyeager · ‎09-05-2014

No one said that Lori is not entitled to a trial. Of course she is.

What some of us think, however is that may be a miscalculated error. But as she appears to be supremely confident of her innocence she thinks its the appropriate course of action.

In retrospect, however, taking a plea with 1.5 years of prison might have been the choice.

We'll see.

corita · ‎08-20-2012

@shoekitty wrote:
@gardenman

Where they really erred imo, was claiming the bribe a donation. Now she is saying she really thought she was donating! Oh give me break!! Oh what tangled webs we weave, when first we practice to deceive
-------------------
Does she really think she was donating? Really. so
unbelievable!! How does she explain the false photos of her daughter on the sports team...rowing team...if I remember correctly??
I hope the jury throws the book at them!!! I can't imagine that it will be easy to find a selection of jurors that have not made up their minds...

stevieb · ‎03-10-2010

Thought she was donating... Does she really expect to convince anybody of that... Yea, right... Whatever... She's not that good of an actress...

In my pantry with my cupcakes...

Johnnyeager · ‎09-05-2014

I missed this last week: The Justice Department has nailed another parent, the first new one since the original wave in March.

Jeffrey Bizzack of Solana Beach was charged with paying $250,000 to have his son's admission to USC facilitated as a false volleyball recruit. He is the 51st person charged in the operation.

On June 28th he pled guilty and the government is recommending a 9 month prison sentence.

It's likely that new information was divulged by former USC coach Laura Janke, who is cooperating in exchange for leniency. Other indictments could be forthcoming the Justice Department has indicated.

Johnnyeager · ‎09-05-2014

The prosecution has filed a motion requesting that Lori and Mossimo have separate attorneys at trial. Currently, the couple have decided to be jointly represented by Latham & Watkins. Prosecution says it puts the defendants at risk of attorneys having divided loyalties.

Federal law gives each defendant the right to effective counsel and their own attorney.

A Rule 44 hearing is now scheduled for August 27th. Several other parental couples with joint representation have had similar hearings. This hearing is routine with joint representation, and the couple will affirm that they are aware of their right to separate counsel.

Lori and Mossimo think a united front will present the best defense. Separate attorneys often work when one party wants to cut a deal and cooperate with the prosecution.

tessam · ‎04-30-2010

While there may be some who disagree, I am a private college admission counselor and I say there is no good that comes from jailing some of these offenders. Hit it them where it hurts Levy an enormous fine to the tune of several million dollars designated to a scholorship fund at the college they scammed and order an ENORMOUS amount of community servce at an agency such as Literacy America and monitor it closely to be sure all is completed on the up and up. If they violate the terms.. then that is dealt with in the court in accordance with terms of violation of order.

A needy student will benefit from scholarship monies and that is a good thing... and a grand slam to the offender's pocketbook combined with sweat equity is an equally good thing... just a thought!

lovesrecess · ‎03-14-2010

I agree they should be fined...but it just reinforces the their idea that writing a big check always takes care of getting you what you want...in this case, no jail. Even now, though, parents are still writing big checks to grease the palms of college administrators or coaches to get their child into college. I have to wonder if any of these kids have enough self- discipline or skills to even pass classes if they do get in,,.or do they pay for the grades also?

Wsmom · ‎03-09-2010

@Johnnyeager wrote:
The prosecution has filed a motion requesting that Lori and Mossimo have separate attorneys at trial. Currently, the couple have decided to be jointly represented by Latham & Watkins. Prosecution says it puts the defendants at risk of attorneys having divided loyalties.

Federal law gives each defendant the right to effective counsel and their own attorney.

A Rule 44 hearing is now scheduled for August 27th. Several other parental couples with joint representation have had similar hearings. This hearing is routine with joint representation, and the couple will affirm that they are aware of their right to separate counsel.

Lori and Mossimo think a united front will present the best defense. Separate attorneys often work when one party wants to cut a deal and cooperate with the prosecution.

I worked in criminal courts for well over 30 years and co-defendants always had their own attorney. Cutting a deal and cooperating had nothing to do with it. United front has nothing to do with it. It almost sounds like these attorneys are just milking them for everything with the worst possible legal advice to keep this going and their (the law firm's) $$$$ going up and up. This way they charge for both clients; if one gets their own atty they lose half. Would explain their insistence on going to trial and not cutting a deal, too.

Johnnyeager · ‎09-05-2014

Don't know where you worked but co defendants (unmarried ) frequently split up so one then rats out the other after cutting a deal with the prosecution. Other couples also have joint representation, not just Lori and Mossimo. It's not unusual or uncommon, so long as a couple wants to work together.