Kate Taylor

Prosecutors have accused Loughlin and Giannulli of paying $500,000 to get their two daughters designated as recruits to the University of Southern California women’s crew team as a way to ensure their admission to the school.

The couple have maintained their innocence, even as Hollywood gossip magazines have reported that Loughlin is increasingly worried about what will happen. In contrast, the other Hollywood actress ensnared in the case, Felicity Huffman, who was accused of paying $15,000 to cheat on her daughter’s SAT, pleaded guilty and has already completed her prison sentence. (Huffman was sentenced to 14 days but served only 12, including the day she was arrested.)

Prosecutors originally charged roughly three dozen parents arrested in the case with one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. After Huffman and roughly a dozen other parents agreed to plead to that count, prosecutors added money laundering charges against the remaining parents, including Loughlin and Giannulli. Then, last week, they added the new charge, of federal programs bribery, which can carry a sentence of up to five years in prison.

Lawyers involved in the case have said prosecutors brought the new charges in part out of frustration with the sentences given out in the case so far, which have ranged from probation to five months in prison, and have all been less than what prosecutors had asked for.

In a statement issued Oct. 22, the U.S. attorney for the District of Massachusetts, Andrew E. Lelling, said the new charges were “the result of ongoing investigation in the nationwide college admissions case.”

“Our goal from the beginning has been to hold the defendants fully accountable for corrupting the college admissions process through cheating, bribery and fraud,” Lelling said.

This article originally appeared in

Lori Loughlin Pleads Not Guilty to New College Admissions Scandal Charge

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, a fashion designer, have pleaded not guilty to new bribery charges prosecutors have brought against them in the college admissions scandal, signaling that they intend, at least for now, to keep fighting the case.

The charge, announced by Rachael Rollins, the Suffolk County district attorney, bore similarities to the case of Michelle Carter, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 2017 for repeatedly urging a close friend in text messages to kill himself.

The former student, Inyoung You, 21, and her boyfriend, Alexander Urtula, 22, were attending Boston College when Urtula leapt to his death from a parking garage in the Boston neighborhood of Roxbury on May 20. Urtula’s family, from New Jersey, was in Boston that day to watch him appear in the graduation ceremony at 10 a.m. He died about 90 minutes before it began.

In a news conference, Rollins said You had been physically, verbally and psychologically abusive to Urtula over the course of an 18-month relationship, with the abuse becoming more intense and demeaning in the days and hours before his death. She said classmates and family members had observed the abuse, which was also documented in Urtula’s journal and in tens of thousands of text messages. Rollins said You urged Urtula hundreds of times to kill himself and repeatedly told him that she, his family and the world would be better off without him. You also used attempts and threats of self-harm to control Urtula, Rollins said.

The New York Times was unable to contact a representative for You on Monday.

Prosecutors said that on the morning of Urtula’s suicide, You was tracking his location on her phone, as she frequently did, and was present on the roof of the garage at the time that he jumped.

“The indictment alleges Ms. You’s behavior was wanton and reckless, and resulted in overwhelming Mr. Urtula’s will to live,” Rollins said, “and that she created life-threatening conditions for him that she had a legal duty to alleviate, which, we allege, she failed to do.”

“Domestic violence may not always look the same,” she added, “but it is always about power and control.”

You, who studied economics and was scheduled to graduate in May 2020, withdrew from classes in August, according to a Boston College spokesman.

She is currently in South Korea, where she is from, Rollins said. Prosecutors said that a grand jury returned an indictment in the case this month and that they were working to secure You’s return to the United States.

“We’re in contact with somebody who is saying that they’re representing her, to see if she will voluntarily return,” Rollins said. “If she does not, we will utilize the power we have to get her back.”

In the two months before Urtula’s death, Rollins said, the couple exchanged more than 75,000 text messages, including more than 47,000 sent by You.

Asked to compare this case with the case of Carter, who was 17 when her friend, Conrad Roy III, killed himself, Rollins said that there were similarities but also significant differences.

Carter had very limited physical contact with Roy, but “we have, quite frankly, I would say, the opposite of that,” she said. “We have a barrage of a complete and utter attack on this man’s very will and conscience and psyche by an individual, to the tune of 47,000 text messages in the two months leading up, and an awareness, we would argue, of his frail state at that point.”

The Massachusetts Legislature is considering a bill called “Conrad’s Law” that would make it a crime punishable by up to five years in prison to encourage or coerce someone into killing himself or herself.

The Boston College spokesman, Jack Dunn, said Urtula was a biology major. He had completed his course work in December 2018 and was working as a researcher in New York at the time of his suicide.

“Alexander was a gifted student at Boston College, who was involved in many activities, including the Philippine Society of Boston College,” Dunn said. “We continue to offer our condolences to Alex’s family.”

If you are having thoughts of suicide, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255 (TALK) or go to SpeakingOfSuicide.com/resources for a list of additional resources.

Former Boston College Student Charged in Boyfriend's Suicide

BOSTON — A former Boston College student has been charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with the suicide of her college boyfriend on his graduation day, prosecutors announced Monday.

In bringing the new charges against Loughlin and the other parents, prosecutors did not make any new allegations of misconduct. Even so, the new charge, conspiracy to commit federal programs bribery, has the potential to lead to longer sentences if any of the parents are convicted.

Loughlin, actress Felicity Huffman and 31 other parents were charged in March in a scheme to cheat on college entrance exams and bribe college coaches. From soon after they were arrested, Huffman and Loughlin’s paths as defendants have diverged.

Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, were accused of paying $500,000 to get their two daughters, Olivia Jade and Isabella Giannulli, designated as recruits to the women’s crew team at the University of Southern California even though they were not qualified, ensuring their admission. USC said in a statement from the registrar Monday that the two were no longer enrolled; the statement declined to give any further information, citing student privacy laws.

Huffman, an Emmy winner for her role on “Desperate Housewives,” was among a group of roughly a dozen parents who pleaded guilty early on, and she was sentenced in September to 14 days in prison. Huffman, who acknowledged paying $15,000 to cheat on her daughter’s SAT, reported to a minimum-security prison outside of San Francisco on Oct. 15 and is scheduled to be released Sunday.

Lawyers involved in the case said that prosecutors were disappointed with the sentences that a judge has given to Huffman and other parents who pleaded guilty and that they brought the new charge in part in the hope of increasing sentences. The sentences have ranged from no prison time to five months in prison and have all been less than what prosecutors have asked for.

Prosecutors had been warning defense lawyers for weeks that they planned to bring the new bribery charge. They had given some parents a deadline of Monday or a few days before to agree to plead guilty if they wanted to avoid having the charge added. Four parents took them up on the offer and pleaded guilty Monday.

Federal programs bribery involves theft from or bribery of an agent of an organization that receives more than $10,000 in federal funds in any one-year period. The parents had previously been charged with money laundering conspiracy and conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and honest services mail and wire fraud.

Lori Loughlin and Other Parents Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Federal prosecutors Tuesday brought new bribery charges against actress Lori Loughlin and 10 other parents who have pleaded not guilty in the college admissions case, signaling an effort to increase the potential consequences for parents who intend to fight the accusations.

Marking an aggressive new posture in the case, prosecutors filed bribery charges against Loughlin and 10 other parents who had pleaded not guilty to earlier fraud and money laundering counts. The prosecutors also brought new fraud charges against several parents and an array of new charges against coaches and others charged in the scheme.

Federal prosecutors declined to comment on the new charges. But lawyers involved in the case said prosecutors were motivated in part by frustration with the sentences already given out in a scandal that has swept up an array of prominent parents accused of paying to cheat on college admissions tests or to bribe college coaches.

After authorities revealed the scandal in March, Huffman and roughly a dozen other parents quickly pleaded guilty. Their sentences, all less than what prosecutors had sought, have ranged from probation to five months in prison. Huffman, who acknowledged paying $15,000 to cheat on her daughter’s SAT, is scheduled to finish her prison camp sentence Sunday.

For weeks, prosecutors warned defense lawyers that they planned to bring new charges and advised defendants to agree to plead guilty if they wanted to avoid being included. With a deadline looming, four parents pleaded guilty Monday.

Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, were accused of paying $500,000 to get their two daughters, Olivia Jade and Isabella Giannulli, designated as recruits to the women’s crew team at the University of Southern California even though they were not qualified, ensuring their admission. USC said in a statement from the registrar Monday that the two were no longer enrolled; it declined to give any further information, citing student privacy laws.

Among new details revealed in court filings Tuesday, prosecutors said that Giannulli had at one point forwarded along to his accountant a $200,000 invoice connected to their older daughter’s admission to USC. Along with the invoice, prosecutors say, Giannulli wrote: “Good news my daughter … is in [U]SC … bad is I had to work the system.”

Hollywood gossip magazines have reported that Loughlin was increasingly worried about the case and regretted her not-guilty plea. A lawyer for Loughlin did not respond to a request for comment.

The parents who have pleaded not guilty in the case had previously been charged with money laundering conspiracy as well as conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and honest services mail and wire fraud. On Tuesday, most of them, including Loughlin, were also charged with conspiracy to commit federal programs bribery, which involves theft from or bribery of an agent of an organization that receives more than $10,000 in federal funds in a one-year period. All of those parents are accused of agreeing to pay bribes to get their children admitted to USC.

The federal programs bribery charge provides for a sentence of up to five years in prison. For any parents who are convicted, that charge would most likely lead to higher advisory sentencing guidelines ranges, potentially determined by how much each parent paid as part of the scheme. This would address a sore spot for the prosecutors, who have argued that the guidelines ranges for the fraud charges that Huffman and others pleaded guilty to should be determined by how much each parent paid — which would have led in some cases to ranges of two or more years in prison. But the judge who has been sentencing them has disagreed.

Still, given that judges regularly depart from sentencing guidelines, it is not clear how the added bribery charges would actually affect parents’ sentences, if any are convicted.

A lawyer for Robert Zangrillo, founder of a Miami-based investment firm, whom prosecutors have accused of paying $250,000 to have his daughter admitted to USC as a crew recruit, issued a statement criticizing the new charges against him. The lawyer, Martin Weinberg, has described Zangrillo as no different from other parents who make a donation to a university in the hopes of getting an advantage for their child in the admissions process.

“Donations that were received and welcomed by universities have never before been characterized as bribes,” Weinberg said. “This attempted and unprecedented expansion of federal bribery laws is unwarranted.”

Prosecutors also brought new fraud charges against Donna Heinel, a former senior associate athletic director at USC, and a handful of coaches and others who had previously been charged with racketeering conspiracy. Prosecutors have accused Heinel of taking bribes in exchange for falsely presenting applicants as athletes, facilitating their admission.

A lawyer for Heinel, Nina Marino, said Tuesday, “The zeal with which this U.S. attorney’s office strives to have long prison sentences hanging over these individuals’ heads is staggering.”

Amid Modest Sentences, Prosecutors Bring New Charges in Admissions Scandal

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — As Felicity Huffman, the actress and parent who pleaded guilty in the sprawling college admissions scandal, neared the end of a two-week prison camp sentence, prosecutors Tuesday pressed new charges against other parents, including actress Lori Loughlin, who have fought the cases against them.

Professor Ronald Sullivan, and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, who is a lecturer at the law school, have been the faculty deans of Winthrop House, one of Harvard’s residential houses for undergraduate students, since 2009. They were the first African-American faculty deans in Harvard’s history.

But when Sullivan joined the defense team of Weinstein, the Hollywood producer, in January, many students expressed dismay, saying his decision to represent a person accused of abusing women disqualified Sullivan from serving in a role of support and mentorship to students. Weinstein is scheduled to go to trial in June in New York on rape and related charges.

On Saturday, Harvard College’s dean, Rakesh Khurana, emailed students and staff members at Winthrop House, informing them that he would not renew the appointments of Sullivan and Robinson as faculty deans after their terms end June 30. Khurana said in his email that the decision was informed “by a number of considerations.”

In a statement, Sullivan and Robinson said, “We are surprised and dismayed by the action Harvard announced today. We believed the discussions we were having with high-level university representatives were progressing in a positive manner, but Harvard unilaterally ended those talks.”

The decision not to renew Sullivan and Robinson’s appointments as faculty deans does not affect their positions at the law school, where Sullivan is a law professor and director of the Criminal Justice Institute.

A number of Sullivan’s colleagues came to his defense; 52 law school professors signed a letter supporting him, saying that his commitment to representing unpopular clients was consistent with his roles as law professor and faculty dean, and that Harvard should not pressure him to resign.

Danu Mudannayake, a junior who took a leading role in organizing the protests, said Saturday afternoon that she had not expected the college to act so definitively or so quickly.

“My honest reaction is just completely gobsmacked, but in the best way,” she said. “I’m very proud today of our college and our college’s administration for finally choosing to do the right thing.”

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/11/us/ronald-sullivan-harvard.html" id="02694687-0e84-3315-a16d-991e1354de0d">The New York Times</a>.

Harvard's First Black Faculty Deans Let Go Amid Uproar Over Harvey Weinstein Defense

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Harvard said Saturday that a law professor who is representing Harvey Weinstein would not continue as faculty dean of an undergraduate house after his term ends June 30, bowing to months of pressure from students.

The professor, Ronald Sullivan, and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, who is a lecturer at the law school, have been the faculty deans of Winthrop House, one of Harvard’s residential houses for undergraduate students, since 2009. They were the first African-American faculty deans in Harvard’s history.

But when Sullivan joined the defense team of Weinstein, the Hollywood producer, in January, many students expressed dismay, saying that his decision to represent a person accused of abusing women disqualified Sullivan from serving in a role of support and mentorship to students. Weinstein is scheduled to go to trial in June in New York on rape and related charges.

As the protests continued, with graffiti aimed at Sullivan appearing on a university building, Harvard administrators said they would conduct what they called a climate review of Winthrop House. In recent weeks, tensions have escalated, with a student sit-in and a lawsuit sparked by a clash between one of the protest leaders and two Winthrop House staff members who were seen as supporting Sullivan.

On Saturday, the dean of Harvard College, Rakesh Khurana, sent an email to students and staff members at Winthrop House, informing them that he would not renew the appointments of Sullivan and Robinson as faculty deans after their terms end June 30. Khurana said in his email that the decision was informed “by a number of considerations.”

“Over the last few weeks, students and staff have continued to communicate concerns about the climate in Winthrop House to the college,” he wrote. “The concerns expressed have been serious and numerous. The actions that have been taken to improve the climate have been ineffective, and the noticeable lack of faculty dean presence during critical moments has further deteriorated the climate in the house. I have concluded that the situation in the house is untenable.”

“We will now take some time to process Harvard’s actions and consider our options,” their statement continued. “We are sorry that Harvard’s actions and the controversy surrounding us has contributed to the stress on Winthrop students at this already stressful time.”

The decision not to renew the appointments of Sullivan and Robinson as faculty deans does not affect their positions at the law school, where Sullivan is the Jesse Climenko Clinical Professor of Law and the director of the Criminal Justice Institute.

The controversy around Sullivan’s representation of Weinstein highlighted a conflict between the legal principle that every accused person deserves a vigorous defense and students’ demands that college officials show support for victims of sexual assault. “Whose side are you on?” demanded one of the spray-painted messages directed at Sullivan earlier this year.

But a number of Sullivan’s colleagues came to his defense; 52 professors at the law school signed a letter supporting him, saying that his commitment to representing unpopular clients was fully consistent with his roles as law professor and faculty dean, and that Harvard should not pressure him to resign.

At the same time, the dispute took on a racial element, with some saying that Sullivan was being treated unfairly. In a statement in late March, the Harvard Black Law Students Association criticized the decision by the university to conduct a climate review and expressed concern about “the racist undertones evidenced by the disproportionate response to this issue by the university.”

Sullivan himself suggested that race was playing a role in the handling of the controversy.

“It is not lost on me that I’m the first African-American to hold this position,” he told The Times this year. “Never in the history of the faculty dean position has the dean been subjected to a ‘climate review’ in the middle of some controversy.”

Harvard students live, eat and socialize in the college’s 12 undergraduate houses. The job of the faculty deans is to support students academically and personally, and to set the tone for the house’s social activities.

As the review of Winthrop House progressed, other issues surfaced, with some current and former staff members telling The Harvard Crimson that they had experienced “a workplace climate of hostility and suspicion” under Sullivan and Robinson.

Sullivan has represented other controversial clients, including Aaron Hernandez, the former New England Patriots player, when he was tried for double murder, and the family of Usaamah Rahim, a man, shot by Boston police, who had been accused of being a terrorist.

Sullivan also represented the family of Michael Brown, a man killed by police in Missouri, in bringing a wrongful-death suit against the city of Ferguson; the family ultimately received a reported $1.5 million settlement.

He has specialized in overturning wrongful convictions. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, he led an effort to change the system that provided legal defense for the indigent in New Orleans; the effort resulted in the release of thousands of wrongfully incarcerated inmates. In 2014, Brooklyn, New York, District Attorney Kenneth Thompson asked Sullivan to design and implement a conviction review unit to identify and exonerate wrongfully convicted people. It became a national model.

In his email to Winthrop House, Khurana praised the commitment of Sullivan and Robinson to justice and civic engagement. “This is a regrettable situation and a very hard decision to make,” he wrote.

He said that he and two other Harvard deans would visit Winthrop House on Saturday afternoon to answer students’ questions. Mudannayake said Saturday that she was in the dining hall with the deans, and the mood was “very happy.”

“They’re all there and addressing concerns, questions, even just people who want to say thank you to them,” she said. “I think that’s added to the kind of celebratory atmosphere.”

The prosecutors’ recommendation for prison time in the case of Huffman, among the best-known of 33 parents charged in what the Justice Department has said is its largest-ever college admissions prosecution, offers insight into a question that has lingered over the case: Will some of the wealthy and well-connected parents implicated in the scandal end up serving time?

Huffman said last week that she intended to plead guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. In a plea agreement, prosecutors said that Huffman’s crime corresponded to a federal sentencing guideline of four to 10 months in prison and that they would recommend a sentence at the low end of that range, along with a fine of $20,000 and 12 months of supervised release.

The federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, and judges may impose sentences that are either heavier or lighter than the advised range. The plea agreement also notes that Huffman “reserves the right to argue” that her crime actually corresponds to a lower guideline — of zero to six months of incarceration.

According to the charges, Huffman paid $15,000 to William Singer, a consultant at the center of the case, so that a proctor would correct some of her daughter’s answers on the SAT after the girl had finished the test and left. Singer has pleaded guilty to racketeering and other charges. Huffman’s daughter, who was apparently unaware of her mother’s plan and to whom Huffman has publicly apologized, is still in high school.

Twelve other parents charged in the case have said that they will plead guilty. Prosecutors are arguing for longer sentences than the one proposed for Huffman in the cases of several of the other parents, because they are accused of paying more money as part of the scheme.

In the case of Bruce Isackson, who has agreed to plead guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud and money laundering and to defraud the United States, prosecutors have said they will recommend a sentence at the low end of a guidelines range of 37-46 months. Prosecutors accused Isackson and his wife, Davina, of paying Singer a total of $600,000 to facilitate cheating on the ACT for one daughter and to get two daughters admitted to the University of California at Los Angeles and the University of Southern California as athletic recruits.

More than a dozen other parents, including actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, designer Mossimo Giannulli, have pleaded not guilty.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Boston charged 50 people in the case, including college coaches and administrators of the SAT and the ACT.

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/us/felicity-huffman-sentence.html" id="96eb4f87-7a65-359a-a249-035f0d4983ff">The New York Times</a>.

Prosecutors plan to argue that Hollywood actress Felicity Huffman should get a prison sentence between four and 10 months for paying a college consultant to arrange for cheating on her daughter’s SAT, court documents show. The prosecutors plan to push for the low end of that range.

Felicity Huffman Should Get Prison Time in Admissions Scandal, Prosecutors Say

According to the charges, Huffman paid $15,000 to William Singer, a consultant at the center of the case, so that a proctor would correct some of her daughter’s answers on the SAT after the girl had finished the test and left. Singer has pleaded guilty to racketeering and other charges.

Twelve other parents charged in the case have said that they will plead guilty. Prosecutors are arguing for longer sentences than the one proposed for Huffman in several of the cases, because the parents are accused of paying more money as part of the scheme.

Prosecutors plan to argue that Hollywood actress Felicity Huffman should get a prison sentence of between four and 10 months for paying a college consultant to arrange for cheating on her daughter’s SAT, court documents show. The prosecutors plan to push for the low end of that range.

Prosecutors said Monday that 13 of the 33 parents charged in the case, including actress Felicity Huffman, would plead guilty. In all but one case, those parents will plead guilty to a single count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest service mail fraud.

On Tuesday, the prosecutors indicted most of the other parents on the fraud charge but also on an added charge of money laundering conspiracy.

Loughlin and her husband, designer Mossimo Giannulli, are accused of conspiring with a college consultant, William Singer, to pay $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters admitted to the University of Southern California as recruits to the women’s crew team, even though neither of the girls actually participated in the sport. Loughlin, best known for her role as Aunt Becky on the television show “Full House,” has already suffered some professional consequences of the charges. The Hallmark Channel said that it would stop development of shows that feature her.

Her daughters, both current students at USC, have also faced repercussions, as USC has placed an academic hold on students tied to the scandal, preventing them from registering for classes.

Most of the parents in the case, including Loughlin and Giannulli, were originally charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. Prosecutors had a limited period of time in which to formally indict them or the complaint would be dismissed.

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/09/us/lori-loughlin-indicted.html" id="0c9eff14-c81e-392a-a37f-c8dfbbf30b24">The New York Times</a>.

Loughlin and 15 Others Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Federal prosecutors brought new money laundering charges against Hollywood actress Lori Loughlin and 15 other parents in the college admissions case Tuesday, raising the legal stakes for parents who have not said they would plead guilty in the case.

Loughlin and her husband are accused of conspiring with a college consultant, Wiliam Singer, to pay $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters admitted to the University of Southern California as recruits to the women’s crew team, even though neither of the girls actually participated in the sport. Loughlin, best known for her role as Aunt Becky on the television show “Full House,” has already suffered some professional consequences of the charges. The Hallmark Channel said that it would stop development of shows that feature her.

Thirteen of the 33 parents originally charged in the case have agreed to plead guilty, and it was expected that prosecutors would move soon to indict most of the other parents in the case. It was also expected that, in indicting them, they would add an additional charge, of money laundering conspiracy.

Federal prosecutors indicted Hollywood actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, designer Mossimo Giannulli, along with 14 other parents on mail fraud and money laundering charges Tuesday, the latest development in the sweeping college admissions fraud investigation.

Loughlin Faces New Charge in College Admissions Scandal

“I am ashamed,” Huffman said, announcing that she will plead guilty to a federal crime, part of a sweeping investigation of college admissions fraud unveiled last month by prosecutors in Boston.

In the statement issued by Huffman, she said she wanted to apologize to her family, friends and colleagues, and especially, she said, “to the students who work hard every day to get into college, and to their parents who make tremendous sacrifices to support their children and do so honestly.”

Huffman was one of 50 people charged in a sweeping investigation of college admissions fraud unveiled last month by federal prosecutors in Boston. On Monday, prosecutors said that 14 people — 13 parents and one coach — would plead guilty in the case. Dates for the formal pleas in court had yet to be set.

Huffman said that her daughter had been unaware of the cheating — prosecutors say a proctor corrected her test answers after she had left. And Huffman acknowledged that, in an attempt to assist her daughter, she had ultimately hurt and betrayed her.

“This transgression toward her and the public I will carry for the rest of my life,” she said. “My desire to help my daughter is no excuse to break the law or engage in dishonesty.”

The case prosecutors have laid out centers on a college consultant, William Singer, whom Huffman and the other parents hired to guide them through the application process. According to prosecutors, Singer specialized in boosting students’ chances through fraud: He bribed test administrators to allow cheating on college entrance exams and bribed college coaches to designate his clients’ children as recruits to teams for which they were not actually qualified. Singer cooperated with prosecutors and has pleaded guilty to racketeering and other charges.

A total of 33 parents were charged in the case. Some have made clear they will fight the charges, while others may still be debating what to do. Huffman is the highest-profile parent to admit wrongdoing in the case so far.

Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, were also charged and were not among those who prosecutors said Monday would plead guilty. The government has said that the couple conspired with Singer to pay $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters admitted to the University of Southern California as recruits to the women’s crew team, even though neither actually rowed crew. Loughlin has lost some professional opportunities as a result of the charges — most notably, the Hallmark Channel said that it would stop development of shows that feature her.

It is not clear what effect Huffman’s acknowledgment of guilt will have on her career. She has roles in several coming movies and television series, including playing prosecutor Linda Fairstein in the miniseries “When They See Us” about the so-called Central Park Five, five black and Hispanic teenagers who were wrongfully convicted of beating and raping a female jogger in Central Park in 1989.

Prosecutors said that Huffman and most of the other parents would plead guilty to a single count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. The charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, but it is unclear how much time, if any, Huffman and the other parents will receive.

Their sentences may be affected in part by how much money each is alleged to have paid to Singer and others as part of the scheme. Huffman’s payment of $15,000 was among the smallest, according to court documents. Huffman’s and the 12 other parents’ sentences are also likely to be lighter as a result of their pleading guilty and not making the government go to trial.

In addition to the parents, prosecutors said Monday that one of several coaches charged in the case, Michael Center, former head coach of men’s tennis at the University of Texas at Austin, would also plead guilty to the same crime. Prosecutors said that Singer paid Center $60,000 in cash and directed $40,000 to the University of Texas tennis program in exchange for Center designating the son of one of Singer’s clients as a recruit for the tennis team, even though he was not a competitive tennis player and did not ultimately play on the team.

Bruce and Davina Isackson of Hillsborough, California, have also agreed to cooperate, prosecutors said. The Isacksons were accused of paying Singer $600,000 to bribe athletics officials in order to secure their two daughters’ admission to University of California, Los Angeles and USC as athletic recruits, and to cheat on their younger daughter’s ACT.

According to the criminal complaint against Huffman, her husband, William H. Macy, was also involved in the $15,000 payment to Singer. For reasons that are unclear, Macy was not charged.

The number of students who have been punished as a result of the investigation is also growing. Last week, Stanford announced that it had expelled a student who had falsely claimed in her application to be a competitive sailor and had vacated the credits that she had already accumulated. The student’s name has not been made public. Former Stanford sailing coach John Vandemoer has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit racketeering and has acknowledged accepting donations to his sailing program from Singer in exchange for agreeing to use recruiting slots for Singer’s clients.

The student whom Stanford expelled, the daughter of a client of Singer’s, was not recruited as a sailor, but after she was admitted, Singer directed $500,000 to Stanford’s sailing program.

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/08/us/felicity-huffman-college-admissions-scandal.html" id="27e80325-4a62-37a7-a3bf-8234af381456">The New York Times</a>.

'I Am Ashamed': 14 Plead Guilty in Admissions Scandal

Felicity Huffman, the Hollywood actress, on Monday laid out a list of failings: Yes, she had paid a college counselor $15,000 to arrange for cheating on her daughter’s SAT test. And yes, it had backfired miserably, turning what Huffman said had been an effort to help her daughter into a betrayal of her.

According to prosecutors, Huffman paid William Singer, the college consultant at the center of the case, $15,000 to cheat on her older daughter’s SAT.

“My daughter knew absolutely nothing about my actions, and in my misguided and profoundly wrong way, I have betrayed her,” Huffman said in a statement. “This transgression toward her and the public I will carry for the rest of my life.”

A total of 33 parents were charged as part of the investigation. One of two Hollywood actresses who were charged, Huffman is the highest-profile parent to admit wrongdoing

Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, were also charged in the case and have not yet indicated whether they will plead guilty or fight the charges. The government has said that the couple conspired with Singer to pay $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters admitted to the University of Southern California as recruits to the women’s crew team, even though neither actually rowed crew. Loughlin has lost some professional opportunities as a result of the charges — most notably, the Hallmark Channel said that it would stop development of shows that feature her.

It was not clear what effect Huffman’s acknowledgment of guilt would have on her career. She has roles in several coming movies and television series, including playing prosecutor Linda Fairstein in the miniseries “When They See Us” about the so-called Central Park Five, five black and Hispanic teenagers who were wrongfully convicted of raping a woman in Central Park in 1989.

Huffman was charged in a criminal complaint with one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. The charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, but it was unclear how much, if any, time Huffman would receive. Sentences in the college admissions case may be affected in part by how much money each parent is alleged to have paid to Singer and others as part of the scheme. Huffman’s payment of $15,000 was among the smallest, according to court documents.

The Justice Department charged 50 people in the case, its largest college admissions prosecution. Those charged included parents, coaches and test administrators for the SAT and ACT. Prosecutors have said that Singer bribed the test administrators to allow cheating on the college entrance exams and bribed the coaches to designate his clients’ children as recruits to teams for which they were not actually qualified. Singer cooperated with prosecutors and has pleaded guilty to racketeering and other charges.

Among the other parents who had said in recent days that they would plead guilty is Gordon Caplan, a lawyer from Greenwich, Connecticut. His former firm, Willkie Farr &amp; Gallagher, which had placed him on leave, said that in light of his acknowledgment of guilt, he was no longer employed there. On Monday, two other parents, Bruce and Davina Isackson of Hillsborough, California, issued a statement expressing regret and saying that they were cooperating with prosecutors. Davina Isackson’s lawyer, David Willingham, said they both intended to plead guilty.

“No words can express how profoundly sorry we are for what we have done,” the Isacksons said in a statement. “Our duty as parents was to set a good example for our children, and instead we have harmed and embarrassed them by our misguided decisions.”

Huffman to Plead Guilty in College Admissions Scandal

Actress Felicity Huffman will plead guilty in the college admissions fraud scandal, prosecutors said Monday, along with 12 other parents and one coach charged in the sweeping investigation.

“My daughter knew absolutely nothing about my actions, and in my misguided and profoundly wrong way, I have betrayed her,” Huffman said in a statement.

A total of 33 parents were charged as part of the investigation.

Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, were also charged in the case and have not yet indicated whether they will plead guilty or fight the charges. The government has said the couple conspired with Singer to pay $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters admitted to the University of Southern California.

It was not clear what effect Huffman’s acknowledgment of guilt would have on her career. She has roles in several coming movies and television series, including playing prosecutor Linda Fairstein in the miniseries “When They See Us” about the so-called Central Park Five.

Huffman was charged in a criminal complaint with one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. The charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, but it was unclear how much, if any, time Huffman would receive. Sentences in the college admissions case may be affected in part by how much money each parent is alleged to have paid as part of the scheme. Huffman’s payment of $15,000 was among the smallest, according to court documents.

The Justice Department charged 50 people in the case Prosecutors have said Singer bribed the test administrators to allow cheating on the college entrance exams and bribed the coaches to designate his clients’ children as recruits to teams for which they were not actually qualified.

Actress Felicity Huffman will plead guilty in the college admissions fraud scandal, prosecutors said Monday, along with 12 other parents and one coach charged in the investigation.

According to prosecutors, Huffman and her husband, William H. Macy, paid William Singer, the college consultant at the center of the case, $15,000 to cheat on her older daughter’s SAT. Macy has not been charged.

Prosecutors said Monday that 12 other parents and one coach had also agreed to plead guilty in the case.

Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, were also charged in the case and have not yet indicated whether they will plead guilty or fight the charges. The government has said the couple conspired with Singer to pay $500,000 in bribes to get their daughters admitted to the University of Southern California as recruits to the women’s crew team, even though neither actually rowed crew.

The Justice Department charged 50 people in the case. Those charged included parents, coaches and test administrators for the SAT and ACT. Prosecutors have said Singer bribed the test administrators to allow cheating on the college entrance exams and bribed the coaches to designate his clients’ children as recruits to teams for which they were not actually qualified.

On Monday, two other parents, Bruce and Davina Isackson of Hillsborough, California, issued a statement expressing regret and saying they were cooperating with prosecutors. Davina Isackson’s lawyer said they both intended to plead guilty.

Actress Felicity Huffman will plead guilty in the college admissions fraud scandal, prosecutors said Monday, becoming the most widely known figure to admit wrongdoing in the investigation.

Prosecutors said Monday that 12 other parents and one coach had also agreed to plead guilty in the case. Several of those parents had said in recent days that they planned to plead guilty, but Huffman, one of two Hollywood actresses accused in the case that brought charges against 33 parents, is the highest-profile parent to do so.

Among the other parents who had said in recent days that they would plead guilty is Gordon Caplan, a lawyer from Greenwich, Connecticut. His former firm, Willkie Farr &amp; Gallagher, which had placed him on leave, said that in light of his acknowledgment of guilt, he was no longer employed there. On Monday, two other parents, Bruce and Davina Isackson of Hillsborough, California, issued a statement expressing regret and saying that they were cooperating with prosecutors. Isackson’s lawyer, David Willingham, said they both intended to plead guilty.

Actress Felicity Huffman will plead guilty in the college admissions fraud scandal, prosecutors said Monday, becoming the most widely known figure to admit wrongdoing in the sweeping investigation.

In a coup for prosecutors and possible bad news for other defendants in the sweeping college admissions fraud investigation, one of the parents charged in the case, Davina Isackson of Hillsborough, California, has agreed to plead guilty and to cooperate with the government, according to a person with knowledge of the case.

Two other parents have said so far that they intend to plead guilty, and more will probably follow in the coming days. But Isackson’s agreement to cooperate is significant. Isackson and her husband, Bruce, a real estate developer, were accused of conspiring with William Singer, the college consultant at the center of the case, to bribe athletics officials to secure their daughters’ admission to the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Southern California as athletic recruits.

Prosecutors also accused them of paying Singer so that a proctor could correct their younger daughter’s answers on her ACT exam. The prosecutors have said that the Isacksons paid Singer a total of $600,000.

Singer has pleaded guilty to racketeering and other charges.

The agreement to cooperate means that Isackson will share what she knows about the roles that officials at UCLA and USC played in the scheme and, if their cases go to trial, could testify against them. It also puts pressure on other parents charged in the recruitment scheme. If Isackson testifies that she believes her actions were wrong, it makes it harder for others to say that they thought that they were simply making innocent donations.

One unusual aspect of the Isacksons’ case is that, according to the charging documents, their older daughter, Lauren, who was admitted to UCLA as a soccer recruit despite not being a top player, was required to participate on the team as a student-athlete for a year. She is listed on the 2017 roster as a midfielder. Most students involved in the case did not actually play on the teams they had been recruited for.

Prosecutors say that, after Lauren Isackson was provisionally admitted to UCLA, Singer directed $100,000 to a sports marketing company controlled by Jorge Salcedo, the former head men’s soccer coach at UCLA. The government has charged Salcedo with conspiracy to commit racketeering and he has pleaded not guilty.

Davina Isackson could shed light on whether the coaches of the women’s soccer team were also in on the scheme. Amanda Cromwell, head coach of women’s soccer at UCLA since 2013, did not respond to messages.

Both Davina and Bruce Isackson will plead guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud, according to the person with knowledge of the case. Isackson will also plead guilty to money laundering conspiracy and conspiracy to defraud the United States.

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/08/us/college-admissions-scandal-plea-ucla.html" id="95497a96-3af8-30d5-a2b4-3fabfa24e43b">The New York Times</a>.

(California Today)

More Trouble for USC and UCLA in the College Admissions Scandal

The inquiry into the coach, Peter Brand, comes as universities around the country are scrambling to respond to a sweeping investigation of college admissions fraud, which has raised questions about athletic recruitment and whether coaches have enriched themselves by essentially selling recruiting slots.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Boston has charged 50 people in the case, including eight coaches and 33 parents, among them Hollywood celebrities and prominent business people.

Harvard has so far not been tied to the scandal in court documents. A university official said in an email to students and faculty members Thursday that she did not believe the circumstances surrounding Brand, first reported by The Boston Globe, were connected to that case.

In 2016, Brand sold his house in Needham, a suburb of Boston, to Jie Zhao, whom The Globe described as a wealthy Maryland businessman. At the time, Zhao’s older son was a student at Harvard and on the fencing team, and his younger son was still in high school. Zhao paid $989,500, some $400,000 more than the assessed value at the time, which was $549,300.

“Place is vintage 1960s in bad shape,” the town’s assessor wrote when he inspected the house after the sale. “Makes no sense.”

At around the same time, Brand and his wife, Jacqueline Phillips, bought a condominium in Cambridge for $1.3 million, well above the $989,000 asking price.

Soon after, Zhao’s younger son, Edward, was admitted to Harvard, where he is currently a sophomore and at least until recently was on the fencing team, according to a profile that was recently deleted from the website for Harvard’s sports teams. He is no longer listed as a member of the team.

Zhao sold the house in Needham in October 2017, for $665,000, a significant loss.

Brand, Zhao, and Zhao’s sons did not respond to messages.

A spokeswoman for Harvard, Rachael Dane, said that the university was unaware of the circumstances surrounding the sale until asked about it by The Globe, and that it was now conducting an independent review.

“We are committed to ensuring the integrity of our recruitment practices,” she said.

Dane would not confirm whether Zhao’s younger son was in fact recruited by Brand, although the brothers were referred to as student-athletes in the email sent to students and faculty members Thursday.

In the email, Claudine Gay, the dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, wrote that Harvard’s athletic recruitment practices were different from those of some other schools. The applications of student recruits are reviewed by the full admissions committee, which has roughly 40 members, and admissions decisions are made by a vote of the whole committee. Also, she said, all recruited athletes had to be interviewed by an admissions officer or alumni interviewer.

At this stage of the investigation into Brand, she said, there was a lot the university did not know yet.

“Regardless of what we eventually learn about these allegations, this is not a time for complacency,” she wrote. “Where there are opportunities to clarify practices and strengthen procedures, we must act on them, and do so with a sense of urgency.”

The university’s admissions practices have been under scrutiny for months. A lawsuit charging Harvard with discriminating against Asian-American applicants went to trial in October. In the process of defending itself, Harvard was forced to reveal many admissions secrets, including the advantages given to students whose parents went to Harvard, relatives of donors and recruited athletes. Documents showed that in recent years the admission rate of recruited athletes was 86 percent. A judge has not yet ruled in the lawsuit.

The Globe also reported on another set of peculiar transactions involving Brand, Zhao, and a nonprofit organization called the National Fencing Foundation of Washington D.C.

In 2013, Zhao made a $1 million gift to the fencing foundation, according to Timothy Miller, who was the organization’s treasurer at the time. The next year — the same year that Zhao’s older son, Eric, enrolled at Harvard — the fencing foundation made a $100,000 grant to a private foundation set up by Brand and his wife, tax documents show. The grant was one of only two that Brand’s foundation received before it dissolved two years later.

The fencing foundation’s president, Alexandre Ryjik, did not respond to messages.

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/05/us/harvard-coach-admissions.html" id="22a567ef-fd8e-3689-a78e-f642e674eb7c">The New York Times</a>.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Harvard is investigating its longtime fencing coach after learning that he sold his house for a vastly inflated price to the father of a current student, shortly before the student was admitted.

Kate Taylor

Articles written by the author

Lori Loughlin Pleads Not Guilty to New College Admissions Scandal Charge

Former Boston College Student Charged in Boyfriend's Suicide

Lori Loughlin and Other Parents Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Amid Modest Sentences, Prosecutors Bring New Charges in Admissions Scandal

Harvard's First Black Faculty Deans Let Go Amid Uproar Over Harvey Weinstein Defense

Harvard's First Black Faculty Deans Let Go Amid Uproar Over Harvey Weinstein Defense

Felicity Huffman Should Get Prison Time in Admissions Scandal, Prosecutors Say

Felicity Huffman Should Get Prison Time in Admissions Scandal, Prosecutors Say

Loughlin and 15 Others Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Loughlin and 15 Others Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Loughlin and 15 Others Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Loughlin and 15 Others Face New Charges in College Admissions Scandal

Loughlin Faces New Charge in College Admissions Scandal

'I Am Ashamed': 14 Plead Guilty in Admissions Scandal

Huffman to Plead Guilty in College Admissions Scandal

Huffman to Plead Guilty in College Admissions Scandal

Huffman to Plead Guilty in College Admissions Scandal

Huffman to Plead Guilty in College Admissions Scandal

More Trouble for USC and UCLA in the College Admissions Scandal

Harvard Is Investigating Fencing Coach for Sale of Home to Prospective Student's Father