[BostonCard]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

[BostonCard]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

[burger]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/sport...andal.html

This article has a deep dive into what happened with the sailing program.  As a bonus, there's an implication that Turley was involved with the admissions scandal (or at least that's how I read it--they don't provide any new details).

[burger]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/sport...andal.html

This article has a deep dive into what happened with the sailing program.  As a bonus, there's an implication that Turley was involved with the admissions scandal (or at least that's how I read it--they don't provide any new details).

[martyup]

Ah, maybe the mystery surrounding Turley's departure is unraveling.

[martyup]

Ah, maybe the mystery surrounding Turley's departure is unraveling.

[stupac2]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

[stupac2]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

[fullmetal]

The NYT article is short on facts and long on pointing and hand-waving.  Only Stanford (or the coaches involved) can really shed light on the situation, and everyone seems to have a reason to keep mum (non-disparagement? reputation?).  I would not assume Turley's situation is at all related.  In fact, despite the article headline, I don't see Vandemoer's and Amerkhanian's situations as related at all either despite the ties of being in the same boathouse.

[fullmetal]

The NYT article is short on facts and long on pointing and hand-waving.  Only Stanford (or the coaches involved) can really shed light on the situation, and everyone seems to have a reason to keep mum (non-disparagement? reputation?).  I would not assume Turley's situation is at all related.  In fact, despite the article headline, I don't see Vandemoer's and Amerkhanian's situations as related at all either despite the ties of being in the same boathouse.

[BostonCard]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

As I drink a diet coke, I would not interpret "can lead to synaptic changes in the brain" as "caffeine causes brain damage".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251842

The data suggest that age is an important factor in both caffeine and taurine toxicity. Although the aged or diseased brain might benefit from taurine or caffeine supplementation, it appears that adolescents are not likely to benefit from supplementation and may, in fact, suffer ill effects from chronic ingestion of high doses.

Thankfully, my brain is aged and probably diseased.

BC

[BostonCard]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

As I drink a diet coke, I would not interpret "can lead to synaptic changes in the brain" as "caffeine causes brain damage".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251842

The data suggest that age is an important factor in both caffeine and taurine toxicity. Although the aged or diseased brain might benefit from taurine or caffeine supplementation, it appears that adolescents are not likely to benefit from supplementation and may, in fact, suffer ill effects from chronic ingestion of high doses.

Thankfully, my brain is aged and probably diseased.

BC

[Mick]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

As I drink a diet coke, I would not interpret "can lead to synaptic changes in the brain" as "caffeine causes brain damage".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251842

The data suggest that age is an important factor in both caffeine and taurine toxicity. Although the aged or diseased brain might benefit from taurine or caffeine supplementation, it appears that adolescents are not likely to benefit from supplementation and may, in fact, suffer ill effects from chronic ingestion of high doses.

Thankfully, my brain is aged and probably diseased.

BC

From personal experience, I would say that caffeine enhances synaptic activity, particularly before 9 a.m....

[Mick]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

As I drink a diet coke, I would not interpret "can lead to synaptic changes in the brain" as "caffeine causes brain damage".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251842

The data suggest that age is an important factor in both caffeine and taurine toxicity. Although the aged or diseased brain might benefit from taurine or caffeine supplementation, it appears that adolescents are not likely to benefit from supplementation and may, in fact, suffer ill effects from chronic ingestion of high doses.

Thankfully, my brain is aged and probably diseased.

BC

From personal experience, I would say that caffeine enhances synaptic activity, particularly before 9 a.m....

[CornFed]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

As I drink a diet coke, I would not interpret "can lead to synaptic changes in the brain" as "caffeine causes brain damage".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251842

The data suggest that age is an important factor in both caffeine and taurine toxicity. Although the aged or diseased brain might benefit from taurine or caffeine supplementation, it appears that adolescents are not likely to benefit from supplementation and may, in fact, suffer ill effects from chronic ingestion of high doses.

Thankfully, my brain is aged and probably diseased.

BC

From personal experience, I would say that caffeine enhances synaptic activity, particularly before 9 a.m....

Yes.  I would suggest that the picture posted by martyup above is a fair representation of my brain without coffee.

[CornFed]

I think that is taking an ad campaign too literally.

Saying "smoking causes lung cancer" is not wrong just because there are smokers who don't develop lung cancer.  In fact, just like most drug users are mentally healthy, most smokers don't go on to develop lung cancer.  And yet, smoking causes microscopic cellular changes and DNA mutations in pretty much all cigarette users, and most substance use, even a substance as benign as caffeine, can lead to synaptic changes in the brain.

BC

Well if you want to argue that caffeine causes brain damage, I won't put up a fight.

As I drink a diet coke, I would not interpret "can lead to synaptic changes in the brain" as "caffeine causes brain damage".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251842

The data suggest that age is an important factor in both caffeine and taurine toxicity. Although the aged or diseased brain might benefit from taurine or caffeine supplementation, it appears that adolescents are not likely to benefit from supplementation and may, in fact, suffer ill effects from chronic ingestion of high doses.

Thankfully, my brain is aged and probably diseased.

BC

From personal experience, I would say that caffeine enhances synaptic activity, particularly before 9 a.m....

Yes.  I would suggest that the picture posted by martyup above is a fair representation of my brain without coffee.

[82lsju]

"Five years before William “Rick” Singer became known as the mastermind of the nationwide college admissions scandal, an internal investigation at UCLA uncovered key elements of his scam.

The first indication of trouble came in a phone call to the school on May 13, 2014. The mother of a high school student wanted to appeal the university’s decision to reject her daughter’s admission as a water polo recruit. The daughter had never played the sport.

“During this conversation,” a report on the investigation said, “the mother stated she was ‘still willing to pay.’ When asked to what she was referring, [the mother] explained that she understood from [Singer] that she was expected to donate $100K to the program, for the admission of her daughter through athletics.”"

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...hotline-nl

---

Actress Felicity Huffman has been sentenced to 14 days in prison.

Huffman also received a $30,000 fine, 250 hours of community service and one year supervised release, federal Judge Indira Talwani said today in Boston.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/felicit...index.html

[82lsju]

"Five years before William “Rick” Singer became known as the mastermind of the nationwide college admissions scandal, an internal investigation at UCLA uncovered key elements of his scam.

The first indication of trouble came in a phone call to the school on May 13, 2014. The mother of a high school student wanted to appeal the university’s decision to reject her daughter’s admission as a water polo recruit. The daughter had never played the sport.

“During this conversation,” a report on the investigation said, “the mother stated she was ‘still willing to pay.’ When asked to what she was referring, [the mother] explained that she understood from [Singer] that she was expected to donate $100K to the program, for the admission of her daughter through athletics.”"

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...hotline-nl

---

Actress Felicity Huffman has been sentenced to 14 days in prison.

Huffman also received a $30,000 fine, 250 hours of community service and one year supervised release, federal Judge Indira Talwani said today in Boston.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/felicit...index.html

[cardcrimson]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

[cardcrimson]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

[qwerty49]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

Aunt Becky will change her plea now. Just watch.

[qwerty49]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

Aunt Becky will change her plea now. Just watch.

[82lsju]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

Aunt Becky will change her plea now. Just watch.

Maybe, Huffman got about a day per $1000 (she paid out $15k), Aunt Becky allegedly paid $500k, so if the jail time scales linearly (no idea if it does) she's looking at ~16 months (maybe 8 months is she's credited with $250k and her husband $250k) so she may still roll the dice.

[82lsju]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

Aunt Becky will change her plea now. Just watch.

Maybe, Huffman got about a day per $1000 (she paid out $15k), Aunt Becky allegedly paid $500k, so if the jail time scales linearly (no idea if it does) she's looking at ~16 months (maybe 8 months is she's credited with $250k and her husband $250k) so she may still roll the dice.

[Genuine Realist]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

Aunt Becky will change her plea now. Just watch.

Maybe, Huffman got about a day per $1000 (she paid out $15k), Aunt Becky allegedly paid $500k, so if the jail time scales linearly (no idea if it does) she's looking at ~16 months (maybe 8 months is she's credited with $250k and her husband $250k) so she may still roll the dice.

It's not a linear process.

[Genuine Realist]

Aunt Becky can't be very happy now, as Huffman prepares to move from Beverly Hills to the Dublin hills.

Aunt Becky will change her plea now. Just watch.

Maybe, Huffman got about a day per $1000 (she paid out $15k), Aunt Becky allegedly paid $500k, so if the jail time scales linearly (no idea if it does) she's looking at ~16 months (maybe 8 months is she's credited with $250k and her husband $250k) so she may still roll the dice.

It's not a linear process.

[82lsju]

It's not a linear process.

so is it typicaly less or more than linear? I saw something that flashed by on the news that another person who pled guilty and had paid out $300k had the prosecution asking for 15 months (so maybe they get 7.5 months given Huffman got 14 days when the prosecutor wanted a month) . What's you best guess that someone who paid out $500K, assuming she is either convicted or pleads guilty?

[82lsju]

It's not a linear process.

so is it typicaly less or more than linear? I saw something that flashed by on the news that another person who pled guilty and had paid out $300k had the prosecution asking for 15 months (so maybe they get 7.5 months given Huffman got 14 days when the prosecutor wanted a month) . What's you best guess that someone who paid out $500K, assuming she is either convicted or pleads guilty?

[BostonCard]

I don't know, ask the homeless woman who paid nothing but committed fraud by claiming that she lived in a school district she didn't live in so that her daughter could get into a better school.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...id/597979/

Not exactly apples to apples, but I think that the two cases show that a lot of factors come into play, way beyond just the size of the payment. GR as a former prosecutor (and I believe also a public defender) has forgotten more about this than I will ever know so I would defer to him. My best guess is that "in for a penny in for a pound" applies. A larger bribe might get a marginally longer sentence, but the biggest factor is that she committed the crime in the first place.

BC

[BostonCard]

I don't know, ask the homeless woman who paid nothing but committed fraud by claiming that she lived in a school district she didn't live in so that her daughter could get into a better school.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...id/597979/

Not exactly apples to apples, but I think that the two cases show that a lot of factors come into play, way beyond just the size of the payment. GR as a former prosecutor (and I believe also a public defender) has forgotten more about this than I will ever know so I would defer to him. My best guess is that "in for a penny in for a pound" applies. A larger bribe might get a marginally longer sentence, but the biggest factor is that she committed the crime in the first place.

BC

[82lsju]

I don't know, ask the homeless woman who paid nothing but committed fraud by claiming that she lived in a school district she didn't live in so that her daughter could get into a better school.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...id/597979/

Not exactly apples to apples, but I think that the two cases show that a lot of factors come into play, way beyond just the size of the payment. GR as a former prosecutor (and I believe also a public defender) has forgotten more about this than I will ever know so I would defer to him. My best guess is that "in for a penny in for a pound" applies. A larger bribe might get a marginally longer sentence, but the biggest factor is that she committed the crime in the first place.

BC

well here's the prosecutor sentencing recommendation for Agustin Francisco Huneeus who paid out $300k

The U.S. Attorney agrees to recommend the following sentence to the Court:

a)incarceration for a period of 15 months;
b)a fine or other financial penalty of $95,000;
c)12 months of supervised release;
d)a mandatory special assessment of $100, which Defendant must pay to the Clerk of the Court by the date of sentencing; 2
e)restitution in an amount to be determined by the Court at sentencing; and f)forfeiture as set forth in Paragraph 6.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/page/fil...1/download

and Huffman's

The U.S. Attorney agrees to recommend the following sentence to the Court:

a)incarceration at the low end of the Guidelines sentencing range as calculated by the U.S. Attorney in Paragraph 3; [not sure why they don't give a value for her but in the paper they said the prosecutor asked for 30 days, in paragraph 3 they calculate her base level offense as 9 vs 16 for Huneeus]
b)a fine or other financial penalty of $20,000;
c)12 months of supervised release;
d)a mandatory special assessment of $100, which Defendant must pay to the Clerk of the Court by the date of sentencing;
e)restitution in an amount to be determined by the Court at sentencing; and 0 forfeiture as set forth in Paragraph 6

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/page/fil...6/download

there are several other plea agreements at the bottom of this page

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/investig...ery-scheme

[82lsju]

I don't know, ask the homeless woman who paid nothing but committed fraud by claiming that she lived in a school district she didn't live in so that her daughter could get into a better school.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...id/597979/

Not exactly apples to apples, but I think that the two cases show that a lot of factors come into play, way beyond just the size of the payment. GR as a former prosecutor (and I believe also a public defender) has forgotten more about this than I will ever know so I would defer to him. My best guess is that "in for a penny in for a pound" applies. A larger bribe might get a marginally longer sentence, but the biggest factor is that she committed the crime in the first place.

BC

well here's the prosecutor sentencing recommendation for Agustin Francisco Huneeus who paid out $300k

The U.S. Attorney agrees to recommend the following sentence to the Court:

a)incarceration for a period of 15 months;
b)a fine or other financial penalty of $95,000;
c)12 months of supervised release;
d)a mandatory special assessment of $100, which Defendant must pay to the Clerk of the Court by the date of sentencing; 2
e)restitution in an amount to be determined by the Court at sentencing; and f)forfeiture as set forth in Paragraph 6.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/page/fil...1/download

and Huffman's

The U.S. Attorney agrees to recommend the following sentence to the Court:

a)incarceration at the low end of the Guidelines sentencing range as calculated by the U.S. Attorney in Paragraph 3; [not sure why they don't give a value for her but in the paper they said the prosecutor asked for 30 days, in paragraph 3 they calculate her base level offense as 9 vs 16 for Huneeus]
b)a fine or other financial penalty of $20,000;
c)12 months of supervised release;
d)a mandatory special assessment of $100, which Defendant must pay to the Clerk of the Court by the date of sentencing;
e)restitution in an amount to be determined by the Court at sentencing; and 0 forfeiture as set forth in Paragraph 6

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/page/fil...6/download

there are several other plea agreements at the bottom of this page

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/investig...ery-scheme

[82lsju]

Devin Sloane, a Los Angeles businessman whose son was admitted to USC as a bogus water polo star, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison.

Over the protests of his attorneys, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani chose to incarcerate Sloane, the second parent sentenced in the college admissions scandal, for misrepresenting his son as a member of Italy’s youth national water polo team, a charade Sloane achieved with gear purchased online, a graphic designer and $250,000. Sloane’s son didn’t play the sport.

Talwani also ordered Sloane to pay a $95,000 fine and perform 500 hours of community service. The four-month sentence struck a middle ground between what prosecutors had requested and what Sloane’s attorneys said was fair.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...?_amp=true

[82lsju]

Devin Sloane, a Los Angeles businessman whose son was admitted to USC as a bogus water polo star, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison.

Over the protests of his attorneys, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani chose to incarcerate Sloane, the second parent sentenced in the college admissions scandal, for misrepresenting his son as a member of Italy’s youth national water polo team, a charade Sloane achieved with gear purchased online, a graphic designer and $250,000. Sloane’s son didn’t play the sport.

Talwani also ordered Sloane to pay a $95,000 fine and perform 500 hours of community service. The four-month sentence struck a middle ground between what prosecutors had requested and what Sloane’s attorneys said was fair.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...?_amp=true

[Mick]

Devin Sloane, a Los Angeles businessman whose son was admitted to USC as a bogus water polo star, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison.

Over the protests of his attorneys, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani chose to incarcerate Sloane, the second parent sentenced in the college admissions scandal, for misrepresenting his son as a member of Italy’s youth national water polo team, a charade Sloane achieved with gear purchased online, a graphic designer and $250,000. Sloane’s son didn’t play the sport.

Talwani also ordered Sloane to pay a $95,000 fine and perform 500 hours of community service. The four-month sentence struck a middle ground between what prosecutors had requested and what Sloane’s attorneys said was fair.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...?_amp=true

Willkie Farr + Gallagher's former CEO Gabe Kaplan has reached a plea deal of 8 to 14 months, a year of supervised release and a $40,000 fine.  He paid a proctor $75k to boost his daughter's ACT score.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/p...-in-prison

[Mick]

Devin Sloane, a Los Angeles businessman whose son was admitted to USC as a bogus water polo star, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison.

Over the protests of his attorneys, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani chose to incarcerate Sloane, the second parent sentenced in the college admissions scandal, for misrepresenting his son as a member of Italy’s youth national water polo team, a charade Sloane achieved with gear purchased online, a graphic designer and $250,000. Sloane’s son didn’t play the sport.

Talwani also ordered Sloane to pay a $95,000 fine and perform 500 hours of community service. The four-month sentence struck a middle ground between what prosecutors had requested and what Sloane’s attorneys said was fair.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...?_amp=true

Willkie Farr + Gallagher's former CEO Gabe Kaplan has reached a plea deal of 8 to 14 months, a year of supervised release and a $40,000 fine.  He paid a proctor $75k to boost his daughter's ACT score.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/p...-in-prison

[cardcrimson]

Devin Sloane, a Los Angeles businessman whose son was admitted to USC as a bogus water polo star, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison.

Over the protests of his attorneys, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani chose to incarcerate Sloane, the second parent sentenced in the college admissions scandal, for misrepresenting his son as a member of Italy’s youth national water polo team, a charade Sloane achieved with gear purchased online, a graphic designer and $250,000. Sloane’s son didn’t play the sport.

Talwani also ordered Sloane to pay a $95,000 fine and perform 500 hours of community service. The four-month sentence struck a middle ground between what prosecutors had requested and what Sloane’s attorneys said was fair.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...?_amp=true

Willkie Farr + Gallagher's former CEO Gabe Kaplan has reached a plea deal of 8 to 14 months, a year of supervised release and a $40,000 fine.  He paid a proctor $75k to boost his daughter's ACT score.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/p...-in-prison

Though not sentenced, that would be the stiffest yet. Right? If I'm keeping score right, two guys got 4 months for fake water polo and tennis recruits at USC and G-town and $250k bribes. Huffman got 14 days for $15k, I think.

[cardcrimson]

Devin Sloane, a Los Angeles businessman whose son was admitted to USC as a bogus water polo star, was sentenced Tuesday to four months in prison.

Over the protests of his attorneys, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani chose to incarcerate Sloane, the second parent sentenced in the college admissions scandal, for misrepresenting his son as a member of Italy’s youth national water polo team, a charade Sloane achieved with gear purchased online, a graphic designer and $250,000. Sloane’s son didn’t play the sport.

Talwani also ordered Sloane to pay a $95,000 fine and perform 500 hours of community service. The four-month sentence struck a middle ground between what prosecutors had requested and what Sloane’s attorneys said was fair.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...?_amp=true

Willkie Farr + Gallagher's former CEO Gabe Kaplan has reached a plea deal of 8 to 14 months, a year of supervised release and a $40,000 fine.  He paid a proctor $75k to boost his daughter's ACT score.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/p...-in-prison

Though not sentenced, that would be the stiffest yet. Right? If I'm keeping score right, two guys got 4 months for fake water polo and tennis recruits at USC and G-town and $250k bribes. Huffman got 14 days for $15k, I think.

[82lsju]

Willkie Farr + Gallagher's former CEO Gabe Kaplan has reached a plea deal of 8 to 14 months, a year of supervised release and a $40,000 fine.  He paid a proctor $75k to boost his daughter's ACT score.



http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/p...-in-prison

Gordon Caplan??

here's his plea agreement from Mar 2019

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/page/fil...6/download

some of the others are here

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/investig...ery-scheme

the points for each of the two already sentenced and Caplan

- Huffman with 9, she got 14 days
- Sloane with 14,  he got 4 months
- Caplan with 11, I'd guess he gets 2-3 months based on his score being between the other two

all three of them get a base level of 7 points, then 4 to 10 points depending on how much they spent, then a reduction of 2 or 3 points for accepting responsibility for the crimes

[82lsju]

Willkie Farr + Gallagher's former CEO Gabe Kaplan has reached a plea deal of 8 to 14 months, a year of supervised release and a $40,000 fine.  He paid a proctor $75k to boost his daughter's ACT score.



http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/p...-in-prison

Gordon Caplan??

here's his plea agreement from Mar 2019

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/page/fil...6/download

some of the others are here

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/investig...ery-scheme

the points for each of the two already sentenced and Caplan

- Huffman with 9, she got 14 days
- Sloane with 14,  he got 4 months
- Caplan with 11, I'd guess he gets 2-3 months based on his score being between the other two

all three of them get a base level of 7 points, then 4 to 10 points depending on how much they spent, then a reduction of 2 or 3 points for accepting responsibility for the crimes