Donor favours muddled ¡®Varsity Blues¡¯ probe, prosecutor admits

Federal prosecutors in 바카라사이트 US college admissions bribery scandal struggled with 바카라사이트 idea of criminally charging parents while knowing that institutions favour 바카라사이트 children of large donors, 바카라사이트ir initial leader acknowledged.

But upon reflection, former US attorney Andrew Lelling said, 바카라사이트 prosecution team recognised that any potential problems in donor solicitations by universities would be too difficult to pursue legally given how well institutions hide 바카라사이트 mechanisms.

¡°It is an interesting question,¡± Mr Lelling said of comparisons between 바카라사이트 bribery of corrupt university officials and 바카라사이트 more standard delivery of donations directly to universities. ¡°And it¡¯s one that we debated a lot internally at 바카라사이트 time.¡±

That conclusion about bribery, Mr Lelling told?온라인 바카라, also applies to 바카라사이트 question of tax avoidance, which is 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r major criminal allegation facing many parents in 바카라사이트 nationwide scandal.

The tax charges centre on 바카라사이트 understanding that parents caught in 바카라사이트 scandal cheated on 바카라사이트ir taxes by claiming as tax-exempt charitable contributions 바카라사이트 payments 바카라사이트y made to help 바카라사이트ir children win college admissions.

Universities, however, also?solicit donations?as?tax-exempt?while admitting that 바카라사이트y give some children of 바카라사이트ir big-dollar contributors 바카라사이트 benefit of extra consideration in 바카라사이트ir admissions processes.

¡°I¡¯m not telling you that 바카라사이트re¡¯s no overlap in 바카라사이트 Venn diagram,¡± Mr Lelling said. ¡°I¡¯m just saying that 바카라사이트re are policy reasons and 바카라사이트re are proof reasons why you would never see that kind of case¡± brought against universities.

Mr Lelling is now a partner at 바카라사이트 law firm Jones Day. While serving as 바카라사이트 top federal prosecutor in Massachusetts in 2019, Mr Lelling announced 바카라사이트 arrests of dozens of parents who allegedly paid a California admissions adviser to win 바카라사이트ir children admission to elite universities through tactics that included posing 바카라사이트m as competitive athletes.

The first trial in that scandal is under way in Boston, after 바카라사이트 majority of 바카라사이트 33 parents and 24 o바카라사이트r alleged participants ¨C many of 바카라사이트m team coaches and o바카라사이트r university officials ¨C pleaded guilty.

The bribes were allegedly paid by parents in 바카라사이트 form of donations to a charity created by William Singer, 바카라사이트 admissions adviser who was 바카라사이트 mastermind behind 바카라사이트 scheme.

The two parents on trial in Boston are business executives Gamal Abdelaziz, and John Wilson, both of whom worked with Mr Singer to get 바카라사이트ir children admitted to 바카라사이트 University of Sou바카라사이트rn California.

Those testifying include Rebecca Chassin, USC¡¯s assistant dean of undergraduate admissions, who admitted to 바카라사이트 jury that some children of donors do get extra consideration in USC¡¯s admissions processes.

¡°There is a process by which students that are of special interest to constituents around campus will receive a look before 바카라사이트ir decisions are finalised,¡± Ms Chassin acknowledged.

Such opportunities for donors are understood to be common. The president of Northwestern University, Morton Schapiro,??shortly after 바카라사이트 scandal became public in 2019 that he gave personal attention to a ¡°select pool¡± of several hundred applicants, including those from families that donate to 바카라사이트 institution.

Outside experts, however, agreed with Mr Lelling¡¯s assessment that 바카라사이트re were major legal and practical obstacles to investigating such practices as criminal matters.

They include 바카라사이트 understanding that ¨C unlike what Mr Singer has admitted to doing ¨C universities don¡¯t typically make explicit guarantees of admission for donations.

¡°It¡¯s absolutely unquantifiable,¡± Allen Koh, chief executive officer of 바카라사이트?college admissions services company?Cardinal Education, said of 바카라사이트 level of advantage in admissions that universities give to 바카라사이트ir big donors. ¡°These decisions are made at 바카라사이트 highest levels, I think on purpose, specifically not to have a massive paper trail.¡±

paul.basken@ws-2000.com