Huffman says, “My desire to help my daughter....” She was not “helping” her by having someone take her SAT for her. She was hurting her deeply. Disgraceful.
10
Both will hopefully both get what they deserve, legally. I will save my weeping for those in the world who are innocent, unfairly suffering, exploited, abused and betrayed. These two women are experiencing the sequelae of their own criminal actions caused by celebrityitis, too much money, poor to absent adult judgement, absent integrity and lousy parenting. I have better uses for my tissues than to weep for them.
7
Cheating to get your kids into a school is wrong. No question about it. But the fact is, it's not illegal. The Feds know that. So what do they do? They stretch a money laundering allegation as far as they can to intimidate them to take a plea. It's bogus prosecution to the nth degree. Lori Loughlin and others did not launder money. Singer did that. I hope they fight it and win.
3
I’m still not quite sure how I see this as any different than from my friends spending $60,000 a year to send their grandson to exclusive private schools for most of his preK through 12? So now he got into USC as well. Pay it up front or at the end, it’s all still paid for regardless. This whole thing seems so unfair to kids who might just like to be their own person to find for themselves. They’re the ones who have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
5
I don't condone what they did. However, why is it ok for Jared Kushner's father to make a $2.5 million donation to get his unqualified son into Harvard. It should be just as illegal.
51
How could they not know that what they were doing was, well, fraud and racketeering? Maybe in the case of Ms. Huffman having played in "Desperate Housewives", her scruples were numbed, and she was blind to the fact that somebody was denied a place to make way for her daughter, so the end justified the means. Ms. Loughlin appears to me to be more cynical in that she knew her daughters were not cut out for academic study but went through the whole charade anyway. Neither should be dealt with leniently, but of the two, I think Ms. Loughlin is the more culpable.
5
Let's not get so self righteous. We should leave these people alone and focused on real issues we as a nation can change, such as medical care, the environment, creating and maintaining good jobs, more scrutiny on public education, etc., etc. The many onepercenters caught in the sting operation didn't do anything else the rich and famous hasn't done for centuries in this country. The real culprits are the schools who have conned the country in thinking their admission processes are fair and just, as well as the superbly compensated administrators that failed to supervise the various people that benefitted from the scam run by Ivy League graduates .
9
What these women did was wrong and no excuse. They should take their punishment. But I'm always fascinated with how virulently women are skewered for their crimes or falsehoods, with much sanctimonious commentary, and blacklisting, while men (generally white men of a certain class,) who have committed much worse crimes go on to lucrative careers in the White House, on the Supreme court, at congress, Facebook, and everywhere else you look. I'll always remember all the big bankers who got off scott free during the 2007 economic meltdown, while Martha Stewart was thrown in jail. yeah, like that.
48
Wow.
Who would have thought which is truer: life imitates art or is it art imitates life?
This could have been a great mini soap opera if it were not real.
I guess easy come easy go,
With dollars not a worry - why not spend it to flaunt it through your children.
I share sentiments below - that it is curious only "desperate" wives were charge but not their "not so conniving" husbands.
5
No shortcuts...for bank robbers, baddie stock manipulators, or parents angling to cheat on behalf of their kids...and I'm willing to bet that most of them are sorry, only because they were caught, not because of the error of their ways.
We are a pretty good country, and a forgiving one...hopefully all involved can see the light.
4
Well, I think Lori ought to have thought about wiser ways to spend that much money. For example, if she'd given it to the RNC she'd be Secretary of Education, which clearly beats what she actually achieved, the prospect of heavy time.
20
I thought the "Husbands" subsection of this article left quite a bit hanging. If the husbands (eg, Macy) also met with the "fixer", how come only the wives were charged, and are the ones receiving the public opprobrium? Unless the wife went behind the husband's back, she was acting on behalf of both of them and they both should share the culpability.
26
We have bigger crooks to catch than these two over-pampered women. For example, how about catching the crooks of Trump family, including Donald Trump's elder sister a federal judge no less, who cheated on taxes?
There is a lot that is wrong with the society, including rich people gaming the system. Let us not leave out those who are powerful and rich from paying for their crimes.
17
Let me point out, as someone who works with committed students of all backgrounds, every day, to build the opportunities that will allow them to make a difference—for good—in this world:
This is not a minor or victimless crime.
First, they committed fraud.
Second, they stole goods and services from universities by means of that fraud.
Third, by such theft, they denied capable students, of lesser means, an opportunity, an intellectual benefit, and a possible life.
This is a 'victimless' crime only because you don't know the victims. And to those nameless people, and to our respect for education, considerable ill has been done.
The fact that some commentators consider either case 'minor,' or somehow OK by some calculation of equivalence . . . tells me a lot about the sorry state of our values.
85
@CEE my sentiments exactly. Thank you for voicing this.
6
The only thing I am shocked about is how shocked people are that this happens.
10
If you raised totally vapid daughters as has Lori Loughlin, you would expect to have to pay a half a million dollars to doctor their way into an institution of higher learning. But none of them in that family ever went to college in the first place so no one should expect any geniuses there. "But look how cool this make-up is!" is what one should expect coming from them, not things like "I'm looking forward to being a doctor or a scientist". And whoever said show biz was superficial?
22
...an institution of higher credentialing.
How much learning, much less "higher" learning goes on in our credential-obsessed, credential-driven system is a highly questionable matter.
The profit/metrics-obsessed folks at Boeing could tell you about some of their difficulties getting a purely numbers-driven, ethics-bereft boondoggle aloft.
For years a certain brand of economics had been telling us honest greed and selfishness and pure profit motive (what used to be called by names like "greed" and "venality") are the boon of civilization.
We're getting fresh reminders that old-fashioned principles like integrity and intellectual substance may have something to recommend them after all.
But I'm fairly certain that "GPA culture" (as none other than David Brooks has called it), even when played "honestly" (no out-and-out 'cheating,' just by-the-book stategic negotiation of the ropes), is on the wrong side of this issue.
We've become a culture of image over substance, pure and simple. The credential culture, even practiced "honestly," is deeply complicit.
7
"....she has repeatedly been photographed smiling, at one point signing autographs for fans before she walked into federal court."
These fans no doubt believe that these actors are the same as the characters they portray.
Robert Young was not a father who knew best. He was a drunk.
So much for reality.
7
These 2 women are the faces of everything that's wrong in America. The rich assuming they can get away with anything while preaching to others how to live. Felicity Huffman's husband talked about honesty and how important it is, all the while he and his wife were lying and stealing an opportunity from another young person trying to get into college.
33
The parents are not victims, and deserve as much punishment as the law calls for, up to and including jail time.
And I know their kids were so dumb that they could not get into a so called "good" college (e.g., USC? say what?) without their parents committing bribery or other crimes to gain admission for the little darlings. However, it seems highly likely that most of these kids were aware of what was going on.
A proctor sat next to the kid and provided or changed test answers? The kid had to know.
Another person took the test instead of the kid? The kid had to know.
The kid took a photo on a rowing machine pretending to be a rower? The kid had to know.
The kid was given extra time to take the test due to disability? The kid had to know that he/she did not have a disability.
Were there possibly a few instances where a kid somehow did not know his parents had cheated to gain him/her admission? Maybe, but doesn't seem very likely.
Many, perhaps most, of the kids were not "caught up" in the crimes but were witting participants. To preserve any sense of decency and ethics the colleges need to investigate not just what crimes the parents and their enablers committed, but what the kids knew and did.
In any case these criminal parents' kids, witting or not, need to be expelled. After all, if a parent steals a car and gives it to his kid, does the kid get to keep the car? I don't think so.
38
Agreed that there's an outsize focus on these two women - in lieu of others accused - but it seems that we are dissecting personality differences here (and perhaps, more sinisterly, acting chops). Also I sense a new narrative emerging that smells like public relations spinning. Why exactly do we need to pit these two women against each other in a NY Times piece? Weren't there like over 50 human beings involved? Hmmm.
18
It's incredibly frustrating to see how these elites used money and privilege to their advantage, but let's be honest about a couple of things. First, EVERY aspect of life in the US is this way (e.g., the quality of your legal defense, military service, etc.). Good grief, look at our president! Second, doing what's in the best interest of our kids tends to bring out a bad side in all of us. The anger expressed towards these people strikes me as a bit like the antagonism of the German public towards the Nazi regime after WWII. Who here can honestly say they wouldn't have done the same thing for their kids if the opportunity existed? I see this as more of a reminder of what I don't want to be than a statement of what I am.
3
@Leo Many of us could have come up with the $15,000 to do the same thing to "help" our kids, and yet we did not. My child is 18 and about to graduate from high school. She did her testing and applications 100% on her own, and got into some excellent colleges. I did what was in her best interest - I let her do it her way. What I can say about her and her friends is that they're pretty jaded about the system.
18
O Hersh:
If you think about Huffman and Lochlin "they're pretty jaded about the system," you should see the levels of cynicism that are so routine within universties and how they operate, even when they are acting within the law.
4
This article wreaks of sexism to me. Pointing fingers at just the Moms and focusing on the Mother’s behaviors.
Both Mossimo Gianulli and Lori Laughlin were indicted equally where is his public shaming here? And personally while I understand Mr Macy’s wanting to avoid the press and spotlight ( maybe u see the advice of his publicist and lawyer) its kind of disgusting that he’s not standing by his wife.
Last time I heard, both sets of parents were married and all should be publicly shamed. Even if it does not fit into this article’s theme of “Bad Moms.”
25
What about the women who have been accused of being welfare cheats or those who have written bum checks to try and make sure their kids don't go to school hungry. Their experience with our legal system is often much more costly to them and their children than what will likely happen to these famous, privileged women who we think we know because they have come into our living rooms as beloved characters.
13
I was involved in my child's college process for sure. Yes we paid for expensive test prep. Yes we sent her to an expensive private high school with a solid reputation for getting kids admitted to top notch schools. Yes we paid for her to take the SAT and ACT multiple times chasingbthat score. Yes there was belp prepping the applications. But no way in heck was there ever a falsification of anything. What tbese parents did was just plain wrong.
7
"yes there was.... yes there was..... yes there was......Yes there was [h]elp prepping the applications. But no way in heck was there ever a falsification of anything. What tbese parents did was just plain wrong."
Wow.
I don't doubt your sincerity or honesty here, but when parental financial resources (not to mention the admitted "help prepping applications, test prep etc etc etc etc all calculated to magnify your child's "merit" for admissikns committees) play this big a role, it becomes necessary to consider whether the whole concept of "merit" or "meritocracy" is largely a fraud. (I've been saying, for some time, precisely that it is.) Arguably, falsification on some level was a factor. For example, did your child disclose to the college application the lengths to which parental resources were mobilized to grease her chances?
11
@Logical
Yes, everything you did was legal; however, parental behavior such as yours is a leading source in the rising anxiety levels of today’s high school students. Encourage education, but back off. So test prep might get the scores up a few hundred points, so what. Let them write their own essays without getting multiple sets of fingerprints on them. They will still get into a good college, but do it without being prodded throughout the process.
8
And, if I had to do it all over again, I would have hired 1 of these “college counselors.” Not to cheat, but to help my son distinguish himself.
My son had a gpa of just 4.0, but a 33 on his ACT (98% percentile) honors society, genuine volunteer work. He did everything on his own, no tutors, no test prep courses, including his own essays & college applications.
Not wanting to overreach, he naively applied to several of the University of CA campuses thinking he fell within the range of accepted applicants. The results: 2 rejections & 3 waitlists.
I am still proud of him, after all the rejection & disappointment he continues to do his volunteer tutoring after school & volunteer park restoration on weekends. He’s a smart, hardworking, nice kid that cares about people & environment. But, in this competitive climate his stats were just not enough to distinguish him from the other 100,000 qualified applicants. A “counselor” may have made a difference.
11
I don’t give either any credit. If Huffman had not been caught would she shed tears for the students wronged? I think not. Being a little guilty is like being a little pregnant. It’s all semantics. Children are the ones who lose out. Between cheating to get just what you want and shootings in schools it’s getting harder and harder to be a kid in today’s world. And with Betsy chopping away at the education system, who says today’s kids have it made?
8
Remember - actors are hired for their looks. As much as we worship celebrity and money, they are not role models. Their professional lives were forged in a place notorious for avarice and double dealing.
We tend to conflate financial success with good morals; on-screen personas with off-screen personalities.
8
@IanC...
Who in the world conflates financial success with good morals?
5
@IanC
Just because someone is great in their profession doesn’t mean they are great at anything else.
3
The aspect that disgusts me the most is that Loughlin contributed to a fake charity, so could take the bribe as a write-off. If so, I hope they get her for tax evasion, too.
42
The rich people are buying their into college and now they are buying their way out of jail.
11
Because colleges admit only a small percentage of those who apply, getting into college is a highly-competitive, zero-sum game. For every applicant who is accepted, many are rejected. Each year colleges establish a limit on how many freshmen will be admitted.
If jocks are given admission preference, there are fewer openings for non-jocks.
If legacies are also given preference, there are fewer openings for non-jocks and non-legacies.
If some students also get admitted via bribery or cheating, there are fewer openings for non-jocks, non-legacies and non-cheaters.
If some students of color are admitted over white students with higher test scores and GPAs, there are fewer openings for non-jocks, non-legacies, non-cheaters and high-testing/high-GPA whites.
This is simple math; all of the preferences noted above inevitably reduce the numbers of non-preferred students admitted, including high-testing/high GPA white students.
As Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts put it, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." [Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007)]
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court and Congress have not yet found ways to achieve racial balance in our schools and colleges without discriminating against some more qualified white students.
2
@Mon Ray I find it bizarre that after reading this article your comment is essentially aimed at affirmative action. Whether or not one supports or opposes affirmative action based on race, I have seen no evidence that students who benefit from such preferences have committed fraud, The same goes for the parents of such students. A comparable situation to the case of Ms. Huffman and Ms. Loughlin would be if they sent a college a picture of their children depicting them as a member of a racial minority or paying an non-white actor to portray their children at an personal interview. Anything is possible but to smear affirmative action beneficiaries by comparison to this current scandal is grossly unfair.
21
Rather than spending time with their children encouraging and developing curiosity and good study habits, all these parents have subscribed to the idea that money can indeed buy anything. Investing huge sums to get your spoiled offspring into supposedly superior colleges will not stop them from wasting their time with vacuous activities during the their 4 year vacations. I have seen literally hundreds of these types entering the workforce and the irony is most will find themselves working for somebody who worked hard at a state school and acquired the requisite knowledge and skills to lead. Pretty funny actually.
6
It's like tax evasion versus tax avoidance. Both center around the same idea - getting a break on taxes - but one is illegal and the other just morally questionable.
These parents don't seem to know how to separate the moral transgression from bribery and fraud.
I admire Huffman's stance more. She has issued a public apology, outlined precisely who it is she hurt, including her child, and seemed to recognize the quality of her actions and the size of her transgressions. We can be cynical and disbelieve her sincerity, but that doesn't erase that she made no excuses and did not equivocate.
Loughlin is in more trouble and may not be able to get away with that - but the brazen disregard she shows, possibly a set of behaviors advocated by her lawyers, make her seem even sleazier. We don't have to be cynical to disbelieve her sincerity.
Is there a moral to the story? Fraud is fraud. Just as tax fraud is fraud, bank fraud is fraud, school admissions fraud is fraud. Like many other fraudsters, they never figured they'd get caught.
17
A crime was committed and some of those charged chose to take different approaches on how to deal with the charges against them
Unlike Anne from Portland I don't know what Lori Loughlin was thinking; what I do know is that most people rely upon their lawyer for advice on how to proceed and many, if not most, do what their lawyer tells them to do
Anyone with any experience in trying federal crimes will tell you that it is very easy to bring a charge of money laundering whenever money changes hands and the penalties for money laundering are very draconian; much greater than for some of the other charges and the amount of money is a factor in determining how severe the penalty is. So it should not have been a surprise that additional charges were brought when the cutoff for pleading guilty passed
At this time I don't know what defense Loughlin may have to the charges against her or if her attorney simply believes that the charges cannot be proved
All I can say is that if Loughlin doesn't have a substantial defense or her attorney doesn't see how the charges can't be proved, Loughlin was ill-served by the advice she received unless she chose to fight despite being advised not to. Huffman probably chose the better path-to accept responsibility and limit the charges brought against her
Unfortunately if Loughlin loses or even now decides to plead guilty she will serve time in jail just to be a deterrent to others - and it will not make me glad or feel better in any way
3
I merely glanced at the comments, and see quite a lot of condemnation. Not to defend these actresses, but I wonder if any of their would-be prosecutors ever cheated on a test, thereby defiling our holy "meritocracy"? How many bought their kids (or enrolled in themselves) the very expensive "Princeton Review" SAT prep course, explicitly designed and marketed to subvert the SAT's supposed "meritocratic" purpose of identifying talent (whatever all that is supposed to mean anyway!) by exploiting test design flaws (which are probably inevitable) to falsely inflate students' scores relative to actual knowlede and ability.
The nation's foremost expert on academic cheating, Donald McCabe, has shown cheating has been rampant for decades, probably increasing at a rate far beyond that of inflation: more likely. corresponding to inflation of tuitition. (Not at all coincidental, if you ask me.) Apparently the vast majority have cheated significantly to polish their almighty GPA's. I have no doubt that some of these cheaters are among the actresses' most vociferous critics.
Studies of pre-med culture show that virtually all pre-meds have fudged lab numbers. Why? You might put it this way: Dissecting rats in rat-race-like conditions has this effect.
(Yes, even *your* kind, gentle doctor was premed once, though he'd like that fact submerged by his more current identity.)
So none of the commenters here cheated, or paid admission consultants or Princeton Review? I don't believe it.
1
Not sure I like how my comment came out, appearing to make something like an "everybody cheats, so what's the big deal?" sort of argument (which wouldn't be any kind of argument at all).
Actually, I'm more in line with Arendt's ("Banality of Evil") argument on this issue. There is a tendency to isolate a few supposed arch-criminals, deflecting away how much these extreme cases have in common with more run-of-the-mill mediocrity and petty criminality.
Many have drawn attentiin to the fact that what Lochlin and Huffman did is only a cheaper version of the "legitimate," legal bribery the megarich resort to in buying dormatories to get their kids admitted.
I think the deeper problem is the level of moral & ethical compromise endemic to the system called "meritocracy" in its ordinary operation. Cheating is rampant, and when not cheatig outright, other forms of "gaming" the process, as every premed knows.
Look at the role money plays. It has always been a stand-in for or artificial magnifier of "merit" (whatever 'merit' may actually be): just look at the financial backgrounds of Ivy-admitted students. "Merit" and "Money" -- just change a few letters, but almost interchangeable-- AS THEY ARE IN OUR BROADER SOCIETY!
Look at the "pay to play" dynamic of our university system: Pay us $200,000, jump through some hoops (quietly cheating -just don't make it blatant- as necessary), & then you can stay or get into the upper middle class.
Much more corruption than people acklowledge.
5
"...and apparently knew nothing of the plans, got a score of 1420, about 400 points higher than she had earned on her Preliminary SAT exams."
What??? She knew nothing of the plans? Are you kidding me!
I understand about protecting the kids from prosecution, but who will protect Americans from the rot? Why do we always come in dead last?
5
My daughter took the psat in tenth grade cold, no prep and scored 1050. That was last year. We planned it that way to see a baseline.
She began private tutoring this past November and her scores have increased to 1350. She isn’t cheating, she’s working.
10
Oh good grief. Take any two people anywhere and you will likely find people on 'different paths." Just because they are two actors, or lawyers, or sales clerks or whatever, doesn't mean they have much else in common.
However, as far as these two are concerned, and I am not that familiar with either of them (had never even heard of "Lori" before this happened), aren't you talking about two very different types of "actors?" One strikes me as the former beauty queen type of actress, probably not much education, doing middling TV work. The other is known for doing award winning, more sophisticated work and apparently has at least some higher education, and married to an equally accomplished actor. So is it any wonder they may have diverging paths?
12
Unless the children of these actresses actively participated in this deception and criminal conduct, they should be allowed to compete on the basis of admission as everyone else. They should be given an opportunity to get admitted on their own merits but any academic work that they have already completed should be counted towards their educational record.
3
Yes, these women cheated, and maybe they feel entitled, I don't know. But spare me all the pious outrage unless you personally have never cheated on anything. If they had donated 10 million for a new building, they could have bought their daughters into college the legal way.
The media is enjoying sticking it to these two women as much as they enjoyed sticking it to Martha Stewart.
15
@Madeleine: They knowingly BROKE THE LAW a consequence of which was disallowing the enrolment of more qualified students to these “elite” schools. That’s wrong and they should have to pay a legal consequence.
6
Celebrity helicopter mommies clear the runway for their college-age daughters and law enforcement swoops in like a condor on a field mouse, threatening 40 years in prison.
And yet, 96% of rapists never see one day of jail and murderers serve a couple of years, only to be released time and again to violently prey on others.
7
These ladies (and almost certainly their husbands) are criminals and warrant incarceration. Period.
4
"..a school other than ASU"? Do they mean Arizona State?
2
The worst thing about this incident is that it proves to the children how little faith their parents have in them to make their way in the world.
14
The democrat (Huffman) apologized and took the plea. The Republican (Loughlin) doubled down, and signed autographs.
16
Huffman was just as devious and dishonest as Loughlin. Her "affect" now may be somber, but she's an actress, and she's playing the part of sorry Mom. I'm sure she is sorry she got caught. But her recorded "Ruh Ro!" comment indicates her real feelings about the school official who was trying to keep college admissions honest. That person was just a little nuisance, nobody to really worry about. Just someone to steamroller over in pursuit of what she wanted.
6
When I saw the endless headlines and tabloid photos my first thought was that wouldn’t be a bad career move for McLoughlin and her family to parlay this incident into reality show. But I’m sure that’s never occurred to them.
"When it came time for Ms. Huffman’s younger daughter to take the test, Ms. Huffman and Mr. Singer again spoke in detail and plans began for a similar process . . . the plans, though, were ultimately scrapped, the prosecutors said, and the younger girl apparently took the tests on her own."
I wonder how she scored?
I would be shocked if either Felicity Huffmanor Lori Loughlin did anything other than receive a hefty fine coupled with tons of community service in the end.
The real rhetorical question is whether their children will forgive them and if their fans will continue to support them in their careers once all is said and done.
2
Probation or actual prison time for the rich and famous? I will believe it when I see it.
3
I'm confused... were Loughlin & Huffman the only 2 participants in this scandal? Why do we keep seeing stories about them - their faces plastered everywhere? What about the businessmen who did the same thing? What about the coaches & the guy who facilitated the whole thing? What about the Dads, Macy & Mossimo? They're famous yet we don't see their faces or read their names. They weren't even indicted...really? They had no idea this was happening?
Seems to me that reporters (& apparently the prosecutor) think this is an easy headline grabber simply because we know these ladies but don't "know" the others.
I'm not excusing them... I just want to know why I keep seeing stories about them yet I couldn't name one other person in the scandal? Perhaps the Press feels that shaming women, particularly women from Hollywood, is more important than shaming the men or other not so famous perpetrators.
#whyonlythefamouswomen
19
I feel bad for Ms. Huffman's daughter. She didn't know what her mom was doing. And now knows how little her mom must think of her. Apparently her unique skills and abilities as a person are not good enough for her mother. So sad.
2
I am so sick and tired of this being referred to as a Hollywood scandal. These are two actresses out of about 50 people who are involved in this particular scheme. I also hate the fact that these two women are being singled out and given much more attention than even their spouses who were also involved to a certain extent. It still has not been explained why Ms. Huffman was charged but not her husband Mr. Macy. Is it because she wrote the check, or is it because she’s a woman and there is a history of women being blamed for everything?
10
I attended MIT, my son is now attending Cambridge University. We are not wealthy and have achieved our degrees through hard work and diligence. Will our hard-earned degrees become degraded if people think that our family bought our way into these prestigious universities?
6
"Earned through hard work and diligence." There was probably some good fortune involved too. Are you of above average intelligence? (I'm guessing yes). If so, congrats you won the genetic lottery. There is nothing wrong with developing your talents and being rewarded for your effort, but the "I accomplished this and deserve this" mentality is based on a certain kind of mythology. Did you never cut any corners on your path to (or through) MIT?
I suspect you may be 100% correct on how you've fulfilled the meritocratic ideal. But then again, time and prestigious degrees have a way of laundering a lot of meritocracy's darker aspects. In fact I once read a book called "The Hidden Curriculum" that focused specifically on how MIT students negotiated the disconnect between academic and intellectual ideals on the one hand and the kinds of "strategies", tacitly encouraged by faculty, necessary to suceed there.
Our educational system is fraught with ethical complexity and contradiction. If you got through 100% squeaky clean, that's an enormous accomplishment. But in any case, some of the basic premises of the concept of academic "merit" are flawed on close examination.
1
I cannot help but think these parents aren’t sorry... just sorry they were caught.
Otherwise, anyone with a moral compass would have realized what they were doing was wrong.
10
More Democrats and their mantra "watch what I say, not what I do."
1
And what party do you suppose the 50 or so lawyers, accountants, and financial planners also indicted (but not household names) identify with?
5
and what's wrong with ASU??
22
@Tom I don't know. Apparently some people are willing to risk going to prison not to go there.
9
I hope that being white, attractive, rich and a TV personality doesn't give them a free pass.
7
Can we stop pretending either one of these people is an ethical human being?
13
They both deserve the maximum lock up time. Don't forget Huffman is an actress and probably put on a good show in court. Both women should do time and not get off lightly just because they are rich.
7
I don't know these women. I don't even follow their work. And yes, what they did was illegal and just plain wrong. But in my opinion, their real crime was trusting the wrong people. "Everyone knows" that it just takes a major donation to a university to get your kid in. How do we know that they didn't think they were using a tried and true method? They didn't come up with this stuff on their own. They paid a guy who did this for a living. He tells them 'I do this stuff all the time'. But I'm supposed to buy into the whole evil mom thing?
"Never subscribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance." I'm not saying that what they did was right. And it appears that the law enforcement community is treating it seriously. But I'm just not sure it's a crime that requires daily media updates.
TD;LR - I'm sick of seeing these two everyday for the 'crime' of being overzealous helicopter moms.
61
@Betsy: They knew it was wrong and illegal. They didn't care and assumed they'd get away with it. People of color go to jail for lesser crimes all the time. Being white, pretty and wealthy doesn't let them off the hook.
229
@Betsy
These women went far beyond ignorance and being overzealous.They knew exactly what they were doing, especially Lori Loughlin and her husband who committed multiple federal crimes using a bribe/lying scheme to the tune of half a million dollars. Her older daughter didn't even want to go to college. Felicity Huffman, an actor with serious talent and apparently some serious moral character somewhere forked over a modest $15,000 and acknowledges her illegal acts and is prepared to accept the legal consequences.
If you consider these actions mere helicopter parenting, which is neurotic one-upmanship, it would be interesting to know what else you would put in the often illegal choices made in raising children.
126
@Betsy. They knew it was cheating, clearly. It's not clear whether they view cheating as morally wrong or not. You apparently don't based on your comments. Based on Huffman's actions and the Macy's lack of involvement and the fact that the plan for the youngr daughter was dropped, I'm guessing Huffman is truly contrite and now realizes that what she did went over the line. BTW, being an overzealous helicopter mom isn't a crime, but fraud and money laundering are.
147
These actresses have gotten too much attention relative to the male captains of industry (Caplan, Wilson etc.), from whom we have far more to fear, since they have run entire companies/firms. Loughlin and Huffman are newbies at this, and they don't run anything.
One has the feeling that Wilson, Caplan and the boys have been cheating their whole lives.
351
@Cousy: What do you mean, newbies? Newbies to crime? It doesn't matter. And when you're a celebrity or int he public light, you're going to get more attention when things go badly for you than are lesser known people. (But, yes, the men should be held accountable, too.)
14
@Anne
I meant newbies in several ways: Loughlin is new to higher ed (she didn't got to college) and new to wealth. Both are inexperienced in legal matters (Caplan ran a big firm!). Both have largely outsourced negotiations to their agents. Wilson has been doing real estate negotiation his whole life.
11
@Cousy: Got it. I agree the men should be held accountable, too. I think people are responding to the 'known' faces of these two actresses because they are well-known nationally and represent how white privilege and wealth privilege tends to impact our justice system in (usually) their favor.
26
Aside from the obvious criminal activity, it is interesting that over the weeks these two particular women have been chosen to be the entire media face of this scandal, including I guess, by the NYT.
I read that of all the money laundered, used to bribe coaches etc, there were men and women of varying degrees of criminality. Huffman was one of the scammers- and on the scale of this particular crime, one of the low dollar criminals.
So where are the rest of the faces of this group- or are these two the "stand-ins" for all of the others? And for the sake of accuracy, Why is that the process here?
403
@Kay Johnson I had made the same observation -- i.e., that there are dozens of people charged in the conspiracy, but every news story focuses almost exclusively on these two women. And it feels unfair to me, just as it feels unfair to you.
But my brain disagrees with my feelings. I believe that the outsize focus on these two women is attributable almost entirely to our society's insane and deleterious infatuation with celebrity. It is the flip side of the ridiculously privileged lives accorded the rich and famous. Much too much attention is paid to celebrities' lives, loves, and random pronouncements. When they experience the occasional misfortune or public embarrassment, much too much attention is paid to that. From an analytical point of view, I see no unfairness. If you repeatedly reap the benefits of a particular circumstance, you have to be prepared to suffer the negative consequences of the same circumstance.
As a criminal defense lawyer, I had also been struck by the very different behavior displayed by these two women since their arrests. I feel some compassion for Huffman, who appears ashamed and contrite. I can't be sure that it's sincere -- she is, after all, a very fine actress -- but it is the right face to show to the world. Loughlin, however, is doing herself no favor with her public face of blithe cheeriness. If she were my client, we would be having a very long conversation on that subject.
142
@Kay Johnson: They are both attractive female actresses who are wealthy and who engaged in similar crimes, but they handled it completely differently. One plead guilty and expressed remorse; the other turned down a plea deal because it involved jail time and she was convinced she's get away with no jail time. So, it's an interesting juxtaposition.
18
@Kay Johnson
When two of the defendants are well-known actresses, of course they are going to be the faces of the scandal.
Like @cds333 I also find Loughlin's demeanor strange for someone facing serious criminal charges, but maybe it shows just how out of touch she really is.
32
Sorry, I don’t agree with the thesis of this piece that the criminal who only paid $15K is less a criminal than the one who paid $500K.
They get no sympathy from me at all.
Cheating is wrong.
125
@Mary I think the thesis is that they have handled the criminal allegations differently: one accepting responsibility (cheating is wrong, in your words) while the other is doing something completely different.
35
@Mary You missed the point, dear. The illegal services in which they were paying was drastically different as seen by the charges each has received. So in fact, yes, Felicity is less of a criminal than Aunt Becky. This will be demonstrated by the severity of the legal consequences they face. Pretty simple to follow if you ask...anyone.
61
@Mary
But in the eyes of the law they committed different crimes.
14
Loughlin needs a better lawyer. And she could learn a few things about acting from Huffman, who certainly knows how to convey the impression of contrition.
222
@Amelia There's a reason why Felicity Huffman has Oscar nominations while Lori Laughlin is best known for a supporting role on a nineties sitcom.
41
@Amelia
I think Ms. Huffman sincerely feels ashamed and embarrassed which comes in handy when trying to effectively portray contrition in the public eye. She and her "Shameless" spouse have a lot riding on this scenario. Their acting careers could come to a complete stall. I think she's worried and pensive over how their lives will changed, possibly irrevocably, going forward,
On the other hand, Ms. Loughlin always reminded me of the stereo-type high school homecoming queen who possessed more beauty than brains coupled with being married to someone with tons of money who could buy their way out of any situation. She always seems to have a smug and arrogant look on her face.
30
@Amelia you're only as good as you allow your lawyer to be and a good lawyer knows that if he or she pushes too hard then he or she will be replaced with another lawyer. Martha Stewart was told to plead guilty and she said but I didn't do insider trading and the lawyer said yes but the people doing the charging have a different interpretation of insider trading. She fired that lawyer and picked one who saw her way of thinking. sometimes people need to hear what they need to hear instead of what
6
We have short memory. Whatever they do in this scandal, both will come back to the film business. They may suffer a short set back either in financial penalty or time behind bars, but eventually will win their bigger pay back when they decide to start acting again. We are curious and love to criticize.
21
Huffman's obviously the mature adult of the two, humbled in the face of reality, whereas Loughlin is showing us once again that the Greeks were right that hubris is what destroys us. "Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad" with self-blinding hubris that makes the proud, narcissistic fools think they are "masters of the universe." Or as Aristotle used to say, "Character is fate." Curtains, Lori.
11
Same song, different verse.
2
I couldn't be more thrilled that literal Aunt Becky is going to end up doing real prison time for what are, in essence, repeated manifestations of arrogance and entitlement.
5
Not a word about this from Donald Trump. This scandal broke days after Michael Cohen's revelations about Trump attempting to conceal his own grades.
8
@cl. I figured someone would try to tie Trump to this. So you're saying that trying to keep your grades confidential is the same as paying bribes and cheating. Hmmm. Meanwhile, Democrats are once again shown to follow their vision that rules apply to others, not to them. Sad.
1
I am very upset with the media about making Ms. Huffman and Ms. Loughlin the "faces" of this scandal. There was an article in Bloomberg about the multi-billionaire who used his money to game the system. Most of the people responsible are men. Why are the two women being relentlessly bashed by media.
Why aren't other women speaking out? It's not gender that is the problem - it's BIG money. This is the same thing that happened with Martha Stewart was found cheating in a very small way on stock market "insider information".
The times have changed. This is no way to treat women and Time's UP.
I want to see equal bashing of the inhertied/stolen wealthy men who have beeen indicted. NOW.
25
These women are not the faces of a scandal. They are celebrities and their fame comes with a price. Put all the faces of unknown men you want and no one would care.
When “ me too” means that indicted persons should be treated differently because they are women, the important message becomes pure identity politics instead of rightful indignation.
7
@njglea These women lived by publicity--literally their only meal ticket--now they'll die by it. So what?
8
@njglea
These aren't unknown women who have suddenly been propelled into the spotlight. They are well-known actresses. Their differing approaches is notable. Other people in the scandal have been highlighted, as well, in other articles.
1
"The amounts the women are accused of spending in the fraud are far different — $15,000 versus $500,000. The circumstances outlined in court documents are distinct as well: a faked test for a daughter versus deals to get two daughters admitted to the University of Southern California with phony athletic claims.
But at the end of the day, regardless of extreme and far apart their cases may be, their deceit, deception and fraud remains the bottom line.
Both sets of parents failed to have any faith in their daughters' ability to get the job done themselves and/or did not believe they could accomplish the task at hand on their own. These parents not only robbed their kids of their self esteem, but also robbed them of trust.
For Ms. Huffman and Ms. Loughlin to have "work that has vanished", perhaps that is the first of many lessons they may learn from this.
9
How did the financial crisis in 2008 not result in AT LEAST as much investigation, prosecution and potential punishment on Wall Street as 50 or so people with this college scandal?!
Every prep school, college and university's development department, admissions department and athletic departments have been doing some version of this for decades.
Obviously, this needs to be prosecuted, but don't Federal prosecutors have bigger fish to fry with the ongoing white-collar crime that ends up adversely affecting so many more Americans that this college scandal does?
23
"... don't Federal prosecutors have bigger fish to fry ...?"
So you think criminals should go free if their crime is not the biggest?
I volunteered in the college office of a private L.A. high school back when my kids were applying to college. What I remember most about many of the parents was how breathlessly and desperately they wanted their children to get into the Ivies and top tier universities, not because the parents were interested in education, but because it gave them bragging rights and increased their own profile.
Laurie Laughlin is the smug, entitled face of this behavior, and it’s as revolting now as it was then.
31
Not that anyone is surprised, but this scheme still irks me no end.
8
During the NCAA March Madness Tournament this year, over 47 million Americans bet/gambled over $8.5 Billion dollars. One has to wonder what the actual enthusiasm for the game was about?
Your bracket or college sportsmanship?
While the college admissions scandal is real and should be pursued through the courts to end these types of schemes, the issue of how money is used and abused in our colleges and universities goes far beyond these 2 Hollywood actresses/parents.
Sure, seeing 2 liberal/elite/coastal/hollywood women facing 'justice' must have been rewarding to some who are smug. We can be assured that many parents not named in this particular law suit are nervous across all 50 states and that they are re-evaluating their strategies to get junior into college.
What we are avoiding is the the role of money in perverting the role of education in our society especially as regards college education. Used to be that sports were considered to be a secondary but necessary part of an education for a 'well rounded' individual. Now it seems sports has overtaken the primary goal of an education. And of course that taints the admission process and goals.
Americans need to reorient our outlook towards college education in many ways. We could start by respecting knowledge and how that helps people function in society today.
28
@Elizabeth
Lori Loughlin is not liberal.
2
@Elizabeth
What percent of students do you suppose get into the college they got into by means other than earning the position? I have to believe it is pretty darn small. And what percent of college enrollment is made up of student athletes that are 1) Division 1 and 2) being exploited for the sake of others? Again, I have to believe it is pretty darn small. It is big money and many gain from the athlete's talent other than the athletes, but the percent of students actually impacted negatively is tiny.
1
@Elizabeth An elite athlete is 10% talent and 90% drive. It is the exceptional DRIVE that leads many of these student athletes to go on to do big things in life. Elite schools know this and they seek this out in the applicant pool. If the formula didn't work they wouldn't be doing it.
There were maybe 33 people arrested, but we get the People magazine version — about two actresses. (Also, is "When her daughter’s high school suggested that she take the test at school, Ms. Huffman sent an email to Mr. Singer that said: 'Ruh Ro!'" supposed to convey anything? It doesn't.)
9
@polymath Clearly you were never a Scooby Doo watcher in your youth, polymath. Ruh Ro is Scooby's (a dog) way of saying uh oh, aka this is not going well. The meaning in that email is very clear.
34
@polymath "Ruh ro!" is the Scooby-Doo version of "Uh oh!"
10
@polymath
"Ruh Ro!" is what cartoon character Scooby Doo would say when he detected trouble or was caught up in mischief.
1
Imagine having the ability to pay $500,000 to someone in 1 -5 installments over a period of 18 months.
And still have money left over to live a rich life.
49
Not withstanding my lack of sympathy for these folks and their off springs, What I would like to know is how can a school not allow a student to withdraw. Its like a job that you can't quit. How is that legal? Anyone?
37
@Ronald
Because there is no law against it.
1
@Ronald It initially perplexed me as well, but I suspect that the principle is similar to you can't just move to another state when you commit a crime (or drop out of a class after you learn that your grade will be an F). They need to be held academically/morally responsible (or cleared) before being allowed to disenroll. For better or worse, U.S. policy increasingly is that universities are responsible for policing student behavior.
2
Follow the money. In investing there is the cockroach theory: you never see one, A company that has a problem has more than one problem. These two actors are not in contention for gangster of the year, so they are simply the two we got to see. There's more. So the larger issue then is how we got here. After WWII there was a revolution in US education. The people's army of the war and became a student proletariat. The Neil Kinnock quote applied to millions of people first in family ever to get a degree. Then came another revolution as the boomers rebelled on college campuses here, in Paris, Berlin, many places. There was an egalitarian moment. It passed. A new deal was made. Minorities and women would be let in if they in turn agreed to the fundamental underlying idea of systemic privileged. The frat houses were allowed to stand, but now black pledges would simply sign off on the same world view. The idea of a real real meritocracy was shelved in exchange for carve outs. In the name of diversity, sometimes less qualified students would be enrolled, but legacy appointments would continue. You will note that in contrast to the post war surge of enrollment, which basically put working class kids on campus, we essentially re-established the old order. There would be carve outs, while some would make it there on their own. And in a nation that often confuses class and race, we confused racial diversity with class diversity. Maybe we should try merit.
2
@Douglas Green. Merit is all well and good. However in many, if not most instances, a person's ability to become meritorious is determined by the conditions of their lives economically. Zip code tends to be destiny for most regarding their educational opportunities.
3
I do not object to anything about this update, but I would appreciate more back stories of some of the other players in the scandal.
Isn't a White Shoe Firm-type Lawyer about to be disbarred for pleading guilty to cheating for his daughter, having already lost his wildly lucrative partnership in his firm??
What about other MEN who were cheating? What kind of positions of power have the cheaters attained?
Aren't there some pretty high level names among the Felonious Fathers as well as these Dumb & Delinquent Dames??
240
@Feminist
I agree. Martha Stewart went to jail for lying related to insider trading. Phil Mickelson got caught insider trading as well but nothing came out of it. It is double standard.
He also had contact with Singer. I hope FBI did not turn a blind eye.
16
@Feminist
Same as Martha Stewart, same as Anita Hill being ridiculed.
7
Maybe I missed something. What does “Ruh Ro” mean? Thank you.
14
@Leanne Yes it would be helpful if they explained it. It's a variation of "uh oh," mispronounced by Scooby-Doo. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ruh-roh
8
@Leanne, this is how a number of animated canines (Scooby Doo; Astro from the Jetsons) said "uh, oh" in response to an unexpected situation or even as a way of saying "I goofed."
And I'm a little embarrassed that I know so much about this!
13
@Leanne
From the Jetsons' TV show - dog speak for uh-oh.
1
The Estrogen TV movie may even star the women, if they will let them do their time on weekends. Will Martha Stewart do a cameo. Could they guest on ''Orange is the New Black''?
Can't wait for the afternoon talk show apology tour, plugging the movie and the tearfest that will follow.
This is "Page Six " fodder.
7
@Lawrence
Plenty of men did far worse than Martha Stewart and did not spend even one day in jail.
23
One was not only crooked, she was smart to only pay $15,000. Ms Loughlin, who never attended college, apparently thought the price was far higher - $500,000. Well, we know where her girls got their lack of brains!
Both broke the law. Both knew it. One just got a better price for her chicanery.
26
@India They paid a different price for different schemes. Aunt Becky went all it, and paid for the full admission to college for both daughters. Felicity just paid for SAT corrections. So, both did break laws, but the severity and consequences is greatly different.
38
The demeanor of these two women is completely different. Huffman is embarrassed and clearly ashamed, while Loughlin trots around with that 'aren't I cute?' look on her face. One has taken responsibility and the other thinks fame will cure everything.
I have sympathy for Huffman, who will do whatever it takes to right her wrong, but Loughlin? She'd better have an extra half million lying around to pay lawyers.
Now, lower the hammer on those who allowed this to happen.
109
1/2 a million to get 2 in USC? A crime of stupidity!
274
@Bos Like Colbert said 500K to get the kids at top notch schools and USC...
14
"And on the acting front, the experiences of Ms. Huffman and Ms. Loughlin lately have been nearly identical: Work has vanished."
Other than a college-admissions-scandal defendant ... Who is this Loughlin woman? (I read that she was an actor in some kids' sitcom on T.V. -- but I've not been a 'kid' since T.V.'s were only 'black-and-whites.') And what is this "work" of hers you reference as "vanished"?
8
@Thomas Murray - Thomas. Google. It has information. You want the readers of this comment section to do your work for you? Irony is everywhere.
21
Well, the actresses might consider hiring Kim Foxx. Their troubles could disappear overnight, with the records sealed.
14
"Following his suggestion, they would present the daughter — Isabella Rose Giannulli — as a coxswain, though she had never rowed crew. "
Sorry to nitpick, but as a former cox'n, I feel it necessary to point out that a cox'n does not "row." A cox'n "coxes" a boat. The rowers are the ones who row.
116
@James Grosser, have you ever heard the expression "she coxes crew"?
Didn't think so.
7
@James Grosser
I think the point is that she got onto the rowing team without merit. She knows she does not belong, so in that sense she shares some part of the guilt.
5
@Mford
Cox is a noun and an intrasitive verb in that usage -- you can cox a shell. an eight or a four, but not a crew. Usually with a loud mouth, and not much else.
5
The perfect community service project for Felicity and others: They serve for a year as volunteer college coaches in inner city high schools, helping students who lack resources (financial and otherwise) navigate the college admissions process. This could include help filling out financial forms, determining "best fit" colleges, and help (within reason) with application forms. And they could also be required to pay a fine - which goes into a scholarship fund.
165
Sadly, they are probably no more adept at the application process than their children who were in need of assistance. It’s probably a miasma of confusing and conflicting requirements.It’s changed a lot since my application days.
Plus, are they really the team to unleash on unsuspecting,honest but under invested in young people?
25
@Leanne I agree. I thought it was implicit but yeah, they'd need to receive training (and supervision) before unleashing them on students.
6
@Camper
They might just say, "I know someone who could help you there."
11
These two actresses are the face of the problem, but the tip of the iceberg. These weak points in the college admissions process - athletic programs, time exemptions for people with medical issues or other disabilities, college admissions advisors, crooked proctors - have been exploited by other parents and admissions coaches. The Boston Globe uncovered one of them last week, involving Harvard Fencing coach Peter Brand's 2016 sale of his home for $989,500 to a businessman named Jie Zhao, nearly twice its appraised value. Both of Zhao's kids got into Harvard.
Since it's impossible to stop the core problem -- greed and society's obsession with status -- how about schools start rethinking the way admissions are handled? Here's one: Selective schools establish a baseline academic and social profile of what's required to flourish at their schools (probably about a quarter to half of the applicants to selective schools), and then do a random lottery to determine who gets extended an invitation to the incoming freshman class? No special consideration because your SAT happened to be a little higher on test day, your parents hired an admissions coach, or the family name is on a school building.
56
@Krakatoa
Hi K,
Funny, I have been advocating for this approach for years.
So far...
cheers, Eric S
4
@Krakatoa How about the athletic admissions get a totally different kind of diploma (if they survive) thus indicating they were not the cream of the academic creams to begin with. So a Academic - Harvard diploma, not a full Harvard diploma. If your kid is really bright and would get in anyway don't take that route, give the slot to a jock. Odd I know but it would cut down the cheating and reinforce academics. Plus you want to know who you are hiring.
3
@Krakatoa I think your randomness idea is brilliant if college were merely for academics. Having attended one of these big-whig schools, I'd venture to say academics is probably about 30% of it. The rest really is the atmosphere and social connections it affords the few that do get in. If you want just grades, then attend a top tier state school. They're easier to get into and much harder to do well in.
I really believe a school like Harvard or Yale or Stanford would suffer if they didn't take into account who specifically they're letting in. Letting the Zhao kids is a major benefit to the fencing team, but also to the school et large as they come from a strong familial business background, something a kid with just academic rigor would be lacking (myself when I started undergrad). Those connections are worth their weight in gold. That method of thinking is essential in our society today. Of course, I'd keep in mind that the Zhao kids are at least worthy of Harvard in terms of "on-paper" excellence, so that extra push was just the guarantee that Zhao needed.
I am baffled by this portrayal of Huffman as being guilty of a lesser crime than Loughlin. Just because she managed to get a "better deal" by only paying $15k (vs. $200-500k) to help her child makes her crime no less egregious.
58
@Neil
Besides the money, the difference is degree. If we compare Mr. Singer's services to a menu, Ms. Huffman apparently ordered just an appetizer (test for one student) but Ms. Loughlin a whole meal for two students (test, phony team pix, bribe to coach, more).
60
I agree. I actually think Huffman is worse because she advocated CHEATING on the exam.
And yet she claims the daughter knew nothing about it - yeah right. What, did her daughter suddenly think she was a genius & that a special testing session for her was normal? Again, yeah right...
2
Lori Loughlin thought that jail is for poor brown and black people who engage in minor crimes. Not for pretty white women who are wealthy. I have to say (also being a white woman but who tries to be aware of my privilege and who doesn't try to game systems), I feel a bit of schadenfreude.
Next up for prison, Boeing execs who allowed people to fly on airplanes that they knew the planes needed software updates, and white collar criminals who tank our economy.
291
@Anne Indeed. Corruption in the United States at all levels is rampant. And yet the U.S. lives with the myth that it is spotless. The Boeing scandal is far worse, however, as it cost so many lives, and the company and its management tried initially to blame it on the swarthy folks in Africa and Asia. Throw the book at them, and I hope that the world will buy Airbus from the Europeans.
70
@Caroline Ok Caroline lets think this through(a deviation for a left/liberal). Boeing does more then any company in US to give us a Trade surplus and raise our GDP.
No Boeing, so the European consortium
severely hurts our trade deficit and GDP and we have to have massive budget cuts to education, social services and the poor.
Why, because Caroline wants Boeing to disappear and then the Seattle employment market should crash.
Great idea from clueless!
2
@paul adler
You're right, they make a lot of money so they should not have to suffer any consequences. /s
13
Y'all, these two paragraphs say the opposite thing:
In the end, prosecutors say, the scheme went forward, and Ms. Huffman’s daughter, who is now a senior in high school and apparently knew nothing of the plans, got a score of 1420, about 400 points higher than she had earned on her Preliminary SAT exams.
When it came time for Ms. Huffman’s younger daughter to take the test, Ms. Huffman and Mr. Singer again spoke in detail and plans began for a similar process, according to the criminal complaint against Ms. Huffman. The plans, though, were ultimately scrapped, the prosecutors said, and the younger girl apparently took the tests on her own.
Which one is right?
5
@Molly Rockett She has two daughters, Georgia Grace Macy (18 years old) and Sofia Grace Macy (17). From how the article reads, Georgia took the SAT while in junior year HS and her scores were manipulated. She's now a senior, and the parents didn't go through with the scam for younger Sofia.
13
@Molly Rockett
It's two different children. The older daughter's exam was doctored; they decided not to go through with it for the younger daughter.
10