I Googled legal definition of benefit and this was the first link:
Definitions 1 and 3 would seem to say the payment constitutes a benefit.
I Googled legal definition of benefit and this was the first link:
Definitions 1 and 3 would seem to say the payment constitutes a benefit.
This is not difficult to overcome at all. Compensation is a form of benefit. In a legal sense a “benefit” resulting from an illegal act is anything at all that might put you in a better position, give you something you didn’t have before, or anything else that is of value or worth, either monetarily or otherwise.
Again, this is not difficult at all to show. They were deprived of the ability to ascertain the true identity of the person submitting the results of the test. They were deprived of the ability to guarantee to their customers (universities) that the results were genuinely obtained by the person named on the test. Their reputation rides on the reliability of their matching of scores with persons. If this isn’t reliable, then their service loses value.
I sincerely doubt he used an actual forged government ID. I would bet a lot of money that the article was mistaken given that most articles on the matter deliberately use different wording, and that common sense would indicate that he would use an ID that would be far easier to forge.
The Thursday NY Times article referenced upthread says specifically:
In other words, out of the alleged test-taker’s six alleged frauds, one is said to have been committed using a NY driver’s license and the other five with school IDs.
The several other articles I linked to seem to quote the DA, and don’t include that info. More importantly, what is being alleged in the article you quoted is not a fake or forged driver’s license (as claimed), but a real one used by someone other than the person on it. Big difference.