Sure the admissions scandal is more pervasive, but on an individual level, should Felicity Huffman or Loughlin expect her case to be dismissed just as Smollett’s case was?
So is making bribes to get your kid into a second rate university worse than faking an attack on yourself and reporting it to police for personal and political reasons?
Is forming a company to defraud multiple institutions and involve their employees in a highly illegal fraud scheme more important than one guy deciding to stage an attack?
(Fixed that for ya.)
Yes. Yes it is. Why is this even a question?
USC’s average ACT is 31-33, and that’s including all the spoiled rich kids and recruited athletes. Normal people have to be at the top of that range. A 33 is the 99%. I don’t think it’s fair to call it “second rate”.
Smollett’s case should not been dismissed. But all that’s missing is an admission of guilt, substantial community service, and a heavier fine. I don’t think Loughlin or Huffman should get more than that, but they were at the end of line. That guy Singer should suffer worse consequences, as should his cohorts depending on their involvement.
ISTM that Smollett did more harm to the cause of justice, if there is such a thing. Rich people bribing universities to get their children in - this is dog bites man. But now everyone who suffers a genuine hate crime is going to be subjected to that extra bit of doubt as to whether they might be faking it.
In a way it’s like whats-his-name the sports team owner going to a massage parlor vs. the Duke rape case. I get that sexual trafficking is a dreadful thing, but nobody doubts that it happens because a rich guy got a tug. IYSWIM.
Regards,
Shodan
This, except that perhaps Smollett might deserve more due to using up police resources because who knows what actual crime might have not been investigated. But I agree they deserve punishment on the same level, and the ringleaders of the bribery scheme should get more than them.
I listened to a Chicago official that explained why he was released, and it seemed to make sense. I don’t think the fact that he was released makes his effect on society any better, though.
I think, ultimately, what Smollett did was more corrosive to society than what the rich people did. That doesn’t mean they should be let off the hook like he was, of course. I think it’s rare that sentences take into account the effect on society.
The rich people committed fraud, and that is a serious offense that has some serious repercussions. Smollett filed a false report, which is a less serious offense, even though the context of his false report may have more broad societal implications than what the rich people did.
So, worse from a criminal perspective? Rich people.
Worse from the societal POV? Smollett.
Since the OP doesn’t define what “worse” means, we’ll go with this. I would expand this notion to include the police/prosecutors actions to the Smollett case as contributing to doing harm to the cause of justice. Had he been prosecuted to some extent (community service, etc.) then there would be more opportunity to conclude that “justice was served”. Whereas now we are left with something that mal-contents can hang their hat on to make all sorts of specious claims.
Loughlin and Huffman’s crime wasn’t just against two colleges, but it was also a crime against the government (tax fraud).
Jussie Smollet filed a false police report.
The idea that these two women might spend a few weeks or months in prison really seems to be upsetting people.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Such as who? I haven’t read the posts of anyone who seems to be upset here, which is different than a modestly-held opinion comparing two actions.
LOL.
Jessie Smollette matters as much as (a) you care about Jesse Smollet (b) you care about group think and “my sideism”. It truly is a non-issue in this larger world of ours.
The other was an incorporated multi-state fraud which ran for years, which counts as the victims not people named “Felicity Huffman” and “Lori Loughlin” nor their children, but hundreds, thousands of 17 and 18 year-olds who are nameless.
I can’t believe the question “This guy faked his own mugging, while this guy stole from hundreds of college students and duped other parents into committing crimes as well. Which is the more important crime?” was deemed worthy of this Board, much less is being taken seriously. C’mon, guys and gals.
But… then… You Know Who was fined $25m for literally operating a Fake University, so I guess I can see why many people are having this moment of moral obscurity. :rolleyes:
Rich people getting their undeserving kids into a prestigious college is not some surprise. It wouldn’t bother me one bit if Loughlin & Co. did some time to set an example though. That kind of shit should stop, and maybe seeing some people go down for it would help.
I think the worse thing Smollett did was undermine the credibility of real hate crime victims. You can’t really put a cost on that. I would be okay with him getting off on what he’s done, but for him to continue to proclaim innocence and not apologize at least is ridiculous.
If you’re predisposed to discount the existence of all hate crimes because some two-bit actor was discovered to have faked his mugging within, what… 36 hours after it occurred, then I don’t think much damage was truly done to true victims of hate crimes.
I wasn’t counting in the tax fraud before. Loughlin is much more vulnerable because of the amount. It’s not simple failure to declare either, they are assumed to be knowingly involved in a conspiracy to defraud through the use of a non-profit organization. They still probably won’t go to jail. It’s white collar crime, if you enforce those things with a heavy hand before you know it lawyers and judges could end up behind bars.
I have been seeing all kinds of durpy Reddit posts like, “Shouldn’t we be going after real criminals?” and “Do they really deserve to go to jail?” Yesterday, I had to shake my head over someone whining that it isn’t fair to send first-time offenders to prison. “I am sure they learned their lesson!”
I don’t know if they are being treated this way because they are famous, pretty white women, wealthy, or all of the above. But I never see the same hand-wringing when its Billy Ray or Tyrone being accused of conspiracy.
Here’s the clincher for me. What Smollett did could have easily gotten two innocent men arrested, imprisoned and in lifelong debt for attorney fees. How does that remotely compare to bribing colleges that play favorites anyways.
This discussion? Sounds about white.
I agree with this.
Someone, somewhere is going unpunished for a nonviolent crime.
So nobody involved in either of the two cases inexplicably linked by the OP should be punished either, because, like, it’s unfair, man. 
This couldn’t have happened because the “accused” were in on Jussie’s ruse. They were the ones who spilled the beans in the first place.
Now, last summer when all those white women were calling the police on black people for simply existing, were you on the side calling for them to be arrested and punished? Because after all, siccing the police on people unnecessarily can not only result in ruined innocent lives, it can result in death. Especially when those innocent lives are black and male. I think every BBQ Becky and Peppermint Patty should have been sent to prison for doing what she did. But alas, that is not what happened. So can you understand why I am not exactly frothing at the mouth over what Jussie Smollett did ?
When black people stop being hassled by the Karens of the world, I’ll have enough fucks for the crimes of the Jussies.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk