Parents find cost of prison can vary
Those who pleaded guilty in admissions case look to earlier sentences for clues to term length
Three Bay Area parents who pleaded guilty to fraud in the nationwide college admission cheating scandal are set to be sentenced in October, and the first round of sentences this month suggest they’ll be going to prison.
“I expect on the low end for every single parent to receive some sort of prison sentence, whether it’s weeks or months,” said former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani.
But it also appears they may not serve as much time as prosecutors want.
Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani handed four-month prison sentences to two Los Angeles businessmen who pleaded guilty to paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to get their sons fraudulently admitted to top private colleges as athletic recruits. Earlier this month, she sentenced actress Felicity Huffman to two weeks in prison for paying $15,000 to have a test proctor inflate her daughter’s SAT score.
Prosecutors had sought more than a year in prison for water system executive Devin Sloane,
13 months for sales team executive Stephen Semprevivo and a month in prison for Huffman.
“At the high end, I don’t expect any parent” who pleaded guilty “to receive more than six months,” said Rahmani, who tried fraud cases when he was in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in San Diego from 2010 to 2012.
For parents contesting the charges, including actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, recent sentences suggest the stakes are much higher. Prosecutors have added money laundering charges in an indictment against them and seven Bay Area parents.
“You get credit for owning up and pleading out,” said Manny Medrano, a former federal prosecutor who served for 10 years in the Los Angeles U.S. Attorney’s Office. “The sentence for people who are fighting this is going to be substantially more.”
The bombshell case announced in March revolved around Newport Beach admissions
consultant William “Rick” Singer, 58, who pleaded guilty to racketeering, conspiracy, fraud and money laundering charges and has cooperated with authorities.
In all, there are 52 defendants, including 13 coaches, two entrance exam administrators and 35 wealthy parents from Silicon Valley to Hollywood, Wall Street and China who paid to ease their kids’ way into elite schools, including Stanford, Yale and the University of Southern California. In addition to Singer, 22 coaches, parents and others have pleaded guilty.
The allegations rocked a country already fretting over soaring college costs and competition to get into coveted schools. A Kaplan Test Prep survey last week found that 57% of high school students feel the system favors wealthy applicants, and nearly half of admissions officers fear the scandal has hurt public faith in the system.
Prosecutors have based their sentence recommendations on the amount of money parents paid for the scheme. While the judge has disagreed with their contention
that it represents actual harm to the universities and testing organizations, she has factored it into sentences, along with other indicators that the parents understood they were perpetrating a fraud.
Of the three parents up for sentencing next month, prosecutors are seeking the longest sentence for San Francisco winemaker Agustin Huneeus Jr. — 15 months in prison. He pleaded guilty in May after prosecutors charged him with fraud for paying Singer $300,000 to inflate his daughter’s SAT score and present her to USC as a water polo star using a photo of another girl playing the sport.
In a recorded call with Singer, Huneeus joked that Singer could have had his daughter’s SAT score inflated even higher and acknowledged his daughter “isn’t worthy to be on that team.” USC sent the daughter a conditional acceptance letter in November 2018 saying she had “the potential to make a significant contribution to the intercollegiate athletic program.”
Huneeus is to be sentenced Friday. His lawyer declined to comment.
Lawyers, accused parents and prosecutors have been closely watching the first round of sentences for clues on what to expect from the judge next month.
Semprevivo, who received four months in prison, paid $400,000 to have his son admitted to Georgetown University in 2016 as a tennis athlete, though he didn’t play. As part of the deception, his son sent the Georgetown tennis coach, who also is charged in the case, a letter touting his purported tennis experience.
“Semprevivo,” prosecutors argued in a sentencing memorandum, “has been something less than a model of contrition.”
After Semprevivo pleaded guilty, prosecutors pointed out, he had a breach of contract lawsuit filed against Georgetown to block the university from expelling his son.
Sloane, who also received four months in prison, paid $250,000 to have his son admitted to USC as a water polo recruit, even though he did not play the sport. As part of the scheme, Sloane bought water polo gear and photographed his son playing water polo in the family
swimming pool, and had a graphic designer manipulate the images to make them appear more realistic.
“I think the clear writing on the wall with this judge is the amount of money spent and the more complex the fraud, those parents are going to get more prison,” Medrano said. “The level of sophistication of the deception, without a question, that’s a significant factor for this judge. They had full understanding of what they were doing.”
Prosecutors have yet to indicate specific prison terms for two parents from Menlo Park set for sentencing next month, just “incarceration at the low end of the guidelines.” Like Huffman, packaged food entrepreneur Peter Jan Sartorio and jewelry business co-owner Marjorie Klapper paid $15,000 to have their children’s entrance exam scores inflated.
After a Singer associate corrected answers for Sartorio’s daughter on the ACT exam in June 2017, she received a score of 27, putting her in the 86th percentile, which she then used to apply to universities in California and Florida, according to a court affidavit. It
was unclear whether the girl knew her score was inflated or whether she was accepted to universities. Sartorio is to be sentenced Oct. 11. His lawyer declined to comment.
The court affidavit said Klapper’s son got a 30 out of 36 on the ACT exam in October 2017 after Singer’s associate corrected his answers, and it was used in his applications to universities in California, Arizona and Colorado. In an email to Singer, Klapper exclaimed: “omg. I guess he’s not testing again,” to which Singer replied “Yep he is brilliant.”
It was unclear whether the boy knew his score was inflated or whether he was accepted to universities. Klapper is to be sentenced Oct. 16. Her lawyer declined to comment.
Medrano, the former prosecutor, said the judge has indicated that no matter what, “there’s going to be continued and consistent prison time” for the guilty parents.
“What better way to send a shot across the bow to other parents not to engage in this.”