In the latest development with the college admissions cheating scandal, a source reports that the former 'Full House' star feels "manipulated."
Lori Loughlin and her husband Massimo Giannulli pleaded not guilty to all charges –– conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, honest services mail and wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit money laundering –– in the scandal surrounding the college admissions scam.
The couple was accused of paying $500,000 to get their daughters, Olivia Jade and Isabella, into USC as crew recruitments, despite the fact that neither of them participates in the sport.
A source close to Loughlin told ET, "[Lori and her husband] claim they were under the impression they might be breaking rules, but not laws," and that "they feel they were manipulated by those involved and are planning that as part of their defense."
After the initial charges, Loughlin and Giannulli were indicted on a second charge of conspiring to commit fraud and money laundering on April 9th, on top of the initial charge of conspiracy to commit mail fraud. The second charge came after Loughlin did not accept the plea bargain that would have allowed for a minimum two and a half year sentence and no additional money laundering charges. People reported on a source close to Loughlin who stated that at the time of rejecting the plea deal, she "didn't really realize how serious the charges were."
If convicted, Loughlin and Giannulli could serve up to 20 years in prison for each charge, totaling a maximum of 40 years. According to TMZ, the couple faces a minimum time of four years and nine months.
Another source told E! News, "Lori really believes she isn't guilty and that any parent would have done the same thing that she did if they were in that position."
Up until the second indictment, Loughlin was apparently under the impression that she would not be going to jail and instead expected a "slap on the wrist," according to ET. Now that the new charges are raised, things are looking far more dire.
One source told People: "[The prosecutors] are saying that the only way anyone's going to escape jail time is if they go to trial and are found not guilty."
It goes to show that trusting a con man running a fake charity to get your daughters into college is not the best move.
Sara is a music and culture writer who lives in Brooklyn. Her work has previously appeared in PAPER magazine and Stereogum.
POP⚡DUST | Read More...
- Lori Loughlin Pleads Not Guilty in College Admissions Scam | Time ›
- Lori Loughlin and her husband plead not guilty in college ... ›
- Actress Lori Loughlin pleads not guilty in college admissions case ... ›
- Lori Loughlin, husband Mossimo Giannulli plead not guilty in scam ›
- Lori Loughlin and several other accused parents plead not guilty in ... ›
- Lori Loughlin pleads not guilty in college admissions scam ›
- Why Did Lori Loughlin Plead Not Guilty in College Admissions Scam ... ›
- Lori Loughlin Pleads Not Guilty in College Bribery Case | TMZ.com ›
- Lori Loughlin pleads not guilty to new charges in college admissions ... ›
- Lori Loughlin pleads not guilty in her first response to the college ... ›
The Cocteau Twins' 1990 masterpiece is still the blueprint for dream pop.
For a band whose lyrics were famously difficult to make out most of the time, the Cocteau Twins left an indelible impact on the world of pop music.
The Scottish trio emerged in the 1980s as some of the most notable pioneers of dream pop, a subgenre of alternative rock defined by airy, sublime sonic textures. But it was their sixth album, Heaven or Las Vegas—which turns 30 today—that truly withstood the test of time, affirming the Cocteau Twins' status as perhaps the most important dream pop act of all time.
Now that Banksy's "Flower Thrower" trademark has been revoked, anyone can profit off his work.
This week anonymous street artist Banksy officially lost the European trademark to his "Flower Thrower" mural.
The guerrilla graffiti artist had engaged in a prolonged legal battle with the small greeting card company Full Colour Black—which was selling products featuring the image of a Palestinian man throwing a bouquet of flowers. But now a panel at the European Union Intellectual Property Office has announced their decision to revoke the artist's trademark on the grounds that he could not definitively prove himself to be the mural's creator.