Harvard University’s former fencing coach and a telecom CEO are facing a jury over charges that they corrupted the admissions process in a case with echoes of the “Varsity Blues” bribery scandal.
Jie “Jack” Zhao, chief executive officer of iTalk Global Communications Inc., is accused of bribing coach Peter Brand to “facilitate” getting his two sons into Harvard by having them designated fencing recruits. Prosecutors claim Zhao paid more than $1.5 million to Brand, both directly and by overpaying for the coach’s Boston-area house, paying off his car and covering some of his son’s college bills.
“What these defendants did was criminal,” federal prosecutor Ian Stearns said Monday in opening arguments in federal court in Boston. “They participated in a scheme to get Zhao’s sons into Harvard.”
Brand, 69, and Zhao, 63, have both claimed they’ve done nothing wrong and insist Zhao’s sons earned admission to Harvard on their own academic and athletic merits. Zhao’s lawyers also contend he has a history of being generous lending money to friends and say he didn’t befriend the coach until after his eldest son was already admitted.
The men each face up to 15 years in prison if convicted.
Prosecutors plan to call fencing academy founder and alleged co-conspirator Alexandre Ryjik as their main witness. According to the government, Zhao initially made a $1 million donation to Ryjik’s National Fencing Foundation in late 2013, with the understanding Ryjik would donate the funds to Brand’s family foundation. When Ryjik ultimately kept 90% of the money for himself, Zhao began making payments directly to benefit Brand, according to the indictment.
In defense opening arguments, Brand’s lawyer, Douglas Brooks, took aim at Ryjik’s credibility, casting the cooperating witness as a liar who previously denied there were any bribes but changed his story after he was caught stealing from his own foundation.
“We are here today because the government chose to ignore the real crimes committed by Alex Ryjik and chase headlines through a false narrative,” Brooks told the jury.
Harvard Harmed?
A key point at trial will be whether actions by Brand and Zhao harmed Harvard. Defense lawyers say the Ivy League school wasn’t deprived of admissions slots, scholarship funds or fencers, as both of Zhao’s sons excelled athletically and academically there.
Eric Zhao, the older son, was co-captain of Harvard’s fencing team his junior year and was named second-team All-Ivy that same 2016-2017 season, according to the college’s sports stats page. His younger brother, Edward, also competed for Harvard but racked up lesser stats, according to the athletics site. The defense says in court filings that both boys had “stellar grades” and test scores that qualified them for admission to Harvard, where the family paid their sons’ full tuitions.
“You will not see any other evidence that there was any other fencer out there that should have been recruited instead of them,” Zhao’s lawyer, Michael Packard, said in his opening statement.
Neither Brand nor Zhao have any connection to the sprawling case dubbed “Operation Varsity Blues” by federal prosecutors in Boston, though that also involved wealthy parents allegedly paying to gain their children admission to elite colleges. That scheme, orchestrated by college counselor William “Rick” Singer, ensnared dozens of wealthy and celebrity parents—including actors Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin—who either paid conspirators to cheat on admissions tests or recruit their kids as athletes in sports they sometimes didn’t even play.
In the “Varsity Blues” scandal, many corrupt coaches had the sole power to pick athletic recruits and offer admission in exchange for bribes. At Harvard, a coach can only make recommendations to the admissions committee, which Brand did for Zhao’s sons.
‘Incentive to Recruit’
Harvard fired Brand after an internal investigation into the over-priced sale of his home in 2019. Suspicions about the sale by the city assessor were detailed in a series of news stories by the Boston Globe.
Between 2013 and 2019, prosecutors claim, Zhao paid off Brand’s car and mortgage, bought the coach’s $550,000 house in suburban Boston for almost $1 million, paid a contractor $150,000 to remodel a more expensive condo Brand subsequently bought closer to Harvard, and spent more than $40,000 on tuition and student loans for Brand’s son to attend Penn State.
Stearns said Brand struggled financially, driving an ordinary car and living in an old house, before he connected with Zhao. The government has highlighted a 2013 email in which Brand allegedly told Ryjik that he could tell Zhao that his sons “don’t have to be great fencers” and that he just needed an “incentive to recruit them.”
Brand said Zhao’s older son would be “my no 1 recruit as long as my future is secured” in a later email cited in court filings.
‘Not an Exchange’
“The evidence will show these payments were bribes,” Stearns said in court.
The defense claims the money was loaned to Brand, and Packard told the jury he would present evidence showing that Zhao and his wife often made large loans to friends “based on their life experiences and culture.”
The money was “not an exchange, not a quid pro quo,” Packard said.
Brooks said Monday that Brand repaid Zhao with interest after receiving an inheritance and argued that the coach was not motivated by financial gain. Noting that Brand was a state social worker before becoming a fencing coach, the lawyer said his client was “clueless about money.”
The case is U.S. v. Brand, 20-cr-10306, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).
This article was provided by Bloomberg News.
