<p>Worked up? You’re reading far more emotion into my response than was there. You seemed surprised that I would defend one of my own. My point to you, really to the OP, is that there are people out in the cold cruel world who bite back and who don’t care if they get bloodied in the process. She’d better be ready for the blowback.</p>
<p>On the question of the OP’s motivations, you’re right, in an academic sense it’s irrelevant, thieves are always turning on each other and giving ‘states evidence’, it doesn’t change the crime. I just have a hard time assigning any noble intent to the OP’s actions. Wrapping those actions in some noble cause smacks of rationalization.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nor is there anything indicating that it’s true, beyond the OP’s word. Of course we could ask why would she lie? But that would bring back the persistently pesky motivation question.</p>
<p>As for ‘stealing’ a spot at UCLA, what if she submitted this work and said in her application “This is the type of work I aspire to; but, as you can see, my own work now isn’t up to this caliber.” Has she ‘stolen’ anything then? Does the OP know beyond a shadow of a doubt the entirety of what the accused submitted? I’ll say it again, we’ve heard half of a story - convoluted, filled with jealousy, envy and fraud - but still only half of a story. If you want to throw in with the OP, be my guest, but my dadar (dad radar) says there’s a lot more to be heard.</p>
<p>Regardless, if a spot was ‘stolen’ that’s UCLA’s problem. One that I think they will look for a way to happily ignore for the reasons I’ve mentioned in other posts.</p>