Attorneys for former Harvard fencing coach Peter Brand and a Maryland businessman accused of a $1.5 million bribery conspiracy told a federal jury the coach recruited the man’s sons because they were everything Harvard wanted: nationally ranked fencers with top grades and the potential to deliver big future donations.
(Bloomberg) — Attorneys for former Harvard fencing coach Peter Brand and a Maryland businessman accused of a $1.5 million bribery conspiracy told a federal jury the coach recruited the man’s sons because they were everything Harvard wanted: nationally ranked fencers with top grades and the potential to deliver big future donations.
“Coach Brand would have breached his honest services to Harvard if he did not recruit them,” said William Weinreb, attorney for ITalk Global Communications Inc. founder Jie “Jack” Zhao, during a closing statement in a trial in Boston.
The jury is set to begin deliberations Wednesday in the trial of Zhao, 63, and Brand, 69 that lasted 10 days. Harvard fired the coach in 2019 for violating the college’s conflict of interest policies after the Boston Globe reported Zhao bought Brand’s house, paying more than $400,000 over its assessed value.
“A lot of potential conflicts of interest might not feel right, but they are not a bribe,” Brand’s attorney Douglas Brooks said during his closing statement Tuesday. “Some of you might understandably not like that this happened. It might feel wrong, but it’s not a crime.”
Federal prosecutors told the jury they didn’t dispute that Zhao’s sons were Harvard-caliber fencers with top academic credentials. But even with those stellar credentials, their admission was never certain at the wildly competitive college, the government said. A committee of more than 40 people voted for their admission but the coach’s rave recommendation “made the difference,” a retired senior admission officer testified.
“Zhao did not want to leave his sons’ admission to chance. He wanted to do everything he could to make sure they got in. He wanted to grease the skids and Peter Brand was his willing partner,” Assistant US Attorney Mackenzie Queenin told the jury.
Read more: Ex-Harvard Coach, CEO Go on Trial in Admissions-Bribery Case
Federal prosecutors presented scores of text messages and emails that the government says prove a conspiracy began in 2012 when Virginia fencing instructor Alexander Ryjik introduced the Zhao family to Brand.
Ryjik testified he was the middleman who was supposed to deliver a $1 million bribe, but he kept $900,000 for his own foundation and was cut out of the scheme.
Zhao then began paying Brand’s expenses directly. He paid for a downpayment on a Cambridge condo, $150,000 in renovations, a new car, utility bills and Brand’s son’s tuition, prosecutors said.
Brand’s and Zhao’s wives both testified the payments were generous loans that Brand repaid from an inheritance following the death of his mother. Other witnesses said Zhao was known for his generosity. The wives’ testimony diverged when it came to the house sale. Brand’s wife said Zhao set the price. Zhao’s wife said the Brands named the price of almost $1 million.
Zhao stopped paying Brand’s bills once Zhao’s younger son won admission to Harvard in 2017, the government said.
During the trial, both sons testified about their fencing careers, academic success and their admiration for their parents, who emigrated from China in the 1980s and became US citizens. Eric graduated from Harvard in 2018 with a degree in statistics and a 3.84 GPA. Edward graduated in 2021 with a degree in economics and a 3.92 GPA.
In closing statements, the defense blasted the government for giving Ryjik an immunity deal in exchange for his testimony. Ryjik admitted to “misusing” funds from his own foundation for personal expenses and to submitting false information to get thousands in PPP loans that he must now pay back. He also didn’t give refunds to other parents for fencing lessons they never received.
“They gave this liar and a criminal a get out of jail free card,” Weinreb told the jury, arguing Ryjik tailored his testimony to fill holes in the government’s case.
The defense contends Harvard was not a victim of any crime and benefited greatly from the admission of Zhao’s sons. The family paid full tuition, gave Harvard $300,000 in donations and the sons’ mother testified she hosted a fundraiser at their home.
In a rebuttal, Assistant US Attorney Stephen Frank told the jury that “the entire college admissions system is the victim” of Zhao’s and Brand’s crimes. “The victims were the tens of thousands of kids who apply to Harvard each year and do it in good faith. When the system is corrupted, everybody loses,” Frank said.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2022 Bloomberg L.P.
