ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh judge sentences Chinese woman to home confinement in test-taking scandal |

Pittsburgh judge sentences Chinese woman to home confinement in test-taking scandal

| Tuesday, April 19, 2016 5:57 p.m

A Chinese woman who paid two people to take exams for her so she could attend Virginia Tech will spend six months on home detention, U.S. District Judge Joy Flowers Conti ruled Tuesday in Pittsburgh.

Yue Zou, 22, of Blacksburg, Va., pleaded guilty in October to participating in a long-running conspiracy that had people in China making counterfeit passports and shipping them to the United States. They then paid others already in the United States to use the passports and take college entrance exams and English fluency tests on their behalf.

Most of the fraudulent exams were taken in Western Pennsylvania, prosecutors said.

Zou, who was legally in the country on a green card, was one of 15 people indicted in the conspiracy. Virginia Tech has expelled Zou, and immigration officials have notified her that she will face deportation proceedings, according to court documents.

At least two other people have pleaded guilty to, or were convicted of, their role in the conspiracy, including one who tried to gain admission to the University of Pittsburgh while he was living in the city. Another sent fraudulent test results to eight universities, one of which was Carnegie Mellon University.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.