UCLA moves to obstruct subpoena request in college admissions scandal development
UCLA requested a judge to block former men’s soccer coach Jorge Salcedo’s request for a subpoena. The request was made for Salcedo’s trial regarding his role in the larger 2019 college admissions scandal. (Daily Bruin file photo)
March 2, 2020 2:05 p.m.
This post was updated March 5 at 2:56 p.m.
UCLA filed a request to a judge to reject a former soccer coach’s subpoena request Friday.
Former UCLA men’s soccer coach Jorge Salcedo filed a subpoena request Jan. 23 to access UCLA records of student-athletes for his case. However, UCLA filed a request Jan. 28 to reject Salcedo’s subpoena request.
Salcedo was charged with fraud and bribery in March 2019 for accepting bribes of up to $200,000 to help admit two students without any competitive soccer experience as athletic recruits. Salcedo resigned as UCLA men’s soccer coach nine days after allegations surfaced.
Salcedo’s charges were part of the larger 2019 college admissions scandal, which involved several university athletic directors and coaches helping admit applicants as athletic recruits despite having no competitive experience in exchange for payments from the applicants’ parents.
Salcedo’s lawyers claimed the fraud charges, which included mail fraud, wire fraud and honest services fraud, would be valid only if there was a corresponding victim, according to Salcedo’s subpoena request.
Salcedo’s lawyers declined to comment for legal reasons.
The evidence obtained from the subpoena would allow Salcedo to “prove that UCLA is not a victim of any of the fraud-based charges … (and that) UCLA is both the architect and orchestrator of the ‘The Student-Athlete Recruitment Scam,’” according to the subpoena request.
In UCLA’s request to reject the subpoena request, lawyers claimed Salcedo’s requested documents were irrelevant to his defense, inadmissible in court and vaguely defined. They added that even if UCLA was not considered a victim, Salcedo’s intent to defraud the university would be more important to the case.