I bet they do time. If their crimes ended in 2002, yet it's just being prosecuted in 2005, then there's obviously been a not-insignificant investigation. Prosecutors don't like flushing all those man hours down the toilet. Hmm. When they decided to trade acts of hacking and fraud for sex, I'll bet they never counted on the kind they'll be getting where they're going.
Yet that's what they end-up (no pun intended... er... well... maybe a little) getting, all the same. I knew if I fed this group enough rope (joke #1), someone would try to slide that one in (joke #2). (Man, am I ever hot with the twofers tonight!) PARENTHETICAL ASIDE: So far these jokes are no worse than I've heard on Letterman, so I'm probably not in trouble with Dave C. yet... but I know I'd better watch it! Seriously. I know I'm dancing on the line, but it's still the correct side of the line... even if only barely.
The other big question is this: Wouldn't there be grounds for a sex discrimination lawsuit if the women were allowed to trade either sex or money for grades while the guys were put on a cash only basis?