Former Harvard University fencing coach Peter Brand arrives at the federal courthouse in Boston
Former Harvard University fencing coach Peter Brand arrives at the federal courthouse where he is being tried on charges of engaging in a bribery scheme aimed at securing the admission of a businessman's two sons at Harvard, in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., December 13, 2022. Reuters

A former Harvard University fencing coach and a Maryland businessman were acquitted on Wednesday of charges that they schemed to secure coveted spots for the businessman's two sons at the Ivy League school in exchange for $1.5 million in bribes.

A federal jury in Boston found Peter Brand, the former coach, and Jie "Jack" Zhao not guilty of all of the charges against them in a case that prosecutors portrayed as part of their broader effort to stamp out corruption in the U.S. college admissions process.

"Today's verdict supports what we have said from the beginning - Peter Brand is innocent," said Douglas Brooks, his lawyer.

The case was tried by some of the same prosecutors who had secured several of the 50-plus convictions arising out of a recent college admissions scandal involving wealthy parents and coaches at elite universities nationally.

The Harvard case was unrelated to that investigation, which was dubbed "Operation Varsity Blues," and instead was prompted by the Boston Globe reporting in 2019 that Zhao had bought the coach's rundown home at an inflated price.

Prosecutors said Zhao did so as part of a scheme to bribe Brand into helping his sons get into Harvard as fencing recruits.

Prosecutors said Zhao, the co-founder of telecommunications company iTalk Global Communications Inc, bribed Brand by covering the costs of a new sports car, Brand's son's student loans and college tuition, and the coach's utility bills.

Then in 2016, Zhao bought Brand's house for nearly twice its assessed value, allowing Brand to buy a $1.3 million condo in Cambridge, prosecutors said. Zhao paid the $50,000 down payment for that condo and covered renovation costs.

Defense lawyers argued that Zhao viewed the home as an investment, that other payments he made to Brand were loans to a friend and that his sons could have gotten into Harvard on their own merit.

"We are grateful to the jury for their service and for doing justice in this case," said Zhao's lawyer, Bill Weinreb.

U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins in a statement said that while prosecutors "fundamentally disagree" with the verdict, they respected it.

"The instant case exposed such profound levels of privilege, entitlement and wealth abusing the college admissions process that something had to be done," she said. "And I am proud that we did."