« This has nothing to do with Laura K. Krishna | AWOK Blog | This saga is over. »

March 29, 2005

Laura K. Krishna is a Ghost.

God, I honestly had no idea this would become an internet-wide thing. My imagination had told me that this could be a funny story kept between me, her school, and a couple dozen friends of mine who visit this site. Maybe we’d get a couple extra people out to our sketch shows. But it’s done, we’re here, and you can’t go home again. Time to share the new developments, and some old ones I may have neglected to tell you.

Here is a little list of things you should know about me, and about this situation, which haven't been covered before.

1. I have too many college professors in my family to let this offense go unrecognized. Plagiarism hurts the livelihoods of my father, my grandmother, and also my cousin and brother who are currently studying education, and finally, the memory of my late grandfather. All this as well as diluting my own English degree, and the degrees of my friends who studied things other than theatre. (Sorry Erica and Dan, you're pretty diluted already.)

2. Blackmail was never really an option, but I had a good laugh thinking about it. I thought I had made it clear that I didn't want the money as much as I wanted the consequence to be poetic. I think I was trying to express that I knew blackmail was an option, but I didn't think it was an option for me.

3. I believe I gave her an excessively fair number of chances to back out. And indeed, for all I know, she has done the right thing as far as not handing in that paper. I'll be the first to congratulate her in that case.

4. Given the evidence I have, a reasonable person would assume that the person I was talking to was named Laura K. Krishna. If I have wronged someone innocent named Laura K. Krishna, I am just terribly mortified and sorry, and you can count on me to make whatever testimony is needed to fuck over the person who stole your identity. Those are the possibilities as I can see it. The person who did this plagiarism was either Laura K. Krishna, or did a good job of pretending she was Laura K. Krishna, and those are the only two possibilities that fit the facts, as far as I can see.

5. Let me present my case for knowing what the name was of the person I was talking to:

I knew her name was Laura K. Krishna before she sent the check pictures. How? Because when I first sent her a PayPal money request, she set her account up with the name Laura K. Krishna. Observe:

[Image removed]

The check pictures were just a corroborating source for what I knew already. It's also where I got the middle initial K.

$75.00

Pay to the order of Nate Kushner

[Image Removed]

If someone other than Laura K. Krishna is using someone else's name and check to do this transaction, she is involved in fraud on a much more serious level than my dumb prank.

6. That being said, I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that I'm not actually going to get a check. I talked to her last night, so this transcript is all from after I made that first entry. First, a quick e-mail exchange. We start with a polite inquiry as to the status of the check

Me: The check is in the mail, I hope?
Her: what
Me: The $75 for the paper I wrote for you.
Her: what
Me: Are you Laura K. Krishna?
Her: my name is laura but thats not my last name

Then, the following is on instant message. I promise you that this went to the exact same screen name I was corresponding with on Saturday, and at that point, the blog was not quite big yet. This one has timestamps, since it was done on AIM instead of AOL:

Me (11:06:18 PM): so you have no idea who laura k. krishna is?
Me (11:08:49 PM): hello?
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:09:27 PM): i'm laura put whose laura k. krishna
Me (11:09:59 PM): oh, I got an im from this screen name the other day.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:10:13 PM): where did u get krishna from
Me (11:10:25 PM): from someone who wanted me to write a college paper for her.
Me (11:10:55 PM): it was on an image she sent me of the check she was writing for my services.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:11:36 PM): thats weird
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:12:08 PM): is there anything i can do for u
Me (11:12:56 PM): well, if you don't believe me, take a look at the outgoing messages on your account.
Me (11:13:04 PM): we corresponded by e-mail too.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:13:21 PM): this isnt my screename its my sisters so i'm never on it she usually is though
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:13:44 PM): theres nothing in my mail box except todays mail
Me (11:14:00 PM): check "old messages"
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:14:17 PM): empty
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:14:39 PM): sry i don't know what to tell u
Me (11:14:46 PM): that's strange.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:14:57 PM): what
Me (11:15:30 PM): oh, the whole thing.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:15:33 PM): sorry no one in this house has been in college for a long time
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:15:57 PM): i graduated from college about 15 years ago
Me (11:16:31 PM): well, I'd look into seeing who was using your account on saturday night.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:16:48 PM): like i said its not my account its my sisters

Ok, I was willing to believe at that point that someone had done something screwy on someone else's account to cover their tracks. But I didn't believe in her refusal to get concerned.

Me (11:16:59 PM): fair enough.
Me (11:17:05 PM): alright, thanks for your time.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:17:06 PM): did u talk to someone on this sn saturday night
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:17:12 PM): ok
Me (11:17:13 PM): yeah, I did.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:17:34 PM): that is strange
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:18:05 PM): why did u need to talk to this person again
Me (11:18:20 PM): to see if she was actually paying me.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:19:02 PM): well...sincei have no idea who u are i'm certainly not paying u this could all be a scam for all i know
Me (11:19:21 PM): well, I'm the one who's been scammed.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:19:34 PM): sorry i dont throw money out the window and sincei have no idea what ur talking about i'm not going to pay u. how did u get scammed
Me (11:19:56 PM): no, I don't expect you to.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:20:13 PM): can i ask how old u are
Me (11:20:25 PM): I'm 24.
Me (11:20:37 PM): just trying to follow up on a conversation I had last night.
Me (11:20:55 PM): and if it's not you, I'll stop bothering you.
Me (11:21:30 PM): you obviously write at a literate level, unlike whoever I was talking to the other night.

In hindsight, I don't know why I said that, because looking over it again, it's not true.

Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:22:18 PM): well the best advice i can give to u is that sometimes u just can't be too nice. so u got scammed once theres not much u can do about it i guess sicne i don't have any answers for you the best thing to do is to probably let it go
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:22:50 PM): because my sister is usually the one on the screenname and she doesn't liek to be bothered when shes working so a little piece of advice don't im her

A normal person would have expressed concern about the hacking of her account. And the warning not to IM her sister...it's fishy. But no worries. I don't think I need to contact her anymore.

Me (11:23:44 PM): spoken like a true laura k. krishna.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:24:00 PM): what
Me (11:24:46 PM): nothing.
Claims Not To Be Laura K. Krishna (11:24:50 PM): Ok ya know what I was trying to be nice to u and help you now your just being rude.
Me (11:25:54 PM): alright, I'm out of here.
Me (11:28:00 PM): If you're not Laura K. Krishna, I'm seriously sorry if I bothered you, but I don't quite believe you, and that's all I'll say.
Me (11:28:03 PM): good night.

So, I don't have the proof that I IMed with her last night. But I also don't think there was sufficient proof that it wasn't her, especially considering that all this correspondence was with the exact same screen name. And I do now know that my hopes for getting that $75 are slim to none. That check was the thing that might have kept me obligated to keep mum, but she blew me off without even knowing anything about the blog.

7. I will not be opening myself to prosecution by cashing a check. I haven't gotten it, and I don't think I will, but I want the check more than I want the money at this point. I have some poetic aspirations for her $75, but not unless I see it in cash or paypal. If I get a tangible check, it's on my wall.

8. I want to apologize for trying to advertise our shows in comments. It seemed like a good idea. Really, it did. And I don't blame the cynics who took that as proof that the whole story was made up. I promise, the story wouldn't have been so damn long, and it would have had more jokes in it if I was making it up on purpose. That said, come to our shows. We're debuting new stuff next week, and the groups we're in that show with are some funny damn people.

9. There is one single piece of information in that first blog entry that I have falsified that will make a lot of people smile when I set it right in a day or two or three. It will help this story maintain a tight three-act structure. This untruth is not about Laura K. Krishna, but about me. All I'll say is that you'll understand why I did it.

10. I have sent an email to this address with a link to the site saying "If you are not Laura K. Krishna, this should not bother you."

Bless you all.

Posted by Nate Kushner at March 29, 2005 06:45 PM

2 Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aweekofkindness.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/6

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Laura K. Krishna is a Ghost.:

54. Ping from Schenectady Synecdoche.

Tracked on March 30, 2005 12:34 AM

104. Ping from Ad Astra Per Aspera.

Tracked on March 31, 2005 02:40 PM

36 Comments

Interesting. I agree that it seems odd to not worry about her account being hacked. I actually just finished reading the first part, and I must say, good work, and even it if doesn't manage to teach a lesson, it's still good for a laugh.

Posted by: Kevin Stock at March 29, 2005 08:14 PM

Ten bucks says she is lying. :-p

Posted by: maria at March 29, 2005 08:18 PM

Now I'm really interested to see what this correction is. More updates!

Posted by: Vinnie at March 29, 2005 08:24 PM

Shes a terrible liar.

I hope she submitted that paper you gave her.

If she is really a top student who is on the Deans List and she submitted your paper...I really wonder how stupid the other students are at that University. Perhaps she got on the Deans List by purchasing all her other papers..lmao

She seems to be a terrible liar or a mental midget.... =P

Posted by: Tom at March 29, 2005 08:28 PM

If all her papers are of this quality, it's a wonder she hasn't been kicked out already, plagiarized or not.

Posted by: Chris Coleman at March 29, 2005 08:30 PM

This fiasco turns me on.

Posted by: Boner at March 29, 2005 08:31 PM

No one who was in college fifteen years ago uses "u" in instant messaging.

I'm just saying.

Posted by: bitchphd at March 29, 2005 08:37 PM

This is great stuff; reality TV has nothing on this scenario.

Posted by: Jensen at March 29, 2005 08:37 PM

Oh. my. god. I cannot wait for act iii.

Posted by: shelley at March 29, 2005 08:39 PM

She never had any intention of paying you. She thinks she's scamming you. Woo boy is she in for a big surprise. This is the Internet, baby. Someone who knows you is watching. You're *so* busted.
And to all you whiners who think her life is ruined? Have you ever watched one of those police video shows where they film the spouse trying to hire a hitman? Do you sit there, eating your popcorn, thinking, "Aw that's not fair. Those policemen ruined that person's life for a moment's indiscretion..."

It's called *integrity*, people. Look it up.

And keep up the good work, Nate. I hope your show is SRO, man. I'd come see you and shake your hand, but I'm on the west coast.

Posted by: A fan in the cheap seats at March 29, 2005 08:39 PM

If she's 37+ (15 years ago?), I'm REALLY disturbed that she's using, well, teens-20s lazy typing. It's more than a little fishy (and how does one get a degree with that kind of writing?).

Posted by: Mel at March 29, 2005 08:39 PM

"How does one get a degree with that kind of writing?"

You'd be amazed (coming from a college English teacher).

Posted by: cut-rate parasite at March 29, 2005 08:47 PM

This is priceless. You are not even remotely responsible for anything that happens to the student -- do the same people complain when the police arrest a drug dealer? "Oh, man, that cop agreed to give him $100 for some coke, not only did they arrest the dealer, they welched on the deal! At least give the dealer his $100, you promised!"

All that said, the likelyhood of Laura K. Krishna being the name of this student's mother/sister/aunt/whatever is probably pretty good. It's not like you ever got photo ID, so they swiped a check from mom's checkbook (they knew nobody would ever cash it, so why would mom notice or care?). Curious to see how it all turns out.

Posted by: Nathaniel at March 29, 2005 08:52 PM

Not that this proves anything, but how many people who have been out of college for fifteen years share AOL screen names with their siblings?

Posted by: CJP at March 29, 2005 08:52 PM

As a student who has never plagarized (though who has turned in some pretty terrible papers) I find this whole episode brilliant and satisfying. She's a horrible liar; she didn't even bother to disguise her typing style when talking to you. And why is she using her sister's screenname if she graduated from college 15 years ago? I hope she turned that paper in.

Posted by: dnl at March 29, 2005 08:53 PM

Reading of these events gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside. To repeat what so many other people have said: she was caught doing something she shouldn't have been doing, and now she must face the consequences.

To the people claiming that the massive online infamy will now ruin her life: tough. If I were to develop a huge drug habit, be discovered and then have the news spread like wildfire through whatever social network it made its way onto, I would consider it deserved.

(Yes, I am aware I am drawing a parallel between having a drug habit and plagiarising. It's late, my analogies are running a little low.)

Posted by: jhxmt at March 29, 2005 08:54 PM

I love the comments this spawned. It's like a car accident. I can't look away!

Posted by: Alan at March 29, 2005 08:59 PM

i kno i mnt rilly part of this, but i still harken back a fyoo daisies to ax:
what is more noble than beer and rent?

Posted by: dharma4marilyn at March 29, 2005 09:05 PM

Well, the writing is no clue to her intelligence for the most part, since many intelligent people write in a lazy way in IM conversations. But the whole thing is really wierd. Plus, if it was her parents' Paypal account, why is the name "Laura K. Krishna" the one on the account? I'd like to hear what the President of India Community College has to say to Nate. Keep us posted.

Posted by: Ben at March 29, 2005 09:06 PM

Okay, now I'm just bewildered.

Posted by: Flashman at March 29, 2005 09:07 PM

I can't believe someone would actually defend this Laura. The very point of a harsh policy on plagarism is to prevent it from happening. An extremely harsh plagarism policy works. I don't think any of Laura's friends will plagiarize after their friend was kicked out of college for paying for a paper.

Congrats Nate on a job well done. You are a true American. I salute you!

Posted by: Random Guy at March 29, 2005 09:07 PM

http://digg.com/links/digg - 40 more diggs than any other link in the new posts of that section. Got one more from me, too.

Nice.

Posted by: Brilliant. at March 29, 2005 09:08 PM

that's one genius 9 year old then, seeing as she's 24 and graduated college 15 years ago.

WOW. She's like frickin' Doogie Howser!

She also seems to be pretty retarded, makes me question the admissions department at whichever university she's supposed to be enroled in. If she was going to play 'dumb', at least come up with a more logical story! GEEZ!

Posted by: blah at March 29, 2005 09:09 PM

Whoa- all the "Krishna" is being changed to "Krishna" right in front of my eyes.

Posted by: John at March 29, 2005 09:11 PM

The person claiming not to be Laura wrote a lot like the person claiming to be Laura. The same misspellings and the use of "u" instead of "you".

Posted by: Ali at March 29, 2005 09:14 PM

I think she lied about her name, I think the picture of the check is unclear and could be any Laura K's, and yet I find myself hoping you also contacted the president of Eastern Illinois for all those Laura's you couldn't identify, because if Laura K. Krishna from the Dean's List at India Community College doesn't have a Hinduism paper due, that's your best second avenue. Or so it seems to me.

Posted by: Melissa at March 29, 2005 09:14 PM

Y'know, Nate, just to make life even more amusing, you should add a Wikipedia article about Varnasrama Vindaloo Dharma that references your blog, just to see who finds it...

Posted by: Ed at March 29, 2005 09:19 PM

krishna -> krishna?

Posted by: krishna at March 29, 2005 09:21 PM

I just realized something. You say this story isn't fake but you changed her name. The original blog I read said the offender's name was Laura K. Krishna. Now it's Laura K. Krishna? Nate, you got some 'splainin' to do!

Posted by: Ali at March 29, 2005 09:22 PM

Not cool, editing my comment like that, taking out the "P-a-h-l" and turning it into "Krishna."

Posted by: John at March 29, 2005 09:23 PM

Nate... if Evil were a cereal, your picture would be on the box. And the marshmallows would turn the milk purple (the color of justice). I'm proud to know you.

Chaz

Posted by: Chaz at March 29, 2005 09:27 PM

Seems a little late in the game to be protecting the names of the innocent...er, well the names, anyway. Well, better late than never, I guess.

Posted by: Some Bloke at March 29, 2005 09:31 PM

I'm confused. How did "Krishna" become "Krishna" over the course of two blog entries?

Posted by: Dr Prometheius Scheme at March 29, 2005 09:33 PM

LOL Dr. Scheme, by the miracle of Perl scripting, I imagine. Nate controls the vertical, and the horizontal...

Posted by: Some Bloke at March 29, 2005 09:34 PM

Well, my first assumption is that Nate's doing this as a snap self-protection move, but with the shots of the Paypal account and check still up clearly saying "Krishna" (not to mention all the comments he'd need to delete...), I'm not sure what the point is.

Nate, chime in here, good pal?

Posted by: Eric at March 29, 2005 09:36 PM

Nevermind, there's the new post from Nate.

Posted by: Eric at March 29, 2005 09:37 PM