Whoever is currently buying FTP for cash/bofa/or whatever.. what is current rate?

Very interesting. TY for posting. Recommended reading etc.

I'm still reading up on a lot and I have no history of law or anything of that nature, but I think it's better to be pessimistic in these instances than optimistic to see more of the puzzle. Free Phil Ivey clearly knows what he is talking about but isn't the crux of his argument that online sites can not be charged with money laundering etc because there was no initial crime (illegal gambling site)? What if that is not the DOJ's primary charge but instead the bribing of banks or something along those lines? I think it's important we keep updating this thread and other smaller threads to keep all the relevant big info in because it's impossible to keep up with the big thread.

The indictment / press release are publicly available. Money laundering sure seems to be the primary charge.

Fraud is the primary charge.

has the DOJ ever 'lost' a case?

I forget the exact number, but they have a 90%+ conviction rate in the southern district of ny.

So then isn't Free Phil Ivey's argument irrelevant? He was operating under the assumption that illegal online gambling is the head of the charge and anything under that could tumble assuming Stars/FTP are not committing illegal online gambling site.

I believe it was linked that they win 77-80% of cases.

So let me get this straight, is there a chance this ends in a massive precedent setting court battle for online poker's future where all the degens of the world can sweat intently drinking heavily praying for the best and expecting the worst?

That sounds exciting.

"I call defendant number four, Mr. Phil Ivey to the stand."

*Ivey Stare*

Sounds exciting. I'd take a 20-80 shot of poker coming back over what I feel like it is now!

He was saying that it wasn't money laundering because online poker isnt illegal.

To answer your question the DOJ success rate at trial (which is all that matters) is 77-80%. Contrary to you uninformed opinion that is not 100%. I have experience dealing with DOJ attorneys and have beat them - so have many other competent attorneys. Most of the time the accused cannot afford competent counsel. That is not the case here.

Furthermore, most criminal prosecutions are straight forward cases that are easy to prosecute - they are basically impossible for the government to lose. This is not one of those cases.

should make everyone more optimistic

but

If PS and FT fight it out (and I hope they do) it will take a long time. I am not sure how backlogged the docket is in USDC SDNY at the moment but we are talking years.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=135

Obviously I hope this guy is wrong, but it does seem like fraud is the primary charge and this has nothing to do with the legality of online poker.

There's no question. Read the indictment or the press release:

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pres...dictmentpr.pdf

http://www.scribd.com/doc/53107543/I...itar-Tom-et-al

This is about fraud. They're also being convicted of otehr things of course, but fraud is the main charge.

Just a note about the Scott Tom owning UB thing - the indictment says 'at certain times relevant to this indictment' (2006-2011) he was a principal decision maker at UB, so the inference that he is still one of the owners of UB (and that they have been hiding it) is quite probably erroneous.

scott tom was dating my ex gf and he told her many times that he was still involved day to day with ap she didnt understand why he was keeping it so secret. So this news doesnt suprise me one bit

I see some people itt relying on what this guy is saying, and I would take his words with many, many grains of salt. For instance, his first paragraph looks like something written by an undergrad pre-law student. Fwiw, I'm a mid-high stakes pro but was a lawyer for a year.

The best cliffs I've seen on 2p2 (and I haven't looked very hard) is TeddyFBI's cliffs in the legislation forum. He goes through the individual counts and explains them in layman's terms so that you can easily understand what the mostly redundant 57-page indictment says. He, as well as the ex-lawyer who made an OP in the legislation forum, are correct when they say that count 8 is what is basically not defensible. That's the bank fraud charge. Bank fraud has nothing, repeat absolutely nothing, to do with online poker and whether online poker is skill, luck, 27.875489% skill and the rest luck, or whatever. There's really no defense to this; the processors are 100% F'd imo there and the sites are pretty screweed since the DOJ was giftwrapped all the internal docs they need to establish that the sites were in on it with the processors.

Everything else in the indictment in some way deals with unlawful internet gambling, and the skill v. luck issue is there and will need to be ironed out. The one state law statute that they use (some NY Penal statute) defines gambling as (I'm paraphgasing here off the top of my head) "any wager where luck is involved even if skill is also involved."

and no company ever survived after getting charged by the DOJ. (what i was told)

neteller?

ill ask him if that was the same kind of deal, it's possible he was plain wrong hehe... He seemed like he knew what he was talking about sorry if that wasnt true

Sigh... I feel you.

unrelated topic but does anyone know if quicktender has been gged or if theyre still straight?

Do many of the high and medium stake pro's have the majority of their liquid wealth online?

If majority = 70% I would guess yes

Yes, anything above 50% is considered a majority.