Sillysal is not requesting to be given the full "details of the investigation."

Sillysal is asking to be told what he is accused of doing. This is not unreasonable.



Although, down the track, after the investigation is complete, the accused criminal in Western jurisdictions is given access to the evidence against them. That's a fairly basic part of our justice systems.

in our judicial system, if you are found guilty, is the court's ruling not final? Of course you can appeal, just as you can to FTP, but thats not going to get you anywhere.

I understand your points, but what i'm trying to say is.. even if the person is innocent, FTP cannot know that until they have finished the investigation. So releasing information to the parties involved would , as FTP Sean put it, "If we disclose details of a case before it is complete, we may be jeopardizing future progress or developments in the case".

Also

God almighty...

I understand that, I never said silly sal was requesting it, other posters did.



[/quote]

I think it is, and it isn't. If 5 players were suspected something illegal like chip dumping or CC fraud, I don't feel it would be in the best interest of the investigation if FTP were to tell them what they're being investigated for. That might give them information that they could use to collaborate, and would jeopardize future progress or developments in the case.

[quote]
in our judicial system, if you are found guilty, is the court's ruling not final? Of course you can appeal, just as you can to FTP, but thats not going to get you anywhere.[quote]


Our court system: You can appeal from independent court to independent court, and in some countries (eg, US, Indonesia) the head of state can grant a pardon.

FTP: No appeal.

Well, no. In the process of an investigation, it's very routine to exclude some suspects.

It's just offensive to suggest that someone should be under suspicion until the end of the investigation if the investigation can clear them earlier.

Concrete rules like this need to be considered with common sense.

Fraudsters in every other part of our western communities are told what they are accused of when they have large chunks of money frozen. I don't think people who are accused of defrauding poker sites are any worse than other accused fraudsters in the world.

yes you can appeal from independent court to independent court, while you are in jail.

is there really no appeal process at FTP though?
can you prove that somehow, i really am curious.


yes, but how could you know which suspects to exclude? If you accidentally exclude one of the guilty parties, they might take their illegal funds and dump somewhere else.


yeah maybe it can be considered, but only depending on the severity of the accusation

Yes, but due to the fact that online poker is based on a trust relationship, (they trust that you dont cheat, you trust that they won't steal your money), I think its hardto compare it to "western communities".

In western communities, when you are accused of a crime, they have you locked up and you have nowhere to run, and they know where you are and who you are allowed to talk to at all times.

Theoretically one can appeal to the KGC. Details of this are in the forum FAQ.

To put it mildly, the KGC is not highly respected.

How about those that you believe to be innocent?

Well, I guess if you accidentally acquit a murderer in court, he might get off. What's the alternative? Gaol all accused murderers and skip the whole trial part?

quote]is there really no appeal process at FTP though?
can you prove that somehow, i really am curious.

[/quote]
Theoretically one can appeal to the KGC. Details of this are in the forum FAQ.

[/quote]
So there IS an appeals process. The appeal process for a US system after you have been founded guilty is "theoretical" as well.



How about those that you believe to be innocent?

Well, I guess if you accidentally acquit a murderer in court, he might get off. What's the alternative? Gaol all accused murderers and skip the whole trial part?

[/quote]

You're starting to lose me..

acquitting a murderer, is completely different than excluding a suspect from investigation. for a murderer to be acquitted (like OJ simpson) he has to be tried.
and for an innocent suspect to be exonerated, he has to be investigated

Wow this thread is really getting off topic...

I agree that this is getting off the topic too much; This thread is a good place where much of the discussion about the obligation of sites has already taken place

you're right I agree that that is a better place for this discussion.

So just as I suspected: A ****** who is off his leash and who makes law analogies without knowing the first thing about law.

Thanks for clarifying.

Just as I suspected: you're an idiot who twice now has failed to make any valid point.

Thanks for confirming.


p.s. the fact that you think that "******s" belong on a leash says enough about what kind of person you are

What have I missed? I know you would have thrown in a few disparaging "idiots" and "morons" but there isn't anything else to your argument. You believe FTP has acted appropriately, even though this has went on since Oct 12th and they haven't even said why they have taken control of 47K of someone else's property without their consent and without articulating a factual reason, and in fact they have suggested that a mere inquiry was somehow slowing down the process. If I have mischaracterized something in some way, please enlighten me, becasue it appears to me that they haven't provided even a rudimentary reason, that they have taken far too long, and that they haven't communicated in an appropriate fashion.

The fact that you think I would inflate your worth by seriously comparing you to those who can't help it says enough about the magnitude of your denial.

Yes, people accused of a crime, at least in the United States, have the right to know what evidence is being held against them. You're an imbecile. You're done talking.

Seriously, you're done.

Gild,

Do you know this person in real life or even over AIM? Because to say something like this you'd have to very certain they're honest. I don't see how you can be unless you know her in real life.

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

Will somebody ban this clown already?

let's all play nice

100% wrong.

Have you heard of the legal concept of "discovery"?

In most trials under U.S. jurisdiction, the prosecution (or the plaintiff) is obligated to disclose just about everything about their case before the case can go to trial.

Have you heard of the concept of "futility"? This guy started out as an apologist for poor customer service, and somehow ended up hijacking the thread with increasingly naive and ridiculous posts. He seems to thrive on the confrontation.

It's time to return to the central thesis - (1) how could FTP take so long to investigate OP's situation, and (2) could it happen to us?

Cheers, Carl.

Discussion really needs to get back on track which includes less lecturing about how various laws work in one country or another.
Turtle is really derailing this thread and I believe should be banned. This is not to say that taking FT's side in this is necessarily wrong or reason for banning. REK is mostly on FT's side too I believe but states his position intelligently and provides and interesting viewpoint without taking the thread onto ridiculous insult-tangents.
But turtle is too much right now and either needs to calm down or needs to go because he's mostly just succeeding in getting everybody riled up at him and isn't really furthering the discussion in the least.