Am a lawyer (no idea where they are) but it's pretty difficult to pick and choose things in a vacuum to decide what a judge was thinking in a given situation. There are so many missing facts that all I can say here is "it depends."

She said went to jail. Could have been a quick booking, no conviction.

Also I have seen in this thread that she may have a criminal record herself: https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...l=1#post980514

Look we don't disagree dude messed up. I just wish when they settled the casino had thrown open the books since the lawyer was apparently able to look at some data but no one saying it would help their case seems the least bit interested in knowing what what found.

For starters, thanks to Chris Moneymaker for responding.

I also think Johnson might have simply misunderstood the question. Consider the actual question:

Johnson says she would have to look at her phone, but mentions two specific people: Moneymaker and Evert Caldwell. It's certainly fair to say that Caldwell attempted to help Postle restore his image, since Caldwell authored a couple of the articles on Rounder Life (which Caldwell co-owns) in the wake of the accusations. But "help him the cheating?" We have no reason to believe Caldwell aided in it. (Unless somehow Evert was remotely collecting the RFID info then sending it back to Postle via his phone or something.)

Soon after, Johnson explains Caldwell's assistance to Postle is to thank him "by trying to back him up on his lies." (I won't attempt to transcribe the entire response, just listen from 19:22 to 19:55.)

Put a pin in that, then reread this:

Thus, it's quite possible that Johnson answered the question as if it was only "do you know who his current friends, who helped him?" Not helped him cheat, but helped him by merely being supportive. And the only two people she could name – without otherwise looking through her phone – was the owner and Rounder Life Media and one of the few poker players that even non-poker players have heard of.

I mentioned Veronica's patience in a previous post. Rewatching that interview, this is the kind of thing that made me think of that quality.

* * * * *

Sorry, I had to clean up the blood that started seeping from my ears. How is that the "only logical conclusion??"

At risk of feeding a troll or getting massively leveled, I'll play along by breaking this down step by step:

PokerStars was and still is a mammoth site, with literally tens of millions of players registered on there. That both Postle and Moneymaker have played on that site means almost nothing.

If we were talking some weird, obscure site with traffic in the hundreds, AND there were two people known to be close off the felt, AND it was discovered that one of them was cheating, then yes, I might look askance at the other person. But even then, I would not make my "only conclusion" to be that Person B was a colluding confederate.

Sabina isn't even all that sure about that, at least not with respect to his time on PokerStars. If anything, Johnson is unsure about Postle's behavior and even gets some of it conflated with a home game. The PokerStars convo begins at 4:12 of the video, with Brill asking specifically about the accusations starting at 4:38:

Again, patience.

Postle has been around the game for the better part of two decades, either as a dealer or as a player. Even if you assume he has only hung around Tunica and the Sacramento area (which you can't), it's fair to say he's made many poker acquaintances throughout the years, with Moneymaker being just one of them.

To run through it again:

Given how many millions of people have played on Stars in addition to Postle and Moneymaker...
Given how many other people Postle has known in the poker community besides Moneymaker...
Given that Postle's ex-wife is unsure if and how Postle cheated on PokerStars...

How is the "only logical conclusion" – your words – that Chris Moneymaker and Mike Postle may have colluded on PokerStars?

__________________________________________________ ___________

My guess is: The Court finds the costs requested to be reasonable, but finds the fees requested to
be excessive. For example, there are multiple entries totaling 33.5 hours for drafting a
memorandum regarding the initial draft of the anti-SLAPP motion. The Court awards
15 hours at $800 for Mr. Randazza; 25 hours at $450 an hour for Mr. Shepard; and 20
hours of paralegal time at the rate of $175 per hour. In total, the Court awards
$26,783.50 in attorneys’ fees and $961.91 in costs, for a total of $27,745.
Defendant is directed to submit an order for the Court's signature.

Lol, I used to litigate fee requests in Chapter 11 cases back in my youth. Pretty good guess, I think

Amazingly good.

Will Mike Postle feel shame?

Ftr i wasnt trolling…

Sabina should clarify what she meant when she responded to who helped postle cheat and said evert caldwell and moneymaker.

SaintsFan49 = Biff Tannen from BTTF Part II

Apologies if this is a derail, but does anyone know what came of Justin Kuraitis?

Not a derail at all, and I did find it interesting that Sabina did NOT cite Kuraitis when Veronica asked for friends who helped Postle cheat. It suggests to me a few possibilities:

1. JFK was not involved in the Stones Live cheating, despite what most of us suspect
2. JFK was involved, but Sabina doesn't know it
3. Sabina misunderstood the "who helped him" question, as I detailed in my long-winded post above.

If you want a few laughs, Justin's footprint is a little weird right now, and it makes me wonder if someone hijacked his name for very low-end poker content:

https://justinkuraitis791087716.wordpress.com/
https://justinkuraitis11.blogspot.com/ AND https://justinkuraitis1.blogspot.com/
https://vimeo.com/user127312637
https://slides.com/justinkuraitis11

The English in each of those sites is so bad that it reminds me of the Silicon Valley character Jian-Yang, who made Chinese knockoffs and fake Amazon review farms. It's as if JFK's name starting showing up on a lot of poker media sites, someone halfway around the world assumed he must have been one of the game's notables, and ran with it from there.

Sabina is not an authority on anything except what Mike Postle is like behind closed doors. Full stop. Stop trying to infer things about the cheating scheme from her interview.

Yeah not sure what the world's most biased source ranting on a podcast was set out to achieve really outside of Brills desperation to keep this story alive and views on her channel. Hilarious that this guy is going full peter falk columbo because of it tho like there's a giant new clue to the unsolved mystery. I like fun conspiracy theories too so I can't blame you if I had to guess the connection is something like Mike helped Moneymaker 'Postle' the 2003 ME and used to drunkenly brag to his wife that he was really responsible for the poker boom. Him taking back a couple hundred thousand felt justified in his mind when he knew he brought in an unthinkable amount of new money to the game by orchestrating the Postlemaker Effect.

So now we've got three pieces of solid evidence:

• He looks at his phone
• He wears hats
• His ex-wife thinks he cheats

Someone call the gaming commission!

I can’t speak for Veronica obviously but I’m going to guess she didn’t realize how much the ex-wife simply “doesn’t have her act together” for lack of a better word.

But yeah, at least IMO and clearly many other people on here agree, there’s almost no substantive value, in terms of poker related or cheating related issues, from anything she says. That she didn’t name JK and did name Moneymaker is worthless, because not only is it likely she is not reliable, even if she was entirely trustworthy and reliable, she’d be simply going off of whatever Postle told her or she overheard. She wasn’t actively participating in his schemes or anything.

And postle strikes me as the type to lie to his wife all the time.

So we have an unreliable, possibly inebriated, woman who has something in her past that led to a court awarding the arrested-for-domestic-violence father full custody of their daughter, who is being interviewed about her knowledge of her ex-husbands cheating/scamming in poker, and her entire knowledge is based on what said ex-husband, who has shown absolutely no qualms about lying to anyone and everyone and likely was not telling her the truth, told her about said activities during their marriage. Oh, and she also didn’t really have a full grasp about what she was being specifically asked.

So yeah. Substantive value = almost zero. About the only value, IMO, was that we learned he has a history of running scams, which makes me think it’s likely he was trying, for a long time, to figure out a way to cheat the live game like he did, and it’s suggestive that he was the one with the idea and whoever was helping him was brought along. Not dispositive. But suggestive. Possibly.

Entertainment value? Decent enough. Her telling of the dental scam was funny.

nice

And remember... it's the ONLY possible conclusion!

Resorting to wild Moneymaker conspiracy theories is clear evidence that the members of this thread have completely given up their quest to prove Mike Postle's guilt. You can chalk that up as another Postle victory.

Give it up conspiracy theorists. Postle won fair and square!!

I think Veronica is Postle's silent partner and we haven't even seen the end of first act yet. This will be better than Ocean's 11.

Which poker room will be the first to host a Mike Postle meet up game?

Stones.

That's an interesting proposition. Mike Postle should be looking at ways to cash in on his notoriety. Maybe take a page or two out of Jake Paul's playbook.

Why doesn't he just continue to play 2-5 anywhere?

he has legal constraints keeping him in California. Same reason why he couldn't go crush the high stakes games in vegas, plus the money doesn't really matter to him anyway. He just likes winning