Judging by his recent statement, he has convinced himself he is in the right here.

"As much as I’d like to say, all I can really say right now is that I have my side of this entire fiasco to tell. It won’t just shock the poker and gambling industries, but the entire world.

This all goes way beyond just my innocence, but includes an entire incredible 17+ year story along with it, and what’s happened since the allegations. In fact, it’s such a mind blowing story, that it’s being told to Dave Broome at 25/7 Productions who will be producing a wild documentary for the world to see on it!

I’ve been waiting for many, many months on this and I’m anxious for it to finally come out. So to all the detractors and accusers who have asked, ‘Why hasn’t he spoken or provided his evidence of innocence and explanations?’

Well guess what? ... Now you know."

That statement is just so lol. So instead of just diffusing everything in the beginning with a clear explanation, he let everything drag out so he could pitch a documentary?

Yeah makes perfect sense.

So you are doubling down that LA entertainment firms are lining up for some of that free publicity from a Sacramento defamation case? Bold move Cotton.

Read the complaint.
* very limited factual claims beyond what is known already for the big names.
* Alleging the defendants were in a conspiracy or acting in concert to defame him is probably untrue, with no factual basics and pretty lame. It’s not pled with particularity.
* Unsure about his is attempt to obtain jurisdiction. Claiming all defendants conduct business in that county probably gets immediately challenged. Don’t see how half of the defendants meet the “the minimum contacts” test or how the publishing of tweets and videos creates jurisdiction in Sacramento county.
* The claimed damages seem to bait for removal to federal court.
* otherwise, well pled.

Not lining up. They found one 5 lawyer LA entertainment firm that would take the case for publicity.

So is that a yes? Does the fact that the law firm has not put out a press release, commented on the litigation to the press or grandstanded for a tv camera in the last three days contradict your belief they are in it for the publicity?

jjjou812 When you aren't arguing you make some useful points, so can you please stop your silly trolling arguments over nothing.

You have no idea how many LA entertainment firms were interested in taking on this case for publicity, so have no idea if the person you are criticising is right or wrong, stop trying to make arguments over anything people say, where invariably it is you that have your facts wrong.

The obvious fact an LA ENTERTAINMENT LEGAL FIRM ARE INVOLVED should make you understand they are attracted to public cases and publicity.

I guess you are a lawyer, arguing to argue.

Now a high percentage of professional poker players know about the ver Standig firm and will think of them if considering litigation. It would have been even better for them if the case hadn't been such a disaster. They were also hoping to get a decent fee.

Any business spends a lot on marketing. These days some lawyers advertise on billboards. Stones ran the live stream for publicity. Perhaps that didn't work out perfectly either.

No, he's just an argumentative troll, lacking reasoning ability. He should simply stop making things up and advancing his little pet theories and being critical of posters who call him out for his foulmouthed abusive nonsense.

We are publicly talking about the legal firm that took Postle's case, they have got publicity out of it, yet he is a timewasting contrarian, so claims they haven't.

Postle taking on the whole poker community is reckless and delusional, and the legal firm supporting this case is very misguided. It is interesting, Lawyer Mac publicly said there was no evidence against Kuraitis or Stones, (a shame he hadn't realised that before launching the case against them) so it is odd they have not taken the action Postle has taken.

Maybe they're waiting for the tooth fairy for $$ to hire a publicist.

What is a cont?

Most legal stuff is evaluated by how a reasonable person would think, act, believe. I don't think a reasonable person would have thought Postle was cheating as, most people didn't think that. Some did, but only a few.

I doubt it will be necessary for an attorney to testify under oath about what was claimed in the first case. It's a matter of record. Attorneys from the first case may not be involved in later cases.

I am sure you are unhappy that you have no control over opposing point of view in this thread but instead of providing unsolicited advice to everyone and trying to run people over with your walls of words, use the report post feature and the mods can address your concerns about my alleged trolling. They control the thread and can muzzle me if they want, not you.

AP does care if you thinks sheÂ’s bitter, DN doesnÂ’t care about your suggestions to become a better ambassador and I donÂ’t care if you donÂ’t like which issues I discuss in this thread with other posters. The last post directed at me suggested I respond in private to your public posts because they hurt your feelings. Sorry, but that is not how a public forum works.

Deuces did not need you jumping to his defense. He is more than capable at defending his positions. just a few pages ago, he wiped the floor with some clown who was critiquing every DN bust out hand when he had less than ten bigs.

Onto the issue at hand: The appeal of any tort claim to a law firm is the potential money to be made from pursuing deep pocket defendants or insurance. A law firm taking a case solely for its publicity is a ridiculous notion offered up by people who donÂ’t know what they are talking about.

The law firms conduct to date belies this notion as they have remained silent. The limited value of publicity of this particular case cuts against it being true. You claim it is “reckless and delusional” for Postle to take on the poker community yet at the same time it is sensible for a law firm to take on such a task on his behalf for the benefit of publicity. The lack of logical consistency is ironic. Finally, any resultant publicity would arguably lead to more people wanting this law firm to represent them in defamation claims. LA entertainments firms are not seeking entry into the Sacramento defamation claim market, despite you claiming it’s an obvious fact simply because in this particular case such a firm is involved. (While there are some firms that advertise for defamation claims (against employers), it pales to the number of lawyers that advertise for more traditional tort claims such as personal injuries or wrongful death claims.). No one markets for time wasting cases, which most defamations claims are.

Our resident misinformed poster states, "LA entertainments firms are not seeking entry into the Sacramento defamation claim market". If he learned to research before embarrassing himself with yet more inaccurate attacks he would looking at the website of Postle's legal firm, which shows they advertise in specialising in entertainment law, which has already been mentioned here, but also specialise in defamation, business law and intellectual property. So his use of them, and their accepting this case, then becomes more clear than if they had been solely entertainment law, without expertise in defamation.

I had blocked jjj, then mistakenly lifted the block, only to find he still posts total ill considered abusive nonsense, with his level of debate consisting of calling someone he disagrees with a "moron" or a "pissant", so I will put the block back on and leave deuceblocker to waste time talking with him.

I know majority of people thinks Postle cheated after watching youtube analysis vids and streams. I'm curious, does anyone here thinks he's innocent?

If 99% of ppl here thinks he cheated, how ****ed up would it be if the law let this douchebag go free?

But what would be madder is if he wins his case, and gets compensated for people correctly saying he is a poker cheat! People punished for saying the truth. The wrongdoer rewarded. This justice process has turned into Alice in Wonderland.

Whatever happened to Stones employee Taylor, he was the technical guy under suspicion of colluding with Postle, yet seems to have disappeared from the Postle scene?

Nice strawman argument. Your premise is this firm took the case for its publicity value, not for its monetary value. Simply because it’s a practice area of the firm, doesn’t mean they took it for the publicity. I never argued attorneys don’t take defamation cases, even a shitty one. If you read further, the named attorney Lowe does not discuss any defamation cases in his bio and the attorney of record is a one and 1/2 year recent graduate. Also one of the attorneys is a crisis manager. All interesting facts, but none are conclusive that this firm took the case for the publicity.

Setting aside the further proof you provide regarding your inability to block out people who disagree with you when your shouting down fails, I don’t believe I referred to anyone else as a moron or a pissant other than you. I certainly never called Deuces anything. I think he is a valuable contributor to most threads, even if I disagree with some of his conclusions. As they say,”If the shoe fits...”

What odds will you give on universal dismissal under California's anti-SLAPP law?

Not conclusive. However, the facts that the firm hasn't handled defamation cases and that they have it to an attorney just out of law school imply that it exactly what they are doing, looking for publicity.

He apparently couldn't find a local Sacramento firm and couldn't find a firm that specialized in defamation cases to take the case, so he got a small Hollywood entertainment firm.

With the original case, they got a Maryland law firm that wanted to make its name in poker law, presumably because they couldn't get a California firm to take the case.

This case could get dismissed like the other one, or it goes to trial. He sued most of the big name poker video makers. They wouldn't want to settle with Postle, and it would make them look bad, so better to go to trial regardless of the expense.

In the first case, the law firm got about $13K. I assume that part of the reason was the possibility of getting a good settlement and part of it was publicity. In this case, it seems really hard for the lawyers to get anything but publicity.

I wondered when this would be brought up. California has one of the strongest anti-SLAPP laws in the country. There will 100% be a motion soon.

Verstantig was already well know in the poker community before this case as a higher stakes poker playing lawyer who represents gambler in gaming law and tax cases. You may not have known who he was but he is well practiced in that area and well published in gaming law. His firm actually has a California licensed attorney listed as staff, though I don’t know if that was true when the litigation commenced. Also, that firm appears to be an affiliation of poker players with law degrees and licenses in multiple non-overlapping states, so I suspect they don’t share traditional office space (could be wrong).

No quite sure what poker law is.

Yes, I did.

Anyone have a link to the complaint described in this thread where Postile is the plaintiff. I searched for it in the records of the indicated court but came up empty.

Another poster itt says he has read it. I would appreciate a link to where it is filed, or posted, or would like to get a copy sent to me.

I am a lawyer, I have actively worked in the poker industry or on "poker cases" for most of the last 20 years, I am not looking for more clients; I just would like to see the actual complaint, whether filed or in draft form.

Link to complaint

https://mk0usbetscom7qny9xn6.kinstac..****eLawSuit.pdf