A few observations:

*People that aren't lawyers don't really help by adding their two cents along with a bunch of copy/paste from their 5 minute google search. The law can be very complicated and there's a lot of nuance to the words used in laying out legal requirements.

*Postle very, very, very likely isn't paying a dime for his attorneys. They've taken the case on a contingency basis (and all the publicity they hope to get) like most plaintiff's lawyers do.

*Defendants on the other hand, will have to pay their way, at least through the end of the case. In the "American system", parties from each side pay for their own fees, unless otherwise required by statute or agreement.

*I can only assume that Phil Galfond and the others who recently began discussing a crowdsourced effort to catalog all the hands from the streams is very much directly related to people realizing their asses were about to get sued.

*People should learn a big lesson from all of this and in the future learn to STFU. I know people feel very strongly about everything surrounding this situation, but it's been a sloppy shitshow from the beginning. As to be expected with a bunch of know-it-all poker players on the internet, obviously, but this was handled disastrously. And sadly I think people were seriously misled into believing that the plaintiffs had a high chance of being victorious, when that should have been clear to those involved that it was a loser.

*Don't talk **** as if you know it's true unless you can back it up. But really, you just shouldn't talk ****. Anybody involved should stop making statements related to the allegation in the lawsuit.

*This is going to be a fun one watch unfold.

We aren't trying to "help" pe se, we find it interesting to discuss. That's what we do. If someone is involved in the case, of course they should speak with an attorney and not rely on 2+2 posters for legal advice or insight. That should be obvious to all. But the rest of us are free to debate the issue if we like.

I don't understand the motivation to "debate" something when one doesn't have a basic understand of that topic. Of course people are free to do whatever they'd like.

And I'm only talking about people making legal conclusions/arguments. I'm all for people asking questions or making their points about all the other stuff. But I don't make the rules. I just don't think it adds anything.

You are. Remember him uttering the words: "cheating mother****ers". So yeah... that's as direct an allegation as you're gonna find anywhere.

You won’t get any action on that because the bet is pretty absurd. You could just offer one of them $1000 to send Postle $2 in the mail..

If you’re willing to bet that Postle gets awarded damages by a jury, you might find some takers.

In a subsequent suit? Why not?

Depends what the person is trying to achieve. I pretend [not] to be a lawyer in forums so I can learn.

Shouldn't this VerStandig guy be representing these players on a no fee basis as it seems he is at least some way responsible for getting some of his (possibly former) clients into this mess?

I am pretty sure if you calculate his fees on the settlement and compare it to the hours worked, he already did that.

Unless this turns out to be some elaborate bluff, I would bet we see a JFK defamation lawsuit soon, probably by the same firm. That one probably has a chance given the lack of evidence linking him to any cheating and AP claiming he was bipolar.

Wait, the Stones people livestreamed the game Postle played and, as the winnings mounted, highlighted him with memes ("The Power of Postle Thinking"), and promoted his presence in the game, but he is not a public figure???

I mean, really. Well before the story broke, I had seen training videos made from his play. He was known to a segment of the poker-playing public.

(Garrett Adelstein, public figure or not?)

Cutting and pasting from Google,

"Truth is an absolute defense to libel claims, because one of the elements that must be proven in a defamation suit is falsity of the statement. If a statement is true, it cannot be false, and therefore, there is no prima facie case of defamation."

Is this not true? The defendants can provide evidence of the truth of their statements. They can request physical evidence from Stones, Postle, and others. They can question Postle, JFK, and others at depositions, and call them as witnesses and question them if it goes to trial if the plaintiff does not call them.

I appreciate the legal opinions, but let's not forget the forest for the trees. It must be difficult to sue for libel and slander if there is strong evidence that the statements are true.

If there is a lesson, it is catch the cheater in the act.

Raising awareness to his action without catching him and his accomplice(s) let Mike and Justin get away with no hope of their victims being compensated.

Perhaps next time someone notices a cheating scheme of this magnitude going on, keep it on the down low and come up with a good strategy to catch the culprits. Perhaps if the gaming commission was made aware of this, they could have aided in an investigation without tipping off the culprits.

Jr0d=Does1.

Mike:

Let us be clear.

Everyone knows you cheated!

There is significant evidence of this.

This will never go away and shall always haunt you.

You are a pariah in the poker community.

You can sue me at ****you .com

This

chopstick:

Good analysis. This imbroglio reminds me of Jonathan Harr's book: "A Civil Action". The only people who are going to benefit from this are the lawyers. They'll continue charging billable hours (and collecting fees) until one side or the other runs out of money and gives up. If you haven't read Harr's book, go to Netflix and watch the John Travolta/Robert Duvall movie. It's an illuminating study of how our legal system "resolves" disputes like this.

I'm surprised Postle was able to find a [top tier?] law firm willing to take him on as a client. Normally, when a wealthy client files a lawsuit like this, it's an indication that the plaintiff has more money than brains. Postle's a little different - he has neither money or brains - so it's hard to fathom why a group of otherwise [smart?] lawyers are willing to waste their time representing him.

I was wrong and stand corrected. Should be interesting to see how it all plays out...

You were part right. He certainly started off with that approach. It was very noticeable at the time, but he gave up on it as time moved on.

What are the odds that, if this suit is for real and it moves forward, Postle will not be deposed by hostile attorneys?

And on a side note, not that there is any real prospect for this happening, but I would absolutely love to see or read an interview of Postle by Maria Konnikova, author of The Confidence Game.

Great movie, but deep pocket corporations and wealthy plaintiff attorneys aren’t in play with the Postle case. Here, the main defendants are uncollectible (hence the go fund me page) as is the Plaintiff.

Also, a Cancer clusters from polluting the town water source is way more complex than this “they called me mean names” claim.

What exactly do you want them to ask him?


Are there topics that he can say "The deposition does not cover that" and refuse to answer?



You don't think he will have prepared answers to the most obvious questions, answers aimed at the jury, not at 2+2?

Follow this tweet thread. There's interesting background information here - whether it leads to the person(s) bankrolling Postle's suit and/or the folks bankrolling the "documentary" is another matter.

https://twitter.com/rachelees69/stat...30966042677248

When I did a deposition recently (my video camera system recorded an accident), the attorney for one side simply objected to every question the other side asked. I would then answer the question, and I guess later a judge would decide whether the objection would be upheld and whether that question and answer would be admissible.

Seriously ? You think it is interesting background information that Stones Casino is described in a tweet as "owned by a shadowy but powerful Jewish family" ?

Anyone have a link to any suit actually having been filed or a complaint served on any of the named defendants ?

I converted a full session with this tool:

Link: http://livesqueezer.winningpokerhud.com

It's open source

Github: https://github.com/vikcch/live-squeezer

Session: $5/$5 No Limit Hold'em with Chris and Botlady
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUr3WeFDHZM

HH file: http://winningpokerhud.com/games/hh/...808-postle.txt

I didn't do it all in one go. But in the second session, i took notes and i started at 1:40:00 mark in the video and did it to the end (3:30:00)
Took me a little over of 4 hours, and it was 45 hands.

The tool has a feature to continue to the next hand, and adjust the dealer button and stacks automatically.

The session has 79 hands

Profit: $4730

His biggest won: $1010
His biggest loss: -$300

Phil Galfond asked for a tool to do this work on his twitter, let him know of this tool.
https://twitter.com/PhilGalfond/stat...99065117499392