"The complaint also contains some intriguing details that are sure to get the poker world talking. Chief among them is a passage that addresses the suspicion that Postle received tips about his opponents’ cards on the phone he often kept on his lap. The complaint states that Postle used the phone to check on his sports bets, and that “he began placing his phone between his legs when he started receiving inappropriate messages or pictures from women he was frequenting with at the time.”

LOL

Source: https://www.wired.com/story/poker-pr...r330m-damages/

Thanks. (I'll be glad to comment on this later in the thread. On a first read, I found paragraph 31 interesting)

Despite what the Wired article may state, I take it there is no file-stamped copy ? Any defendants been served ?

I wonder how many in this thread are included as one of the "Does 1-1000."

Yeah Postle's reasoning for putting phone between his legs just shows how big of a narcissist he is... and how distorted the reality he lives in.

**** just got real.

And as usual the ones who will come out ahead in all of this: the lawyers.

One time when I was based in Costa Rica, we were looking over the edge of the bridge over the Tarcoles River. There were 9 or so huge crocodiles below in the water, ranging from 4 to 12 feet long.

Our local legal counsel leaned too far, and fell in.

He landed in the river, among the crocs, who let him walk across their backs to the river's edge.

When he climbed back up to the bridge, he explained that, to the crocodiles, it was a matter of professional courtesy.

Postle's setting himself up for fail with the claims of sports bets and boob pics.

He better have a ton of betting slips/betting history to show for that time frame. His cell provider will be able to give a list of phone numbers he got texts from which could lead to some funny depositions with the people who own those numbers.

"Can you list all of the times you sent pictures containing nudity to Mr Postle?

That doesn't explain why he frequently looked down at it specifically while he was tanking. I mean is it normal for him to look at dick pics while he is thinking about a hand?

Discovery is a *****, isn't she?

I.e., Postle's explanation literally does not pass the laugh test.

Postle doesn't strike me as the sharpest tack in the azz cheek.

Perkins doesn’t care about the money. Postle has bigger problems now. A guy with money who doesn’t give a **** and is ready to be entertained by this bullshit. MP would be best served to disappear and stay under that rock.

I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't the defense be able to trot out any number of professional players as expert witnesses that would attest to it being mathematically impossible for his play to be explained without access to the hole cards?

I'm also not a lawyer, but wouldn't Postle have to prove the damages exist in the first place? He has no public reputation, does not run a business that would be damaged by any of this, and there is no guarantee of earning an income from playing poker. Therefore, he cannot prove that defendants caused damage to his income. I don't even know why we are arguing about this anymore because there's almost certainly no way a judge finds in his favor even if it goes to trial, but I haven't seen that part brought up before regarding damages.

On a side note, has anyone heard from Devin Nunes's Cow? That lawsuit didn't work out too well for Nunes.

Expert witnesses cost money and juries are stupid.

I would venture to guess that given the circumstances there would be a number of players willing to act as expert witnesses for free.

What is fascinating about this case is that the main players - Postle, Brill and Kuraitis are all very aggressive, angry, defensive people, who let their emotions overtake their commonsense. So Brill was so angry about things that she misguidedly went public with her accusations, without having got the evidence before hand to support her allegations. She says she is not bitter about things, which is fine, it is a free world and people are free to see each other and ones self as one sees appropriate, but in my eyes anyone who, of all the names in the world, calls themself Angry Polak, may have anger issues and lack the self awareness to realise this is the case. Postle is equally self delusional, claiming to have had a massively successful poker career when he had in reality ended up playing cheap poker in a small casino and clearly had to resort to cheating to be successful and he blocks out that reality by claiming as a bluff that people who say he cheats are not being fair to him. Kuraitis recent public statements show an amazing arrogance and anger, and blind eye to his own weaknesses. The Kuraitis side of things is remarkable, he seems to have got a free pass. Allegations were made to him, he says they were investigated, but there is no evidence to show they were ever investigated. If allegations were made to him that he is then shown to have lied about by falsely saying they were investigated, he should be sacked for failing to report and investigate the cheating allegations against a player, but he is still a Stones employee. So apart from him saying there was an investigation that cleared Postle, what investigation of Brill and Casey's concerns was done? If none, Kuraitis should be sacked, as any of us would be if we did that role and did nothing when repeatedly told a player was cheating. Yet he publicly presents himself as an innocent victim.

So all this is ego from the people involved, who have lost sight of common sense - that evidence should have been gathered before alerting the suspect that they were a suspect, that evidence should have been gathered before presenting a disastrous case to court.

Exactly how should she have collected evidence before talking to Kuraitis or someone above him in Stones management?

Here's my counter.

O.k, sir, please sit in the game and if you can replicate EVEN HALF.. JUST ****ING HALF of those winnings, then your are proven innocent and you win your damages claim.

However, if you can't do it, then the case is dismissed and you owe everyone their winnings back. This is the way to prove if he is guilty or innocent AFTER the fact. I'm sure they could even come way down from half. Would be funny to see him stumble around saying why he couldn't do it. "Well everyone has studied my play now".

Then the next counter.. "okay, then can you at least break ****ing even after having the highest win rate in the history of ****ing poker?"

This guy is so far gone in the head

The person who posted that has the IQ of a tree stump. Don't bother responding.

I would also think that the defense would be entitled to examining his tax returns for the last 17 years as part of discovery to help prove that he does not have a "wildly successful poker career" as his sole source of income. How far of a limb do I have to go out on to say that his poker income declared to the IRS is not what most people would deem to be "wildly successful"?

On paragraph 108 from the complaint it says: "Plaintiff's loss of reputation has caused plaintiff to lose all ability to financially provide for himself and his family because gambling institutions will not allow an alleged cheater to play at their facilities"

IANAL once again, but this is being presented as a statement of fact when it is clearly false as he can play online and at any casino that hasn't specifically banned him.

In paragraph 107 it says "Plaintiff has suffered injury to his personal, business, and professional reputation....and significant economic loss in the form of lost wages and future earnings"

Considering that professional gamblers do not have wages paid by an employer and future earnings are not guaranteed, this would also be false as I was alluding to in my earlier post. I would think an attorney would pick up on this pretty quickly as a point of attack.

Paragraph 122 also mentions he has lost the ability to gamble and/or earn a living because he wasn't "invited" to the games. Apparently, his lawyer has never been to a casino before.

Paragraph 144 is just lol. I mean the whole thing is really. I can picture the judge rolling their eyes already.

LMAO THIS IS ****ING NUTS.

I'm actually SHOOK that postle is COUNTER-SUEING. Cannot WAIT for discovery lollllllll. He just sued some of the richest people in the game, of course there's going to be a massive BR for lawyers ready to steamroll him. Like, the sessions are literally on stream, so he better have cell-phone records of these alleged nudes he's been receiving at very convenient times.

On the bottom of page 5 it states that Postle "would watch multiple sporting events that were not on Stones Hall televisions nearby." It doesn't mention sports bets. Is that mentioned somewhere else in the complaint? The significance is that there would be a record of sports bets, such as losing receipts, which he would obviously keep for tax purposes if he was a professional gambler. Also, he would have a log of all sports bets made for the same reason. Those two items can be requested during discovery to prove/disprove his claim. Records of any texts received during the games can also be requested. Both to confirm the texts he claims he received, and to see he anyone was texting the cards to him from a remote location. The phone company may have his texts archived even if he deleted them.

Just in case anyone else thinks like that, it was more a case of still needing to get evidence after talking to Kuraitis, as it was his job to get the evidence, but if he had proved incapable of doing that, then another investigative route was needed.

The timings of the cases will be interesting. 60 have settled the case against Postle, but 28 have not, so may do another case against him, with a different lawyer. A second case would have the advantage of having learned lessons from the first unsuccessful case. So if, speculatively, Postle wins his case, and then the second case goes against him, those found guilty against him could then appeal that they had been proved right. If the second case is heard before the Postle case as is successful, then his case would have to be dropped, as his appeal grounds would demonstrably be wrong.

So it does look more as though his case is a way to try to reduce those speaking publicly against him, in the run up to any second case.

A second case should look very carefully at the Stones technical Taylor, and at how many streaming sessions he was involved in that Postle played. The screen cards changed to cover up Postle's play, and that would only have been done by the op at the time.

It was interesting to read Lawyer Mac's statement that there was no evidence against Stones or Kuraitis, but he did not say that about Postle. This cheating could have been done by Postle alone, as he had access to the streaming equipment, or with an accomplice to transmit the cards, and Taylor would be the obvious suspect accomplice. Kuraitis may well have been involved, but only verbally, so unless one of the others admitted Kuraitis had been in on it, there would be no actual hard evidence to tie him, just circumstantial, with the way he defended Postle, failed to act on allegations against him (I have seen no evidence he ever did an investigation of the claims) then, if so, lied about investigating Postle.

Has Taylor done similar work at any other casino? Has any single player there had similarly amazing results in streamed games?

Am I the only one who thinks Postle made a tactical mistake by including Negreanu in the lawsuit? He has received a lot of publicity over the years and many in the general public will know him as an expert at poker and will put weight on his opinion. The other defendants are relatively unknown to the general public.