Wonder if If any of the remaining 19 players voted "Completely disagree" in this poll?

Saw it on the internet, so there is no doubt about it's veracity.

You can beat the crap out of people that park in handicap spots and throw debtors in prison too. If someone has any proof other than a "feeling" this guy was cheating, let's see it. I think the punishment is improper given my understanding of the facts and the mob rules, kill'em all approach is ridiculous. In addition, I think the Wsop and Casino open themselves to liability with this poor decision to take his prize money.

They could also lay out explicit penalties for different types of instead of just saying we will do whatever we decide is appropriate.

I don't feel like reading this whole thread so I'll just ask the question:

Did this guy ever produce the other 25K chips he supposedly took as souvenirs from the other WSOPC events he won? If he can't come up with them he was probably going to use this one in the ME to gain an advantage the next day.

"This guy" hasn't posted in this thread. While NVG is a totally important place, "this guy" doesn't really have any obligation to defend himself here.

Who said anything about him coming onto NVG & defending himself?

Seriously, where was that written in my post?

You'd think to protect the result & prize money that he'd want to show the casino the validity of his story after he was confronted & produce those other chips to them, or the proper authorities, from the other tournaments he won. If he actually had them or, better yet, framed it would go a long way to prove he just made a silly mistake & didn't think it through & this wasn't done for some nefarious purposes.

My question remains, has he ever produced these other souvenir 25K chips to anybody?

His problem is that he got caught. Did anyone clarify how he was caught?

I don't happen to think he was being malicious but obviously that is open for debate. Being that intent is almost impossible to prove, I think breaking the rules should be enough to receive severe punishment.

His punishment was pretty heavy if you believe it was a souvenir but where do you draw the line between cheating and simple mistake/bad judgement? What if a guy has 4 chips, claiming 1 for each of his kids?...20 chips for the sorority?

There hasn't been any indication that he was ever asked to do so. Moreover, based on the press release, it would be completely irrelevant anyway because PBKC stated that his intent was not a consideration in their ruling.

totally this.

I am befuddled by all the discussion here about his intent anyway.

It's irrelevant in the same way the "intent" of someone that robs a bank is irrelevant. akin to a bank robber claims that they just wanted to look at the bricks of hundreds and was planning on returning the money. robbing banks is against the law, break the law, go to jail.

Also "stupid" is also not a generally accepted defense in any court I know of (this court being PBKC and WSOP). So comments about him just doing something stupid as a defense also sort of weird.

Break tournament rules, suffer the consequences. Clearly PKBC and WSOP had sufficient evidence that he broke tournament rules, as I would think they would not take this decision lightly.

Hats off to PBKC and WSOP for taking action !

MTT scammers out there take note. Go try to steal money from other people not the MTT community, or better yet just stop being a scammer, and go make a living the old fashioned way.... earn it.

Crime doesn't pay.

"3. He is being denied $x because he allegedly cheated."

Disagree. He is being denied money because there is a rule that says you will be denied money if you steal any tournament chips and he stole tournament chips. Whether or not that falls under the "cheating" label is irrelevant.


"4. Cheating is defined as breaking a rule to gain an advantage."

Disagree. Dictionary.com defines cheating as "to violate rules or regulations." It doesn't say anything about whether or not you gain an advantage.

As cheating is defined by the contract in section 39, when interpreting the contract you use the word's meaning per the contract, not dictionary.com.

ADHESION CONTRACT
A type of contract, a legally binding agreement between two parties to do a certain thing, in which one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to write the contract primarily to his or her advantage.
An example of an adhesion contract is a standardized contract form that offers goods or services to consumers on essentially a "take it or leave it" basis without giving consumers realistic opportunities to negotiate terms that would benefit their interests. When this occurs, the consumer cannot obtain the desired product or service unless he or she acquiesces to the form contract.
There is nothing unenforceable or even wrong about adhesion contracts. In fact, most businesses would never conclude their volume of transactions if it were necessary to negotiate all the terms of every Consumer Credit contract. Insurance contracts and residential leases are other kinds of adhesion contracts. This does not mean, however, that all adhesion contracts are valid. Many adhesion contracts are Unconscionable; they are so unfair to the weaker party that a court will refuse to enforce them. An example would be severe penalty provisions for failure to pay loan installments promptly that are physically hidden by small print located in the middle of an obscure paragraph of a lengthy loan agreement. In such a case a court can find that there is no meeting of the minds of the parties to the contract and that the weaker party has not accepted the terms of the contract.
For the record, I simply copied the above from a google search.
With that being said, there is no doubt that the WSOP contract that is forced on all players is an ADHESION CONTRACT, is it UNCONSCIONABLE, that is the question. Courts will usually always give the benefit to the weaker party, or against the drafter of the document.
In this case, the WSOP has this clause, “IN ITS SOLE AND ABSOLUTE DISCRETION”, I think this clause alone is unconscionable, because the sanctions and penalties cannot be appealed. There is no doubt this is one-sided agreement and a one-sided penalty.
Everyone can argue that it was fair or not fair but ultimately it will be between the parties and their lawyers and or the courts to determine.
The most troubling aspect of this chip issue, is the amount of people who have no problems throwing someone under the bus to be run over and mutilated, for what seems like an innocent mistake. Although we have a presumption of innocence in this country, it seems we have reversed it to presumption of guilt.
As I indicated before, I think there should be some sort of sanctions, but I think this draconian punishment was too severe and I base it on the PBKC own investigation into the matter and nothing else. This guy is a professional poker player and a lot of you are professional poker players, should one transgression put him out to pasture?
As an attorney, I know that in order for me to lose my license, it would have to be a serious transgression and that would happen only after a full hearing with both sides being able to present their case. There would also be less severe sanctions such as a reprimand or suspension of my license.
In my mind, the big picture is the huge corporation taking advantage of the little guy and this is something that everyone should be concerned about. Because if you don’t, you may be the next person that we will be blogging about. Additionally, with a lawsuit there is discovery and as an attorney this is where it gets exciting. Once discovery commences I get to subpoena all records related to sanctions and how many people want to bet that someone has taken a chip before, and how many want to bet that they all have not been disqualified from the tournament and banned from the properties. Do you really think the WSOP and PBKS will want everyone to know what they have done in the past?
As poker players and especially professional poker players, you should want to know what the WSOP and PBKS has done in the past.
Everyone on this blog should welcome a lawsuit. Let’s not all jump on the bandwagon and say ban, castrate and crucify this chip stealer, instead let’s put the fire under the organizations who are making a boat load of money from all of us. Let’s get the facts, get their investigation, get their thoughts, then we can all make an educated decision and by all means, give this guy a chance in a court of law instead of in the court of public opinion.

Anybody wonder why I got a picture of this guy from a cash game? I can't remember specifics (being a long time ago), but I took it because he was pulling some sort of shenanigans at the table. I'm guessing some huge angle shooting. I can't think this was an innocent crime.

You liked his shirt? You thought he was cute? He slept with your boyfriend? You can not remember why you took it but you expect us to believe its compelling evidence he was probably cheating in a tournament six months later? Or compelling enough to place a high value on your opinion? WTF?

You took his picture because of some sort of shenanigans but can't remember, well that narrows the reason and for that reason you can't think this was an innocent crime. OK that reasoning makes sense! NOT.

Intent is a required element of almost every crime. It is never irrelevant a a crime, including robbery, especially in the punishment phase. Your examples clearly confuse intent with motive.

Whatever. Just trying to give some insight on the story.

One time you took a picture of the accused. A compelling addition to the story. I can see why you were so anxious to share that insight

I'm quite sure I will lose any debate with you regarding law as like I said before, I skipped classes the day the taught Law in Law school... but

two things

1) the jurisdiction here is not the US judicial system and the laws are not FL criminal law statues ( wrote statues just to tilt you ) . Jurisdiction is PBKC Security and I guess TDs and staff (along with others from WSOP apparently), and the laws are PKBC and WSOP rules, so conversation about intent is sort of mute.

2) just for fun... from above are you saying I can rob a bank with the motive of simply being bored and having nothing better to do, and the intent of immediately returning the money, and then whether or not I committed a crime would be in dispute?

39. i. Cheating is defined as any act a person engages in to break the established rules of play to gain an advantage.. The highlighted portion is the intent part of the rule. The conversation is not deaf or dumb.

For example, a player may break the established rule of play by folding early to go take a "wicked dump" is not cheating because he lacks the requisite intent nor attempts to gain an advantage. Or one could take a chip as a souvenir from the wsop on the last hand of a chopped tournament for some stupid table. By not looking at his intent, its actual not possible for the wsop to claim he cheated under these rules. But what they really meant is they were not looking at the motive behind the theft of the chip.

Your own #2, also a wicked dump, is still only focusing on motive. The intent in a robbery is to take someones property (the banks) by threat or force. Your motive is relieving boredom.

Did you write mute instead of moot to tilt him, too?

I always enjoy your input Lou but intent is a major factor, usually the most important factor, whenever a crime is committed. From the most severe crime in the penal code, the killing of another person, to traffic misdemeanors.

These are the three common charges for killing someone . The base federal guideline for involuntary manslaughter is 10-16 months. On the other side of the spectrum Murder in the first degree it is a life sentence or the death penalty.

1 Murder first degree. Biggest factor is premeditated or lying in wait.
2 Murder second degree intentional killing that is not premeditated
3 Involuntary Manslaughter. Killing someone without malice/intent/afterthought

As far as intent being moot, you highlighted the aspect of intent. I have no way of knowing what his intent was, however the analogy of bringing a box cutter on a plane post 9/11 by another poster was a great one. This incident happened within weeks of the borgata incident. That this person could be so obtuse is hard to believe. Also that he took the chip duringthe tournament and got himself a first place chop during a points race is not going to garner him much sympathy.

LOL. as much as I'd like to assert that was a continuation of my tilt strategy, sadly that was just me being stupid.

Ptlou,

Intent is a crucial part of criminal law in western democracies.

You can read more about it online here: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

It is a reasonable introduction into the issue.