I have deliberately not tried to investigate what Divita did because it's totally irrelevent to the matter at hand. Maybe he was an innocent man railroaded by a vindictive ex- and a sleazy prosecutor and maybe he's a serial child abuser...and maybe the truth lies somewhere in between.

Either way it doesn't alter the fact that EPL decided to steal his prize with zero justification and they should be forced to cough up the $18,500 they owe him plus lawyer fees. Hopefully that will be sufficient incentive for them to not steal from poker players in the future.

I haven't looked into the situation obviously, but I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. DaVita were telling the truth about his situation. I've worked with convicted sex offenders before and many of them were convicted because they pled guilty to something based on actions that really weren't that big of a deal, because their attorney or the judge did not warn them about the sex offender status issue (you only have to legally tell a client about the actual sentence, not any collateral consequences) and so they made a poor choice to opt for 2 years instead of the potential for 15-20 through no fault of their own. It's really unfortunate, and more so especially because many of them have lives that are ruined because of all the presumptions people like exactly everyone in this thread have made.

I'm not saying he's not a scumbag, I'm just saying he might not be, and I know lots of people in similar situations who are decidedly NOT scumbags who get **** on all the time... so I just have more sympathy I guess.

But yeah also obviously that's not what this situation is about, and EPL royally F'ed up by not giving this guy his money.

+1

You mean like inappropriately touching kids?

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Also bear in mind that there was no sex offender registry in 1991, so it was not even a consideration in weighing the pros/cons of taking the deal back then.

So you're saying he was retroactively put on the sex offender register?

Mr Martin just said (paraphrased):
"If we had found out about his history independent of the complaint, we would have taken the same action"

I thought he said previously that they didn't take any action?

This happened to many many people convicted before the registry was created. They say it's not ex post facto because it "isn't punishment, it's just a status" when the reality is the status is much more of a punishment than the time served in many cases.

Martin and DeVita are on at the same time? If so, is Martin standing by his claim that Devita 'voluntarily withdrew'?

This happens all the time.

Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional. So state legislatures write the laws so that people are put on the list if they are ever convicted of anything (shoplifting, driving with license suspended, DUI, marijuana, etc...) ever again. Going on the list is punishment for the new crime.

Also, the sex offender list laws usually require people who were still in prison or on parole/probation when the law was passed to register, even if they were convicted 20 years before.

Varies by state. Not legal advice.

What you're saying makes perfect sense but in Mr. Devita's QJ's interview he never mentioned that he would've never pled guilty had he known there was potential to later be put on a sexual offender registry.

I'm not saying it didn't happen but I am saying it's interesting he never mentioned it.

No, not at the same time. He came on after.
Yes

I have no direct knowledge of the specifics of his case.

I do know Megan's law was not passed until 1996. Apparently California did have a previous requirement for certain sex offenders to register with the police, but without the public notification system we have today:

I don't know if you know that he was again charged in 2008 for similar charges but for what ever reason the child chose not to testify.

Remarkably he used the same defense as his previous charge blaming some woman who was trying to extort money from him.

I'll subscribe to the "where there's smoke there's fire" on this guy.

Mr. Martin REFUSED to debate with me live on the air on the QuadJacks.com broadcast... He knows the truth, and the knows that I can mess up Epic's
"spin" on this situation. That's why he won't allow me to join the show now.

michael, do you have any comment on the reviews of your businesses in google search?

and do you have any comment for what happened in 2008 when you were arrested for committing lewd acts on a child?

does this matter for any reason pertaining to this thread?

not really, but im curious.

you can search for my opinions in the thread.

Michael,

Why you decide to keep posting is beyond me, but you were an embarrassment on QJ tonight.

i missed it, why do u say he was an embarrasment kevmath?

Keep your Ad hominem attacks out of the thread please. It is simply an attempt to derail the thread and not relevant.

Listening to him attempt to be funny, trying to spin his way out of his previous criminal issues, and why he thought using an accent in response to Jon Aguiar's question was a great idea don't help his case.

I thought I saw his name on to catch a predator ...jk
Lol he should just post up his discovery and show us some cold hard facts.

Please don't encourage him to come back.