-
Comment -
Detective: "That bag of $100k in cash you received. It has some stolen bills in it."
Fairlay: "Do you have jurisdiction to seize it?"
Detective: "No. But as a favor, we ask that you keep it in a closet in your basement until at least the end of the year."
Fairlay: "Done deal."Comment -
Fairlay cannot be trusted with any significant amount of btc going forward.Comment -
SBR should do the right thing, giving D to Fairlay.Comment -
There's a reasonable chance we find out through the media if Degen1 is indicted.
Here's a story about someone who embezzled $22 million then shot off $9m at Nitrogen:
some of his bets:
Perhaps the feds learned something from that case.Comment -
Nothing happens.
if you play at a bitcoin book, you play in and get paid in bitcoin. No one has a valid claim against them for "value change" ever. To start with what "value"? Against the Euro, the New Zealand Dollar, GBP, US$?
Think about it like this, I play in US$ books but when withdrawing to my bank I have to exchange those US$ for AU$.
Would you think it was fair or crazy if I was trying to say the bookmaker was responsible for movement in my local currency against the currency they offer and I chose?
One other point. I see a few people talking about Degen's deposit coming from an exchange to Fairlay.
Not sure where this has come from. I don't think Degen said that was the case to SBR.
It might be true, but I don't know if it is or not..Comment -
Bitcoin 101 is exchange to wallet to book....am i correct? If this is true and he sent 100k + direct from exchange to book something is very much suspicious here....So many triggers would be set off...Newbies sending few 100 bucks i can see but an experienced gambler would never do this....send funds back to last address and be done with this messComment -
You are mixing up an exchange such as Coinbase with other exchanges that don't ban for sending funds to a book. There are reasons for not wanting to use a personal wallet for transactions with sportsbooks. The player may not want a personal wallet linked to a sportsbook in any form. You cannot send the money back to the exchange since it doesn't guarantee that the funds will be credited to degen.Last edited by raiders72001; 09-04-19, 11:53 PM.Comment -
It’s just comical at this point, I’ve moved on. It’s objective that this was handled poorly and only worsened through time. When dust settles, I’ll get my apologies and compensationComment -
You're not claiming Bookmaker is unreasonably holding your funds either. If they're giving me reasonable access to my available funds, I have nobody to blame but myself if the currency charge hurts me and I failed to act on it. People deposit into Fairlay with the expectation they can move their Bitcoin in and out quickly as they see fit. This is not the case here.
If this were a lawsuit, it would be argued as "Loss of Chance" damages owed by Fairlay. This would be a strong argument also considering the fact the IRS considers Bitcoin property as opposed to currency like the USD and $AUS in your example so he can argue his property depreciated in their custody creating a loss of chance if he tried to bring litigation in a US court.
They are choosing to intervene and become trustee/custodian of the bitcoin which prevents him from being able to withdraw and use it as he sees fit. At the very least, they owe him interest on the bitcoin they're holding assuming they return it to him.Last edited by mrpapageorgio; 09-05-19, 03:05 AM.Comment -
SBR needs to step-in and threaten a F rating and a blacklist if funds are not returned immediately. If there is law enforcement, they can deal with the exchange directly. Fairlay is a betting provider, not a legal court. Under the circumstances, it is much more likely they are trying to pull a fast one and act like they have no choice but to hold funds. If he's a part of some worldwide drug/ human trafficking ring, then we could understand. But I doubt that is the case since it has not been mentioned too SBR.Comment -
The only practical reason people wanted to cut out the intermediary wallet I can think of was the few times when the mempool had a severe backlog of transactions waiting to be added to the blockchain which caused the miner fees to skyrocket so people took the risk because they didn't want to pay the extra fee to move it in-between the intermediary wallet and didn't want to potentially risk waiting a long time not only for the transaction to be confirmed in their wallet, but then to have to send it and wait to be confirmed at the book.Comment -
Exchanges can be used as mixers. Go right from the mixer to the book or book to mixer. Sportbook to Coinbase shouldn't be done. Going from Exchange to Coinbase isn't getting you banned. Fees and speed are another reason to cut out the middleman.
I always use a intermediary since it's easier to figure out if there's ever a problem with a book questioning deposits and withdrawals. Another reason for using a middleman is to keep you from being banned at a place such as Coinbase.
Last edited by raiders72001; 09-05-19, 02:33 PM.Comment -
If someone is trying to track a bitcoin transaction and mixers are used, then assumptions may have to be made. If you are using the same wallet for 4 different sportsbooks, then it's a gambling wallet.Last edited by raiders72001; 09-05-19, 03:07 PM.Comment -
It really doesn't matter. Unless you're intentionally keeping certain addresses segregated within a single wallet, It's not hard to figure out which addresses are part of the same wallet. https://www.walletexplorer.com/ does all the work for you.Comment -
I believe someone wrote a report about the Quadriga missing funds based on that site's guesses and sent people off on a vigilante effort last year?
And was later shown to be almost completely inaccurate in it's guesses?
Sounded like the site was a bit of a scam from what I read..Comment -
If the sole purpose is to keep from getting banned at Coinbase, then it doesn't matter. One wallet is fine. Coinbase knows what you're doing one wallet or a wallet for each book. If you are going straight book to Coinbase, you just increase your chances of getting banned. You are forcing their hand.Last edited by raiders72001; 09-06-19, 06:18 AM.Comment -
It's just a block explorer that also groups together addresses that have been signed in single transactions. I don't think it even generates revenue.
Lets say I have 3 addresses (A, B and C) in my wallet with 1 BTC in each and I want to send 2.5 BTC to Address D.
My wallet software will create a single transaction with 3 outputs (A, B, C) and 2 inputs. 2.5 BTC will go to D and then the .5 BTC change will be sent to another address in my wallet.
There is now proof that A, B and C are all part of the same wallet. If I ever reuse those addresses with any other addresses, those will also be added to known addresses of my wallet.
This is all assuming I'm the one controlling my bitcoin with something like Electrum or Bitcoincore, not using an exchange.Comment -
That logic makes sense.
I am not even sure of the details so really am just asking a question here, but was there was some kerfuffle about helpful readers ripping into Kraken based on results from that site suggesting the quadriga guy was squirreling away funds in an account there?.Comment -
I'm not familiar with the issue and can't find anything on it. But, I can't see how walletexplorer can be at fault really. They're just a blockchain explorer.
In other news, looks like Degen1 is getting his money back in 2 weeks.
From Fairlay Support:
We'd like to publish the following update on the degen1 case for anyone interested:
Decision has be made to return the roughly 100K USD deposit of degen1 to the address it was sent from. Degen1 could not rebut our presumption that the funds are of questionable origin. We therefore decided to reject his deposit and close his account permanently. Degen1 is not allowed to use our site again. The address his deposit is returned to belongs to an exchange.
All involved parties have been notified that the transaction will be released to the Bitcoin network on September 20th giving everyone time to make necessary preparations.
It's weird they are insisting on waiting 2 weeks and insisting on returning it to an address that they know Degen1 doesn't actually control.
I think it's possible the exchange will be pressured to hold the funds from the same people that pressured Fairlay to do the same. If it's an exchange licensed to operate in the United States, he can almost certainly kiss the money goodbye.
Assuming he gets paid, I think he'll probably just disappear, but hopefully he'll spill the beans.Comment -
It's not a weird move Twitchy looking at it from a CYA standpoint. If you're Fairlay, what's the best way to wash your hands of this hot potato without completely pissing off either side? Fairlay can tell the "third party" the Bitcoin is not going back directly to him, so he can't exactly run off into the night with it before they have a chance to reach out to the exchange. Fairlay can tell SBR and Dengen that they are no longer holding the Bitcoin and to take it up with the exchange whatever they decide to do. SBR will drop out since they aren't in the business of advocating for customers with complaints against Bitcoin exchanges. It'll now be between Dengen, the third party, and the exchange.
If there were odds available, I would bet money the two week window is to give the "third party" time to get a demand letter (or subpoena) drafted to the exchange and to have the exchange prepare to take back the Bitcoin.
Fairlay can now say, "We are no longer part of the situation, the Bitcoin has been returned to sender, you can deal with them." They are basically doing a reverse pass the buck.
If it's Gemini or Coinbase, best of luck getting them to release it quickly, but at least he can deal with a US based firm and has more legal remedies assuming the Bitcoin is clean.Last edited by mrpapageorgio; 09-06-19, 11:01 PM.Comment -
Degen doesn't have to prove his innocence. Fairlay has to prove his guilt. Unless Fairaly produces a court order, they should be black listed.
I don't think that authorities were ever involved. Fairlay tried to grab $100k but there was a lot of forum pressure. Now Fairlay is trying to save face by returning the money to the depositing address.
If authorities were involved, the authorities would have been questioning degen, not Fairlay questioning degen. The authorities would have grabbed the money going to the exchange, not at Fairlay.Last edited by raiders72001; 09-06-19, 11:38 PM.Comment -
FairlayYou are presumed innocent until proven guilty.presumption that the funds are of questionable origin.
The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty. It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maximei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”).
In many states, presumption of innocence is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, and it is an international human right under the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11. Under the presumption of innocence, the legal burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which must present compelling evidence to the trier of fact (a judge or a jury). The prosecution must in most cases prove that the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt remains, the accused must be acquittedComment -
I want to write a final bit to point out what eventually most people who care should see, and I don’t want Fairlay to be fully excused for handling this terribly from the beginning:
#1) I asked them to return my funds to any address that it had been deposited from, I asked that and it had been suggested by everyone here and SBR for the last 6 weeks, to do this now while pretending they did nothing wrong is absurd
#2) they still never provided any information in terms of what I was accused of or who the third party was. They seem to continue to leak information without giving me any further insight, compromising security of my transactions to an unknown third party
#3) given that they still have not provided me any additional information, their comment that I was “unable to rebut” their assumption is false bc they never even gave me an opportunity. I was also never presented with any evidence
#4) there’s still no evidence that a law enforcement agency was involved, especially given the fact that all my information was handed out to a troll box, to SBR and to a third party
#5) it’s hypocritical that Fairlay has asked me in their emails to not disclose anything in public when they are not even guaranteeing a safe return of my funds to me, and that they are providing false information to the public to clear their name and save face (primarily that I wasn’t able to rebut anything. They asked for a phone number to reach me and when I gave that they did not call me, nor provide any further detail).
#6) didn’t they claim that I have no access to an exchange, and if my funds are of questionable origin, how do they know that they are returning to an exchange? And if it’s an exchange how is it a questionable origin?
#7) for them to give further information and further complicating me securing funds to other parties that may not be true is not their place
#8) I was just asked a few days ago about my identity and other personal details, so how could they even have been so sure that this third party had the right person..
Whether you believe me or not, the above is based on facts and logic. Even SBR has confirmed a lot of what I have complained about, including the fact that no information was given to me.
In my opinion this is no real solution for me as the customer, and it’s also not absolved them of their wrongdoings themselves, including potentially disclosing details on a supposed law enforcement investigationComment -
degen - will the exchange return your money?Comment -
You're absolutely right mrpapageorgia.
What's weird is that Fairlays response seems overly explicit. They could have just said "investigation complete, we will be returning the funds back to the same address that Degen deposited with. We think there's something shady going on but can't prove it".
Why point out that the address they are refunding the $100k to is not actually controlled by Degen1, and they are only going to do so after notifying the people that do control the address that something fishy is going on? (and wait 2 weeks to make sure everything is clear)
My guess is that the exchange is what linked LEO to Degen, and then to Fairlay.
Degen, what exchange did you use?Comment -
Comment -
The story that Fairlay gave to SBR about Degen1's activities is almost certainly not true. Pretty hard to rebut something that Fairlay would not tell him about and is also not true.Degen1 could not rebut our presumption that the funds are of questionable origin
And Fairlay could have worked this out for themselves if they simply asked Degen1 directly about the allegations, or even just asked what was the source of his money.
Even simply asking for proof of his full name and address before assuming he was the person being investigated would have been a start!
There is about 80% chance that they have the wrong guy from the start imho.
But Fairlay have no clue about that as they have not even asked him the questions to work it out.
This is why SBR was so concerned that Fairlay were acting unprofessionally, unfairly, unlawfully and without even taking the slightest precautions to make sure they protected their own client from what now appears to be false allegations against him.
Let's hope whatever plan Fairlay has here, that is going to take two weeks, does not involve them purposely trying to victimize their customer even further.
And they need to send BetG's money back now too. That case is looking to be no better than simple theft by them, if their CEO response is really the full official position on that one.
They profit heavily by making signup rules with no ID or KYC to attract money launderers and criminal source money, which cannot easily be washed via reputable books, and then try to act like they are angels and are not profiting on purpose from dirty money.
Talk about the epitome of the cliche, don't throw stones if you live in a glass house.
Last edited by Optional; 09-07-19, 03:48 AM..Comment
