1. 09-18-12 09:35 AM #911
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    Justin,

    You should have filed the suit. That attorney that you hired is a bozo.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 09-18-12 09:37 AM #912
    BigDaddy
    BigDaddy's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-01-06
    Posts: 8,378
    Betpoints: 729

    you can't make this shit up.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 09-18-12 09:40 AM #913
    raydog
    raydog's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-07-07
    Posts: 6,984
    Betpoints: 113

    too much going on in this thread now...

    the nuts and bolts is the argument over who played on the acct.... (thats the only real issue here)

    cory giving info that really says absolutely nothing...(no kid, just because you got your mommy to write some emails crying about you losing, doesnt mean they were watching or monitoring the play...it just means she brought to their attention you thought the game was cheating you and you were constantly losing in the casino and are now having to deal with the bitching, thats it)

    mf arguing he should have never been banned in the first place... a valid argument, but still, irrelevant to any decisions made about payments in this case, imo....

    i love watching cory bury himself... does anyone really think that heritage would cut ties with sbr if they ruled against them in a case worth the measly balance riding in this case??? fukk no... continue though
    Last edited by raydog; 09-18-12 at 09:47 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 09-18-12 09:49 AM #914
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    why would you file a lawsuit in Colorado?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 09-18-12 10:06 AM #915
    HedgeHog
    HedgeHog's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-11-07
    Posts: 10,118
    Betpoints: 17069

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddy View Post
    you can't make this shit up.
    Nope, but you can certainly try to cover it up. It also goes a long way in explaining the leeway allowed in the EZ spam thread, complete with a "seemingly unbiased" Justin7 video. The entire propaganda thread was an SBR production.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. 09-18-12 01:33 PM #916
    jgilmartin
    jgilmartin's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 03-31-09
    Posts: 1,119
    Betpoints: 7

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddy View Post
    you can't make this shit up.
    Cory appears to be making some of it up. In some of the 'pasted' emails, his mom's address is h@yahoo.com; in another it is hh@yahoo.com.

    Quote Originally Posted by cory1111 View Post
    From: Helena H [mailto:h@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 7:02 AM
    To: John
    Subject: 84730


    Tell me John,
    Do I have to lose 50k before I win one dollar? Just look how many deposits and not one dollar has been won? You think this if fair?
    Helena
    84730
    Quote Originally Posted by cory1111 View Post
    From: Helena H [mailto:hh@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 7:28 AM
    To: Heritage Sales
    Subject: Re: 84730


    Hi John,
    I just want a chance to win, and obviously thats not happening. And if its at 6% isnt something wrong then? But no I dont want the casino closed, I put a lot of money in it and should be able to win something.
    thanks,
    Helena.


    I think Cory should be paid; I just found it amusing.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 09-18-12 01:43 PM #917
    boatboatboat
    what the hell is this?
    boatboatboat's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-23-11
    Posts: 1,148
    Betpoints: 120

    To lazy to go back and read.

    Has SBR commented on if they did fund the Cory vs EZ/RX lawsuit?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 09-18-12 01:45 PM #918
    cloverfield
    cloverfield's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 12-24-10
    Posts: 860
    Betpoints: 4727

    Quote Originally Posted by jgilmartin View Post
    Cory appears to be making some of it up. In some of the 'pasted' emails, his mom's address is h@yahoo.com; in another it is hh@yahoo.com.


    I think Cory should be paid; I just found it amusing.
    I think he is just editing out the email address. Her name appears to be Helena H..so he probably left h from one email, and hh from another.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 09-18-12 01:50 PM #919
    jgilmartin
    jgilmartin's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 03-31-09
    Posts: 1,119
    Betpoints: 7

    Quote Originally Posted by cloverfield View Post
    I think he is just editing out the email address. Her name appears to be Helena H..so he probably left h from one email, and hh from another.
    Yes, possibly. Why would you not just edit out the whole address, though, unless you wanted it to look like you directly pasted emails? Regardless, it has no bearing on the case at all.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  10. 09-18-12 02:06 PM #920
    HedgeHog
    HedgeHog's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-11-07
    Posts: 10,118
    Betpoints: 17069

    Quote Originally Posted by boatboatboat View Post
    To lazy to go back and read.

    Has SBR commented on if they did fund the Cory vs EZ/RX lawsuit?
    No, they are eerily quiet on the subject. Consequently, we should adopt the same stance Justin took in this case: If one side refuses to provide requested info, a default judgment should be made. SBR apparently did fund Cory's lawsuit, and gave him an unprecedented free soapbox for his cause. It also calls into question the supposedly unbiased video J7 made as SBR had a clear bias in the matter from the onset.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. 09-18-12 02:26 PM #921
    boatboatboat
    what the hell is this?
    boatboatboat's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-23-11
    Posts: 1,148
    Betpoints: 120

    Maybe they haven't commented because they dont even know Cory has said they funded the lawsuit. I haven't read an official SBR post in this thread for quite awhile.

    For all we know, they aren't even reading. And who could blame them...........

    Maybe someone should create a thread and ask them directly. If it isn't true, I would think they would appreciate the chance to set the record straight, and if it is true, there might very well a good reason they funded the lawsuit, that we are unaware of.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. 09-18-12 02:27 PM #922
    Optional
    Optional's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date: 06-10-10
    Posts: 57,809
    Betpoints: 9245

    Why is this such a big issue for for you Hedge?

    SBR is a player advocate site. Isn't it good that they would help fund a legal action for a member?

    You might read all sorts of evil intent into it, but how do you know they haven't done this for others? Or wouldn't do it for you in a case they felt a book had stolen 40k from you?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  13. 09-18-12 02:33 PM #923
    boatboatboat
    what the hell is this?
    boatboatboat's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-23-11
    Posts: 1,148
    Betpoints: 120

    Not speaking for Hedge, but speaking for my self, it seems odd that one gambling forum funds a lawsuit to take control of another forums URL.

    Not sure what that does to "protect" the player.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  14. 09-18-12 02:39 PM #924
    Optional
    Optional's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date: 06-10-10
    Posts: 57,809
    Betpoints: 9245

    Quote Originally Posted by boatboatboat View Post
    Not speaking for Hedge, but speaking for my self, it seems odd that one gambling forum funds a lawsuit to take control of another forums URL.

    Not sure what that does to "protect" the player.
    I did not know about that part. Thought it was simply to get Cory's winnings.

    Either way, I like the idea that if I ever get put in that sort of spot SBR might pony up the funds to pursue it.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  15. 09-18-12 02:42 PM #925
    boatboatboat
    what the hell is this?
    boatboatboat's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-23-11
    Posts: 1,148
    Betpoints: 120

    you really think SBR will come to your rescue?

    COME ON MAN!!!

    This isn't about protecting players.

    never has been, never will be.

    It's about the fourm getting $ , it always has been.

    Same thing is true at the rx, covers, any of the fourms.

    Anytime you click on a books link at the top and make a deposit, SBR gets a slice of the pie.

    MAKE IT RAIN BABY!! MAAKE IT RAIN!

    Naive, to think other wise.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  16. 09-18-12 02:57 PM #926
    Optional
    Optional's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date: 06-10-10
    Posts: 57,809
    Betpoints: 9245

    I'm not naive. I see they could have had personal reasons for wanting to give extra help. I don't have a problem with that.

    And I also have zero problem with SBR making money. In fact, the more the better. I like what they do it with it.

    Actually, it blows me away that so many from the land of capitalism seem to have an issue with SBR being a profit making business.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  17. 09-18-12 02:58 PM #927
    HedgeHog
    HedgeHog's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-11-07
    Posts: 10,118
    Betpoints: 17069

    Quote Originally Posted by Optional View Post
    Why is this such a big issue for for you Hedge?

    SBR is a player advocate site. Isn't it good that they would help fund a legal action for a member?

    You might read all sorts of evil intent into it, but how do you know they haven't done this for others? Or wouldn't do it for you in a case they felt a book had stolen 40k from you?
    No, they used to be a 100% advocate site, now their focus is almost entirely based on making a buck. Just look at BOL's banner and their bought and paid for B+ rating if you have any doubts. Don't for a second think SBR John donated 3k to Cory out of the goodness of his heart--something was required in return. Further, they used that EZ garbage marathon thread as their platform for their hidden agenda and wrapped it around a Justin7 video declaring the righteousness of their cause. I'm glad that Colorado case got thrown out and hope John enjoyed eating that 3 grand losing bet.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  18. 09-18-12 03:08 PM #928
    tuckman
    tuckman's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-17-07
    Posts: 79
    Betpoints: 2398

    The onlything SBR wanted was theRX domain name, that alone is well worth more than any lawyer fee's they possibly paid out to go after it. Sbr has lost all credibility with how everything keeps coming to fruitation. If you had any doubt with how they mask the BetOnline issues, after this dispute they tried to keep quiet its done nothing but backfire in their face. I rather go to bat vs a book alone than ask SBR to arbitrate any dispute that possibly has a sponsor involved. You cant fault a forum for trying to make money, but dont do it with the knife stuck in the front of your posters, at least keep it hidden in their back
    Nomination(s):
    This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: HedgeHog
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote 1
  19. 09-18-12 03:11 PM #929
    HedgeHog
    HedgeHog's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-11-07
    Posts: 10,118
    Betpoints: 17069

    Quote Originally Posted by Optional View Post
    I'm not naive. I see they could have had personal reasons for wanting to give extra help. I don't have a problem with that.

    And I also have zero problem with SBR making money. In fact, the more the better. I like what they do it with it.

    Actually, it blows me away that so many from the land of capitalism seem to have an issue with SBR being a profit making business.
    Absolutely nothing wrong with making money, but how you earn it is another story. Case in point: Passing off Betonline as a "Recommended Book" is disgraceful. People have been waiting months to collect their winnings, but SBR's ad check seems to arrive on time regularly.

    This is why I believe Justin7/SBR have no business deciding a case involving a sponsor, regardless if the decision appears fair. SBR loyalties are more driven by profit than player protection these days. That is a fact, albeit a sad one.
    Last edited by HedgeHog; 09-18-12 at 03:15 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  20. 09-18-12 03:35 PM #930
    HedgeHog
    HedgeHog's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 09-11-07
    Posts: 10,118
    Betpoints: 17069

    Quote Originally Posted by boatboatboat View Post
    Maybe they haven't commented because they dont even know Cory has said they funded the lawsuit. I haven't read an official SBR post in this thread for quite awhile.

    For all we know, they aren't even reading. And who could blame them...........

    Maybe someone should create a thread and ask them directly. If it isn't true, I would think they would appreciate the chance to set the record straight, and if it is true, there might very well a good reason they funded the lawsuit, that we are unaware of.

    Extremely doubtful. The Mods' jobs are to monitor threads, especially inflamed ones like this. SBR reps are certainly reading this thread, but have elected to not respond the past 2+ days.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  21. 09-18-12 03:41 PM #931
    boatboatboat
    what the hell is this?
    boatboatboat's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-23-11
    Posts: 1,148
    Betpoints: 120

    Maybee jj will call sbr and find out and post a vid??
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  22. 09-18-12 04:00 PM #932
    Optional
    Optional's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date: 06-10-10
    Posts: 57,809
    Betpoints: 9245

    Quote Originally Posted by HedgeHog View Post

    Absolutely nothing wrong with making money, but how you earn it is another story. Case in point: Passing off Betonline as a "Recommended Book" is disgraceful. People have been waiting months to collect their winnings, but SBR's ad check seems to arrive on time regularly.

    This is why I believe Justin7/SBR have no business deciding a case involving a sponsor, regardless if the decision appears fair. SBR loyalties are more driven by profit than player protection these days. That is a fact, albeit a sad one.
    Possibly right. Maybe I don't care as much as you because the ratings don't mean anything to me anyway. They are just another form of advertising, aimed at newbies. Might sound selfish, but if I had money stuck in BOL, I'd much prefer SBR to be helping them stay in business than turning on them when they are down. (assuming they believe BOL will come good again eventually)

    We know it's a business. We know SBR has high paying sponsors. I think they tread the line between helping players and sponsors just fine most of the time. No need to try and hold them up to a standard you would for some sort of govt regulator. Justin7 and SBR look out for us pretty well for a free website imho.

    Anyway, I'm starting to sound like a shill. So will just agree to disagree with you guys now. ;-)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  23. 09-18-12 04:12 PM #933
    MonkeyF0cker
    Update your status
    MonkeyF0cker's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-12-07
    Posts: 12,144
    Betpoints: 1127

    Optional.. most of that comes from the fact that you don't understand the way things worked in the past - before the UIGEA legislation was finalized. SBR could afford to be diligent and fair. It's not a knock on you. You just weren't around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin7 View Post
    In a newswire from earlier, we stated that SIA had canceled a player's winnings for the last 6 months. SIA provided convincing proof that the player was aware of the closure at that time. Through a technical error, the player's account was re-enabled for wagering, and the player resumed playing (after initiating withdrawals).

    I recommended to SIA that they pay the player anyway - it wasn't the player's fault that his account was re-enabled. Still though, the player's knowledge that his account was closed muddies the water. While I would have handled the dispute differently from SIA, I cannot say their decision in this matter was unjustifiable.
    Quote Originally Posted by SBR_John View Post
    If he would have lost would they have refunded those losses? No. They should pay.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Dozer View Post
    The player's funds were at risk so he he won the money. If SIA really wants to be sure the player understands they don't want his action they can cash him out.
    http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...te-update.html

    It's a different story today.
    Nomination(s):
    This post was nominated 2 times . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: HedgeHog, and prop
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote 2
  24. 09-18-12 04:16 PM #934
    MonkeyF0cker
    Update your status
    MonkeyF0cker's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-12-07
    Posts: 12,144
    Betpoints: 1127

    I'm pretty certain the views expressed by every member of SBR in that SIA dispute of 2007 are the same ones expressed by me and others in this thread.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  25. 09-18-12 04:23 PM #935
    Dark Horse
    Deus Ex Machina
    Dark Horse's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 12-14-05
    Posts: 13,764
    Betpoints: 2

    Quote Originally Posted by cory1111 View Post
    HERE IS PROOF HOW HERITAGE HAD BEEN MONITORING THIS ACCOUNT....WHILE MY MOTHERS ACCOUNT IS DOWN THE 19k, AND BEFORE 43k WAS WON.
    John,

    Can you tell me what percent I am at now. I just deposited another 200 dollars and lost it in 5 min,along with your $100. How can you not say there is something wrong when I cant win one time,just once? Just look at my play and see.


    From: Heritage Sales <sales@heritagesports.com>
    To: Helena H <h@yahoo.com>
    Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2012 9:49 AM
    Subject: RE: 84730


    Helena,
    We have had this conversation numerous times about your casino play. What Heritage sports offers is;
    8% cash on 100 or more, every 8th deposit free, and a 8% rebate on casino and horse play every month.
    This is what we offer. We don’t change it because a player is losing, nor do we change it when a player is winning.
    I understand your frustration, but there is not much we can do. I have enclosed a few email from the past on the same subject to show we have been pretty consistent.
    100 cash in your account, comes with a 5x rollover.

    Thx

    John

    From: Heritage Sales <sales@heritagesports.com>
    To: Helena H<h@yahoo.com>
    Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2012 10:30 AM
    Subject: RE: 84730</h@yahoo.com></sales@heritagesports.com>

    We cant factor in peoples level of play- some play near perfect –others don’t- some win, but keep playing until they lost everything- no way for us predict human behavior. If you choose to continue- you do so knowing the History of past performance.

    From: Helena H [mailto:hh@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 7:28 AM
    To: Heritage Sales
    Subject: Re: 84730

    Hi John,
    I just want a chance to win, and obviously thats not happening. And if its at 6% isnt something wrong then? But no I dont want the casino closed, I put a lot of money in it and should be able to win something.
    thanks,
    Helena.

    From: Heritage Sales <sales@heritagesports.com>
    To: Helena H<hh@yahoo.com>
    Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2012 10:18 AM
    Subject: RE: 84730</hh@yahoo.com></sales@heritagesports.com>

    Helena,
    I understand your frustrated, however we are 1st and foremost a Sportsbook and the majority of our business is in Sports wagering. As for online casino’s, the Industry average Hold percentage is around 5% and you are at 6%. We can do a onetime rebate for you this onetime and close the casino if you like. However, in the future if you choose to play in the casino you do so at your own risk. Playing online is very different than in a traditional casino and the hands go much quicker, which in turn can cause you to play a lot more hands than you would if you were sitting at a table. 100 in your account- good luck.

    John

    ** let me know if you want the casino closed?

    ----- Forwarded Message -----
    From: Heritage Sales <sales@heritagesports.com>
    To: Helena H <h@yahoo.com>
    Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 11:30 AM
    Subject: RE: Out of Office AutoReply: 84730
    </h@yahoo.com>

    Helena,
    I cannot get back to you every time you have the same issue with the casino. We are well aware of your feelings about our online casino. However, All I can do is reiterate what we offer. This casino is also used by many other A-rated Sportsbooks, some players love it and some do not.

    8% cash on deposits
    8% casino rebate monthly
    Every 8th deposit on the house






    lol. If not paying winnings after having these communications is not the standard definition of free rolling I don't know what is.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  26. 09-18-12 04:25 PM #936
    Optional
    Optional's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date: 06-10-10
    Posts: 57,809
    Betpoints: 9245

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyF0cker View Post
    Optional.. most of that comes from the fact that you don't understand the way things worked in the past - before the UIGEA legislation was finalized. SBR could afford to be diligent and fair. It's not a knock on you. You just weren't around.

    http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...te-update.html

    It's a different story today.
    You're right. I don't know what it used to be like.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  27. 09-18-12 04:29 PM #937
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    Quote Originally Posted by Optional View Post
    You're right. I don't know what it used to be like.
    Monkey doesn't know what he's talking about again. Both the SIA case and Heritage were subsequent to UIGEA.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  28. 09-18-12 04:31 PM #938
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    There were changes to SIA. They had problems in the past especially with European players. Now they don't take US players and have cleaned up their act.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  29. 09-18-12 04:38 PM #939
    MonkeyF0cker
    Update your status
    MonkeyF0cker's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-12-07
    Posts: 12,144
    Betpoints: 1127

    Quote Originally Posted by raiders72001 View Post
    Monkey doesn't know what he's talking about again. Both the SIA case and Heritage were subsequent to UIGEA.
    Nice reading comprehension. See FINALIZED.

    Do you know what finalizing the UIGEA did, Raiders? Apparently not.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  30. 09-18-12 04:39 PM #940
    MonkeyF0cker
    Update your status
    MonkeyF0cker's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-12-07
    Posts: 12,144
    Betpoints: 1127

    Quote Originally Posted by raiders72001 View Post
    There were changes to SIA. They had problems in the past especially with European players. Now they don't take US players and have cleaned up their act.
    Here's one out of left field... But maybe Heritage should clean up their act too.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  31. 09-18-12 04:47 PM #941
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyF0cker View Post
    Nice reading comprehension. See FINALIZED.

    Do you know what finalizing the UIGEA did, Raiders? Apparently not.
    I sold my forum because of UIGEA. Agents got scared. That was 2005-06.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  32. 09-18-12 04:48 PM #942
    MonkeyF0cker
    Update your status
    MonkeyF0cker's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-12-07
    Posts: 12,144
    Betpoints: 1127

    Quote Originally Posted by raiders72001 View Post
    I sold my forum because of UIGEA. Agents got scared. That was 2005-06.
    Great. Good for you. That does not mean that all effects of the passing of the UIGEA were instantaneous. Hardly so.

    The UIGEA wasn't entirely finalized in the DOJ until the last days of Bush's Presidency - late 2008/Jan. 2009.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  33. 09-18-12 04:50 PM #943
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyF0cker View Post
    Great. Good for you. That does not mean that all effects of the passing of the UIGEA were instantaneous. Hardly so.
    You're a Vegas bettor. I don't think you were even betting offshore at the time. Even with Vegas you said that BW doesn't play teasers. If you weren't such an asshole to other posters, I'd stop exposing you.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  34. 09-18-12 04:54 PM #944
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




    The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (or UIGEA) is United States legislation regulating online gambling. It was added as Title VIII to the SAFE Port Act (found at 31 U.S.C.§§ 5361–5367) which otherwise regulatedport security
    Legislative history

    The Act was passed on the last day before Congress adjourned for the 2006 elections.]
    ............
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  35. 09-18-12 05:00 PM #945
    raiders72001
    raiders72001's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 10,496
    Betpoints: 15395

    This is when guys got scared.

    In July 2006, David Carruthers, the CEO of BetonSports, a company publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange, was detained in Texas while changing planes on his way from London to Costa Rica.[14] He and ten other individuals had been previously charged in a sealed indictment with violations of US federal laws relating to illegal gambling. While as noted above, a United States Appeals court has stated that the Wire Act does not apply to non-sports betting, the Supreme Court of the United States previously refused to hear an appeal of the conviction of Jay Cohen, where lower courts held that the Wire Act does make it illegal to own a sports betting operation that offers such betting to United States citizens.[15]The BetOnSports indictment alleged violations of at least nine different federal statutes, including 18 USC Sec. 1953 (Operation of an Illegal Gambling Business).[citation needed]Carruthers is currently under house arrest on a one million dollar bail bond.[16]
    In September 2006, Sportingbet reported that its chairman, Peter Dicks, was detained in New York City on a Louisiana warrant while traveling in the United States on business unrelated to online gaming.[citation needed] Louisiana is one of the few states that has a specific law prohibiting gambling online. At the end of the month, New York dismissed the Louisiana warrant.[17]
    Also in September 2006, just before adjourning for the midterm elections, both the House of Representatives and Senate passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (as a section of the unrelated SAFE Port Act) to make transactions from banks or similar institutions to online gambling sites illegal. This differed from a previous bill passed only by the House that expanded the scope of the Wire Act. The passed bill only addressed banking issues.[18] The Act was signed into law on October 13, 2006, by PresidentGeorge W. Bush. At the UIGEA bill-signing ceremony, Bush did not mention the Internet gambling measure, which was supported by the National Football League but opposed by banking groups.[19]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
First ... 24252627282930 ... Last
Top
« Previous Thread | Sportsbooks & The Industry | Next Thread »