Some Info about Choice poker

[lowroller]

If I'm not mistaken, aren't BOTH Sports Interaction and WSEX still operating/thriving?? With WSEX, Jay had to come back and turn himself in!! Steve and Hayden are still considered fugitives, but I don't see that slowing down WSEX.

They can prosecute owners on US soil all they want, they're going to have a tough time getting the $ out of, and shutting down a business in Costa Rica where they have no jurisdiction. It's the nature of a corportaion to keep on going regardless of what happens to 1 or 2 owners. If owners or spokespeople go down it means NOTHING to the sites...they will keep chugging along. To think otherwise is naive.

[Wake up CALL]

dandy_don wrote: "I believe if you read closely, the poker sites are just the next in line."

Ok, I took your suggestion and read the Wire Act again very closely. Nope nothing about internet poker, in fact noting about prosecuting the bettors either. At first I did not think you were paranoid just misinformed. Now I think you might be both.

[gabyyyyy]

"Ok, I took your suggestion and read the Wire Act again very closely. Nope nothing about internet poker"


The wire act does not have to specifically implicate every single gambling activity. They do not list horse racing, football, and other sports activities, just sports betting. Does that mean the above are exempt?

Attorney General's and Judges have a duty to interpret the law. As of late they have interpreted the wire act to mean, "any unregulated gambling activity conducted via a wire".

You can moan and complain until your eyes turn blue. Heck you can even choose to ignore what is actually happening.

Fact of the matter is, that many of these sites are currenrly being investigated and there is not a single thing any of us can do. I sure as heck though, would not play at a site where one of the owners lives in the United States.

[Wake up CALL]

"Attorney General's and Judges have a duty to interpret the law. As of late they have interpreted the wire act to mean, "any unregulated gambling activity conducted via a wire"."

No they have not you Whack Job. I must conclude this is so since you are unable to post one single prosecution of an offshore poker site being prosecuted for internet poker. Nor for that matter any indivuduals being arrested for the same.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
"Attorney General's and Judges have a duty to interpret the law. As of late they have interpreted the wire act to mean, "any unregulated gambling activity conducted via a wire"."

No they have not you Whack Job. I must conclude this is so since you are unable to post one single prosecution of an offshore poker site being prosecuted for internet poker. Nor for that matter any indivuduals being arrested for the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am backing Wake Up Call on this one...the only way to prove your point Gabyyy is to point to an exact case where the law has been "interpreted" as you say it has been. You have been asked to provide authority for your position, and so far, you have failed miserably. The law is not based upon your own anecdotal evidence, or beliefs in what "should be."

If you want to be a lawyer, go to law school.

[Ted Geisel]

Gabyyy takes a quote from the Federal Wire Act, which is a statute and then segues into some press release about something the Justice Department has said to intimidate the media.

Gabbyyy the ONLY Federal Circuit Court to rule on the Wire Act section you quote said it does NOT apply to unline casinos. The argument that a poker game is not a banked game, therefore is not in the business of making or accepting wagers is also a valid one, even beyond the Circuit Court's ruling. (The underlying case tossed out a claim that Mastercrard and VISA violated the Wire Act by accepting gaming charges.) That is a legal precedent of more value than a press release.

Basically, in the US if a statute doesn't SAY expressly and clearly that something is illegal, it is NOT a crime. This is precisely why legislation is periodically introduced to BAN internet casinos, because the Wire Act does NOT make them illegal.

(I do not know what state law says in Texas, but if a Texan owns a business that is legal where it operates overseas, why would you think he has somehow violated a law in Texas ? Do you think the World Poker Tour owners are criminals because they work with Party Poker to show a tournament on TV ?)

Ted "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" Geisel

(I have nothing whatever to do with Choice Poker and have never even seen their website.)

[Oski]

Ted: Go to the head of the class. Good work!

[Ted Geisel]

Enough of this BS already.

In In Re: Mastercard International Inc. Internet Gambling Litigation, Case No. 01-30389, in November, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit said,

[T]he Wire Act does not prohibit non-sports internet gambling..." and upheld a decision by the District Court that debts incurred with respect to non-sports interent gambloing were not illegal because non-sports internet gambling itself was legal.

You can look up the case yourself if you want the real facts and the Courts' view.

Ted

[Ted Geisel]

[Oski]

Ted: I was complementing your good work, not being sarcastic!