ALERT - Fox news running a story on the busted VA game tonight

[mmcd]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume you are a law student if you have access to lexis... you dont happen to know what they charge for a individual membership do ya?


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know, but I'd guess it's a lot since many medium sized law firms have either one or the other (Wewtlaw or Lexis) and tend to get pissy when it gets used gratuitously.

I think unlimited access would be quite expensive.

They actually go out of their way to get law students hooked, so firms would be more inclined to use them a lot.

After all it's a LOT easier than going to a law library and finding/copying the cases, especially if you want to research a specific issue extensively.

[dcJohn]

Based on the end of the report, where they explained that they actually intervened before this became an issue, it also seems like comments about "criminal elements" were also greatly inflated.

I think the only promising thing about it is that at least they felt that the only way to justify busting the game was by presenting the (here possibly ficticious) case of a game that's bringing in an enormous rake and that has had neighborhood complaints from crime caused by the game. (I know, it's thin.)

John

[dcJohn]

Lexis isn't just for law students anymore. Many universities now give *all* students online access to Lexis, thanks to easier online access and more flexible site license options. We do that here at GMU (I'm an adjunct there).

John

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

[ QUOTE ]

Turner v. Commonwealth , 226 Va. 456, 309 S.E.2d
337 (1983).

Not completely on point, but the only time the specific issue has really come up.

Also, note that the statute's plain language says: conducts, manages, supervises, or directs.

This taken together with 18.2-334's requirement that the private residence is not "commonly used" for gambling activities, seem to make this law's applicability dependent on not only the "rake" question", but also the level of control over the game by the home owner.

For example:

5 or 6 friends get together every Thursday and play poker in one of their homes.

Almost certainly ok.

Theres a game that regularly (twice a week or more) runs in a particular house where distant aquaintences, or even strangers that here by word of mouth are invited to play poker. Often there are several different games, offering various stakes. The home owner has the final say as to any disputes that occur at the tables, but DOES NOT TAKE A RAKE.

Probably illegal.

I think it depends on more than just making profit from the game. It may be somewhat of a contol/promotion issue.


[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent post. IANAL and did not know of the case law. I'll have the wife (attorney that she is) pull up the case for me. My home game is almost always held at my house, because I built a table and have cool chips and KEMs. A friend sometimes hosts the game when I can't, we play on a random schedule that works out to once or twice a month and rulings are made by group vote, combined with whoever pisses and moans the loudest. I'm nearly certain my game is legal.

I also play at the Moose Lodge, where most games are tournament style, which seem to be legal under that code section someone else cited. Sometimes cash games break out, with the house getting $5 a head for expenses when you buy-in. These are more questionable. Fortunately, several local police officers and the town manager have participated, so I'm not real worried about the game getting busted.

[Nate Finch]

Funny, a friend of mine was actually at that game when it was busted.. I first heard about it a little over two weeks ago. Got an email from him today about it being on TV. Evidently swat guys busted in with guns drawn and the whole 9 yards. Took everyone's picture, had individual interviews for about 3 hours, and confiscated the money from everyone's wallets, which included my friend's entire bankroll. Sucky.

Like Slamdunkpro said, it wasn't a really high limit game or anything... I really can't conceive of them getting $40k a *month* from a rake.

Was it a group of friends playing 50 cent hands? No... but it wasn't an underground gambling ring either.

Moral of the story? Don't leave your bankroll in your pocket, and choose your games wisely.

I love the way they say it was a casino because it had two tables. Who here hasn't had too many people for a single table and wished you had a second one? By that standard, we're all halfway there.

-Nate

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
you dont happen to know what they charge for a individual membership do ya?

[/ QUOTE ]

It really depends on what you get. They have plans that are pay-as-you-go (i.e. pay by the minute or by the search) and flat-rate subscriptions. The flat rate subscriptions vary wildly depending on the contents of the plan.

[Cubswin]

http://www.timescommunity.com/site/t...1686&rfi=6

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You did hear the part about raking $40,000/month, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I played in that game for a while - If they were raking 40k / month I didn't see it. That would have been like $7.80 / hand based on the number of times they played per month.



[ QUOTE ]
And known criminals in the area?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah right - did you catch the bit at the very end when the new anchor said something like (help me out here cubswin) " The police said that they were able to shut this down before the criminal element moved in"

And ya know what? If they were indeed pulling 40k/month - more power to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to this:Article

"Baucom also learned that the residence contained two 12-person poker tables and that, when these tables are full, people would wait in line to get a seat. On any given night, he said, there were at least 30 players in the basement of the townhouse."

so 2 x 12 is 24 people playing at all times. Did this game go on every night? What was the rake?

If the rake was $10 a half hour just like the Casino, and there were 24 people playing at all times for 40 hours a week then:

$20 hour x 2 tables x 12 people = $480 hour.

$480 hour x 40 hours a week = $19,200

$19,200 x 4 weeks a month = 76,800 a month.

Also:
Also, a $4 rake per hand + $1 tip to dealer = $5 per hand
35 hands an hour x $5 = $175 hour
$175 hour x 24 hours a day = $4,200 a day
$4,200 a day x 30 days a week = $126,000 a month
or $1,512,000 per table per year.

Considering how many tables foxwoods has, and how many of them are full at 5AM on Tuesday, running a poker table is a very lucrative business.


But just curious when you say, based on the number of times a month that they played, how many was that? And how high was the rake?

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
"Baucom also learned that the residence contained two 12-person poker tables and that, when these tables are full, people would wait in line to get a seat. On any given night, he said, there were at least 30 players in the basement of the townhouse."


[/ QUOTE ]

First Yes there were 2 tables but the most they ever sat was 11 - I never saw more than 4 or 5 people sitting out. And this was on 3/6 night. Other nights the attendance was far less.

No, the games did not run 24 hours a day / 7 days.

Since this case is still pending - I'm not going to get into a lot of detail other than to say the news figures are inflated to a large extent.

[mrraise]

I also played in this game on a weekly basis and I can confirm that the quoted rake figure was greatly overblown