SEC probes Doyle

AAAA · #1 12-16-2005, 08:42 PM

GrannyMae · #2 12-16-2005, 09:31 PM

this was inevitable. only disclosure will settle this. said disclosure will sink or exonerate him. i sure hope it is exoneration.
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Uglyowl · #3 12-16-2005, 09:41 PM

This story is starting to get mainstream press as well. Wonder how big a story it will become?

Rudbaeck · #4 12-16-2005, 10:08 PM

Someone made alot of money in that circus.

While I feel for Doyle I somehow don't see how he can be blameless in this. But on the other hand I can't see him being stupid enough to try this kind of moronic trick either. Oh well, I am fairly sure the SEC will manage to pierce attorney privilege and take this to court. Will be interesting to see who pulled the strings.

AAAA · #5 12-16-2005, 10:16 PM

what grounds would they use to pierce attorney client privilege?

I can think that when attorneys are acting as businessmen, they should lose that privilege, but if they were advising him, and he confessed to something, that shouldn't be admissible.

I am concerned that this doesn't blow the whole poker world to pieces. Don't know who is old enough to remember what the $64,000 question scandal did to tv game shows. I would hate to see online poker get tarred with that brush.

GrannyMae · #6 12-16-2005, 10:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
what grounds would they use to pierce attorney client privilege?

I can think that when attorneys are acting as businessmen, they should lose that privilege, but if they were advising him, and he confessed to something, that shouldn't be admissible.

I am concerned that this doesn't blow the whole poker world to pieces. Don't know who is old enough to remember what the $64,000 question scandal did to tv game shows. I would hate to see online poker get tarred with that brush.

[/ QUOTE ]

martha stewart has never been so big since her scandal.

people will not stop playing poker because the old boys's club pulled a fast one on a lightly traded (relatively speaking) security.

memphis57 · #7 12-16-2005, 11:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
what grounds would they use to pierce attorney client privilege?

[/ QUOTE ]

Patriot Act.

And, as for what relation this might have to terrorism, well everybody knows that all illegal perpetrators hang together, so it's not at all unlikely that online poker is funding Al Queda.

(This is sarcasm, but only just barely - they're already using Patriot Act powers widely in the war on drugs.)

FlFishOn · #8 12-17-2005, 01:01 PM

The worlds of poker and finance are full of opportunistic scumbags (think Dutch Boyd). Where does Brunson come down on this sliding scale? I guarantee you he will not get sainthood for his part in it.

GrannyMae · #9 12-17-2005, 01:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The worlds of poker and finance are full of opportunistic scumbags (think Dutch Boyd). Where does Brunson come down on this sliding scale? I guarantee you he will not get sainthood for his part in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

do you know the facts? nobody does, so STFU until you have a basis for your opinion.

mentioning boyd and doyle in same post shows you are simply a provocateur.

fool

mackthefork · #10 12-17-2005, 05:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Someone made alot of money in that circus.

While I feel for Doyle I somehow don't see how he can be blameless in this. But on the other hand I can't see him being stupid enough to try this kind of moronic trick either. Oh well, I am fairly sure the SEC will manage to pierce attorney privilege and take this to court. Will be interesting to see who pulled the strings.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but I can see him being retarded enough, to get involved with people who would, without any actual dishonest intent on his part.

Mack