5 ms·

> reflecting the baccarat cash as well as $500,000 won using some of the winnings at craps This is the real wtf. Ivey could have easily used his own money to p

• shawabawa3 10y ago
  I guess the logic is that if he lost $500k they wouldn't have asked for that back
  • iopq 10y ago
    You should only keep track of the baccarat winnings/losses. If he won $9.6M in baccarat and lost $500k in craps, they should still ask for $9.6M, not $9.1M. That said, they agreed to the rules, they should eat the loss anyway. The government has no role in protecting businesses from their own stupidity.
    • pc86 10y ago
      The argument (which I don't agree with, but which has some merit) is that he and his accomplice used knowledge available only to them which constituted a fraud against the casino. The reason I don't agree with it is that the fact that the cards were printed in a manner which made it possible to do this does not mean they defrauded the casino, it means the casino shouldn't have agreed to use those cards because their security folks should have known about this issue.
      • nommm-nommm 10y ago
        No, the arguments is not that is it fraud, that's addressed in the article, "Ivey did not commit fraud, Judge Noel Hillman for the U.S. District of New Jersey wrote in an opinion on Monday." The argument is it the game wasn't legal under New Jersey law as one party knowingly used marked cards. The judge believes that the fact that they didn't mark the cards themselves isn't important.