NEWS ALERT - David Carruthers, detained by US authorities

[cipher]

Originally Posted by Westland Bowl

I definitely would want to know "the basis for detainment" too!!! There are a couple of issues here:

1. If US authorities are acting on behalf of the bill the passed the House last week, they evidently didn't read it or more importantly, don't know the political process of how a bill becomes law in US. The bill gives no authority whatsoever to anyone in anything just yet. And again, the bill only deals with the use of credit cards and transfers of funds for gambling purposes.

2. If US authorities arrested David because he runs a online sports betting operation albeit on non-US soil in which US citizens bet, it is like US authorities arresting the Amsterdam seller of pot (where it's legal) after discovering a small stash on a person entering the US. The US authorities would be over-stepping their jurisdiction in this case.

In any case, I guess the US authorities arrested David....because they can and likely get away with it. There are probably some other issues that will later come out about this.

Hi WB:

Actually this case could be a God send to the industry. Here's why, The DOJ is trying to boot strap RICO into this now and as scary as that might seem to be, the elements of RICO are exceedingly hard to prove in a case such as this. A good analogy would be that the DOJ has enlisted the use of a 105 Howitzer to kill a horse fly.

They (DOJ) wants this conviction in the worst way and it shows with DOJ throwing the RICO statute into the mix. The one bad thing for DOJ and filing under the RICO statute, is that if they (DOJ) are unsuccessful in getting a conviction there are severe penalties that can come down around the ears of the government hard and fast.

I'm sure that David Caruthers has a top notch legal team in place and if he dosen't he'd better get one and fast as there are numerous time sensitive filings that hav't to be made in RICO cases. And the courts have taken on the stance that mistakes won't be tolerated inasmuch as the stakes are so high for both sides.

Have a good one.

[jetset]

Good post, Cipher. I have the feeling this is just the start of a major litigative issue that will have far-reaching repercussions for the DoJ as well as BoS.

The action is all from the authorities at present, and they may have ammunition of which we are unaware, but I suspect a strong response is taking shape as we speak.

[cipher]

Originally Posted by jetset

Good post, Cipher. I have the feeling this is just the start of a major litigative issue that will have far-reaching repercussions for the DoJ as well as BoS.

The action is all from the authorities at present, and they may have ammunition of which we are unaware, but I suspect a strong response is taking shape as we speak.

Hi Jet:

To my way of thinking this could be the "ball buster" that will make or break the industry as we know it.

Have a good one.

[spearmaster]

Originally Posted by Westland Bowl

2. Is Kaplan a US citizen? Unless it has changed in the past few years, US law considers expatriated citizens to be still US citizens for 10 years afterwards. Even income earned overseas are taxed as if you still resided on US soil.

I'm pretty sure Kaplan is American. But as Casinomeister said earlier, all US citizens residing abroad are still required to pay taxes to the US Government, minus any amounts they may have paid to countries with a dual-taxation agreement, and minus an automatic $80K exemption.

3. Did David Carruthers join BetonSports after Kaplan moved it to Costa Rica? To charge a non-US person with issues involving a company on non-US soil and such betting operations is legal within his own country is preposterous.

Carruthers joined long after Kaplan moved NASA/BetOnSports to Costa Rica.

The issue of legality of operations is irrelevant - they are not charged with illegally operating a sportsbook - they are charged with illegally accepting bets from Americans.

Any person consider to have committed a crime against American interests can be detained when on US soil.

I think that sucks - but it's the truth.

A thinking person can see huge holes in this case. It is appalling the level of professionalism is soooo low within US government. However, they have many times the power to hurt you and it is best to maintain a bit of respect for them if I were David or Kaplan or et al.

Most people overestimate the ability, brains, and skills of members of the US Government LOL. You would not believe how many idiots I have encountered. That being said, there are quite a few intelligent people in the US Government as well.

Originally Posted by pacers31

Sure looks like a government publicity stunt to help their bill along in the senate.

I don't think so. This operation was actually quite large and many arrests were made in various parts of the country. The cost of something like this would be very high - certainly not worth doing as a publicity stunt.

Originally Posted by U.S Attorney Catherine L. Hanaway of the Eastern District of Missouri

"Misuse of the Internet to violate the law can ultimately only serve to harm legitimate businesses. This indictment is but one step in a series of actions designed to punish and seize the profits of individuals who disregard federal and state laws."

Rubbish. She is a federal attorney with NO jurisdiction over state issues. She is certainly not authorized to make this claim on behalf of any state.

Before we all go crying "end of the online gambling world in the US" let's remember that BetOnSports is a sportsbook - and sports wagering is considered to be illegal by virtue of the Wire Act.

Poker and casino gambling are NOT thought to be covered by this same law.

Should we be worried about this case? Yes, if you're into sports betting. Somewhat, if you're involved in the industry at all as an operator. No, if your gambling is confined to poker and casino and lottery and bingo et al.

[Simmo!]

This sat almost side-by-side in the Telegraph newspaper today with the announcement that from September 2007, UK licenced online casinos will be allowed to advertise on television.

Strange - the contrasting cultures of freedom and oppression side by side

[Westland Bowl]

Originally Posted by Simmo!

This sat almost side-by-side in the Telegraph newspaper today with the announcement that from September 2007, UK licenced online casinos will be allowed to advertise on television.

Strange - the contrasting cultures of freedom and oppression side by side

Didn't it used to be that people left UK because of supposed oppressive taxation rates prior to 2000??? Thirty years ago, I've read some British rock stars moved to US because of this. Now it seems that this has reversed (though I'm sure you want Madonna to move back to US! ).

[winbig]

Originally Posted by Westland Bowl

Now it seems that this has reversed (though I'm sure you want Madonna to move back to US! ).

No, they can keep her.

[Simmo!]

Originally Posted by Mousey

BetonSports took wagers...over a toll-free telephone line

Key point above. 1961 Wire Act. Thats what this is largely about in my view...encouraging US citizens to break the law via telephone betting on sports.

[Webzcas]

The problem you and other "officials" of P&CA might soon face though, is the application of RICO statutes to the on-line gambling association as a means of going after individuals only peripherally associated with online gambling. I would hope that such doesn't happen, but the possibility does exist

If I were in your shoes Dave, I'd have legal counsel check into this. Yeah, I know its unlikely to be a problem here at P&CA, but its possible nonetheless.

Precedent is already set in USA case law as regarding illegal activities which are facilitated over the internet regardless of the site of the server. I'm not talking file-sharing per se, but regarding criminal prosecution of child pornography here in the states. I hope you look into this potential problem.

BTW, I doubt mere members could be under fire (unless they promote a gambling site in their signatures, etc.) as they have no power to affect changes to the website as a whole.

Again, I doubt this sort of thing will be a problem here, but I figure it bears some research.....

(For the record I figure this will end like Prohibition did....)....

This was posted on my politics forum by a right leaning US Poster. Apparently according to this american poster, I could be in stttuck for having gambling links and a roxy banner at the footer of the forum.

Don't know whether to or at his post

[Tigr50]

Got a letter from Sen. Pete Domenici today saying he was voting against Senate bill 2628.

He says, "I believe the Internet is a prime example of free market principles that have made America so successful and I oppose any attempt to place overly burdensome relulations on it." Period. Paragraph.

As for this Carruthers, et. al., how does Homeland Security (of which the FBI is now a part) get suckered into arresting folks for tax evasion? Just reading this thread, I feel like I am in being terrorized by my own government.
Tigr50