Louisiana issues fresh warning to gambling industry

**Westland Bowl** · 29th September 2006, 01:11 PM

It is the nature of the Internet to be accessible worldwide, including places where gambling is illegal, without having a physical presence there. Just because it is possible, sting or not, to place bets with an online sportsbooks/casino does not make that sportsbook/casino guilty because.....WHO INTIATED THE BET? The Louisiana citizen did the actual illegal act. Louisiana can only prosecute gambling entities that have PHYSICAL servers, offices, etc. WITHIN THEIR BORDERS!!!

WELCOME TO THE INTERNET AGE !!!

Hmmmmm....I think I'll start a chain of online-gambling ice cream parlors in other states bordering around Lousiana for Lousiana citizens to come and have some fun!! (Probably Riverbelle online casino would be the most popular one with their Deep South theme!)

**GrandMaster** · 29th September 2006, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Westland Bowl

IWHO INTIATED THE BET? The Louisiana citizen did the actual illegal act. Louisiana can only prosecute gambling entities that have PHYSICAL servers, offices, etc. WITHIN THEIR BORDERS!!!

Sportingbet clearly initiated the bet by offering odds on various sporting events or making the casino or poker room available. It wasn't the case of Louisiana residents asking Peter Dicks to set up a company to take their bets. Louisiana law makes it illegal to manage a company that offers online gambling to Louisiana residents, to operate the servers, or even to write gambling software. Enforcement may be difficult, but that does not make the law invalid. Compare the situation to someone operating a mail order company selling cannabis (marijuana) to Americans from Amsterdam. The US would not be able to touch him as long as he stays in Amsterdam, but he might expect interest from law enforcement if he sets foot on US soil.

**jetset** · 29th September 2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:Those companies that stayed private are now enjoying a certain peace of mind knowing they remain unnamed and under the radar. Unquote

There is a certain irony in this isn't there? Big companies that are publicly quoted, upfront and have asked for regulation and taxation, with corporate and management details upfront on their sites are the ones that the law enforcers single out, ignoring the "flying under the radar" outfits!

Such is life.

**Westland Bowl** · 29th September 2006, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by GrandMaster

Sportingbet clearly initiated the bet by offering odds on various sporting events or making the casino or poker room available.

Yes, that can be true....however, they offered it to everyone in the world that came to their website. Just because a Louisiana citizen may *take* the bet doesn't mean that they can't offer it to the rest of the world.

It wasn't the case of Louisiana residents asking Peter Dicks to set up a company to take their bets. Louisiana law makes it illegal to manage a company that offers online gambling to Louisiana residents, to operate the servers, or even to write gambling software.

SportingBet can't help that Louisiana citizens come to their website. What they CAN help is to deny completing the bets to Lousiana citizens once Sportingbet (and hence any sportsbook/casino) verifies the citizen's residency. Then again, there are thousands of jurisdictions in hundreds of countries around the world. How can they be expected to keep up with all of them especially those written in other languages?

Enforcement may be difficult, but that does not make the law invalid. Compare the situation to someone operating a mail order company selling cannabis (marijuana) to Americans from Amsterdam. The US would not be able to touch him as long as he stays in Amsterdam, but he might expect interest from law enforcement if he sets foot on US soil.

Yeah, if the person knew he was shipping to USA where he can get punished for it if he travels to US. I agree. But despite the laws against cannabis, it is widely available to anyone who wants it. If a Louisiana resident wants to gamble online, he will find a way. It can't be helped regardless.

**cipher** · 29th September 2006, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by Casinomeister

Louisiana police have issued a stark warning to the online gambling community saying that it was investigating a number of companies, and their executives and directors were at risk of arrest. Captain Joe Lentini, head of the Police Gaming Enforcement division's casino section, declined to name which companies but acknowledged that the state was continuing with its gambling clampdown.

Lentini told the UK's Financial Times newspaper that his department had 'agents all over the state working daily on the investigations'. It is thought that sealed warrants for over 50 people working or connected in the gambling industry and at least a dozen companies have been issued.

More here:
ATE Online - Remote Gaming

With none of the aforementioned warrants having any more clout than a diaper full of dodo.

Have a good one.

**cipher** · 29th September 2006, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by GrandMaster

Sportingbet clearly initiated the bet by offering odds on various sporting events or making the casino or poker room available. It wasn't the case of Louisiana residents asking Peter Dicks to set up a company to take their bets. Louisiana law makes it illegal to manage a company that offers online gambling to Louisiana residents, to operate the servers, or even to write gambling software. Enforcement may be difficult, but that does not make the law invalid. Compare the situation to someone operating a mail order company selling cannabis (marijuana) to Americans from Amsterdam. The US would not be able to touch him as long as he stays in Amsterdam, but he might expect interest from law enforcement if he sets foot on US soil.

I'll tell you for sure the fur is going to fly when and if that Judge in New Yorfk declares that fugitive warrant issued out of Louisiana NULL & VOID. With SPORTING BET seeking to recover the billion dollars that SPORTINGBET's stock suffered. Rest assured no one and I do mean NO ONE is going to be there to bail the state of Louisiana out of that mess.

Have a good one.

**cipher** · 29th September 2006, 04:36 PM

It's not looking like Govenor Pataki is buying Louisiana's B S either.

Have a good one.

**jetset** · 29th September 2006, 05:16 PM

Peter Dicks has been released by the New York court. According to his lawyer, New York governor George Pataki refused to sign his extradition warrant to Louisiana and he was released Friday.

Dicks's legal team is quoted as saying: “We gave the court sufficient reason to free him,” adding that Dicks will return to London tomorrow and he “will have a party in New York tonight”.

As far as is understood the Louisiana state authorities have kept their warrants active despite the refusal of New York to honour same.

Dicks’ legal team will presumably continue the fight in that state to lift the state warrant on grounds of no offence committed by the accused.

Dicks is quoted as saying his experience in prison had been “interesting and colourful".

Edited to add that I think Cipher is right - perhaps the time has come for big companies to take legal action themselves against individual law enforcers who treat the sanctity of personal liberty in such a casual fashion.

**spearmaster** · 29th September 2006, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by GrandMaster

Sportingbet clearly initiated the bet by offering odds on various sporting events or making the casino or poker room available. It wasn't the case of Louisiana residents asking Peter Dicks to set up a company to take their bets. Louisiana law makes it illegal to manage a company that offers online gambling to Louisiana residents, to operate the servers, or even to write gambling software. Enforcement may be difficult, but that does not make the law invalid. Compare the situation to someone operating a mail order company selling cannabis (marijuana) to Americans from Amsterdam. The US would not be able to touch him as long as he stays in Amsterdam, but he might expect interest from law enforcement if he sets foot on US soil.

I think you missed a notable difference in making your comparison.

Peter Dicks and Sportingbet did not initiate a bet - they offered one. They are legally allowed to offer this bet and cannot be expected to automatically shut their doors to Americans who aren't supposed to walk in, given the UNCLEAR status of internet gambling in the US. The type of bet was not described - it could have been a sports bet, casino wager or even poker game.

And - Peter Dicks did not actively take part in accepting this bet, nor would he probably have even know of the bet taking place. He is passively involved only by association.

The mail order company, on the other hand, should have known it was selling a substance illegal in most states in the US under most circumstances and would have had to actively ship the marijuana, thus actively breaking the law.

Had Sportingbet, or Mr. Dicks, actively sought to take bets from Louisiana citizens, perhaps through marketing, then the situation might be a bit different - but all the Louisiana officials could pin on Mr Dicks was a charge of "gambling by computer" which he did not actively take part in.

It's no wonder George Pataki refused to sign the warrant, even though he is governor of a state actively fighting the growth of online gambling. The charge was flimsy at best.