DOJ letter (x-posted)

[vandyhawk]

Thought this post from P5's about someone receiving a letter from the DOJ about a check received from an online gaming site would be of interest:

P5's post (http://www.pocketfives.com/4A9123EB-9597-47FA-9177-B66A0676C5FE.aspx)

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Thought this post from P5's about someone receiving a letter from the DOJ about a check received from an online gaming site would be of interest:

P5's post (http://www.pocketfives.com/4A9123EB-9597-47FA-9177-B66A0676C5FE.aspx)

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesnt sound like the guy who received the check is in trouble. It seems like they want info from him to help with a case against a bank or payment processor. Unnerving nonetheless.....

[BluffTHIS!]

I didn't click on the links in that thread, and only saw Golden Palace mentioned. The question is whether GP or the other sites are poker only or affiliated with a sportsbook. If the latter it's not too worrisome. In either case though, the DoJ is likely looking for a complaining witness for a case and the OP of that P5 thread, or any other player receiving such a letter, should do all that is possible not to help them, which to this non-lawyer would seem easy since they can't allege the player broke a law, except if he evaded taxes. If they can tag a player with tax evasion/money laundering, then they would have the leverage to coerce him to cooperate perhaps. Also whoever gets a letter like that should immediately change banks since that has to be who ratted him out.

[vandyhawk]

It seems that the check processor is just as likely a culprit in giving out the info. Has the DOJ gone after Golden Palace before? Things like this are why I only have money on poker-only sites now.

[BluffTHIS!]

A check processor, unless asking the DoJ for guidance, would be more likley to merely take the hyper-compliant route and just not process a check and forget about it. It is Joe Shmoe 35K a year bank manager in Podunk who is more likely to make an issue of it because of either a personal adversity to gambling or that hyper-compliant mentality.

[jafeather]

Is it the same person from this thread? (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=11198066&an=0&page=0#Pos t11198066)

[oldbookguy]

HMMM, odd, there are two different names of U S Attorney on each; I.E. the letter header and the question ending. Also, the question letter has no US header?

obg


[ QUOTE ]
Is it the same person from this thread? (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=11198066&an=0&page=0#Pos t11198066)

[/ QUOTE ]

[Johnny McEldoo]

very scary...i don't want a letter...does this make anyone really nervous or am i overreacting?

[GaryTheGoat]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it the same person from this thread? (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=11198066&an=0&page=0#Pos t11198066)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think they're different people. One New Jersey and one California.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
very scary...i don't want a letter...does this make anyone really nervous or am i overreacting?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're overreacting. It's clear from the tone and content of the letter that they're looking for evidence to prosecute/intimidate either a check processor or an online poker/sports site.

[fun160]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
very scary...i don't want a letter...does this make anyone really nervous or am i overreacting?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're overreacting. It's clear from the tone and content of the letter that they're looking for evidence to prosecute/intimidate either a check processor or an online poker/sports site.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, you may be implicating yourself if you answer the question "Was this check in payment towards gambling winnings, or was it a cashing out of your account?" If it was winnings and you haven't reported them to the IRS, they could bust you. If you admit you were gambling you could create a tax issue for yourself even if you lost money because of the horrible tax treatment of gamblers.

The letter doesn't compel the recipient to action. I would not answer it. If they really want it they can subpoena you, but they may leave you alone if you ignore them. And by all means pay taxes on that income now that the authorities know you've received a check.

[crashjr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
very scary...i don't want a letter...does this make anyone really nervous or am i overreacting?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're overreacting. It's clear from the tone and content of the letter that they're looking for evidence to prosecute/intimidate either a check processor or an online poker/sports site.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, you may be implicating yourself if you answer the question "Was this check in payment towards gambling winnings, or was it a cashing out of your account?" If it was winnings and you haven't reported them to the IRS, they could bust you. If you admit you were gambling you could create a tax issue for yourself even if you lost money because of the horrible tax treatment of gamblers.

The letter doesn't compel the recipient to action. I would not answer it. If they really want it they can subpoena you, but they may leave you alone if you ignore them. And by all means pay taxes on that income now that the authorities know you've received a check.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seriously doubt that this will happen, but if I got a subpoena I would respond by asserting my 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination. The Utah USAO has made it clear that they believe "virtually all" forms of internet gambling are illegal.

I would also ignore the original request for information.

[MiltonFriedman]

This is interesting if genuine, and it looks genuine:

The UIGE Act does not apply to cashouts.
The BetUS prosecution was for uncoded credit card transactions.
Web Merchant, LLC was one of the parties, I believe.
It seems the US Attorney in Utah is expanding the investigation, but not necessarily the law.

(I think where he is going is to allege that writing checks is somehow fraud ?)

[Legislurker]

Your chief worry is that the DOJ is now totally adrift. Senior officials left and right are quitting. Almost everyone left "in charge" is a political hack. Alberto Gonzales is a dead man walking. I think every US attorney knows they are going to be fired when Bush is gone. Hence, they are now doing whatever the [censored] they please even more than before. So if some prosecutor with christian political ambition wants to score points attacking immoral gambling, he/she damn will well. They could try almost anything.

[MiltonFriedman]

Fair enough point. However, a headless snake dies. If the replacement US Atty has no agenda to push a case, it can be ended.