neteller founder pleads guilty

[JPFisher55]

Bad news, especially for US citizens owed money by Neteller. What incentive does Neteller has to pay them? It cannot continue as an LSE company and most of its business is gone.
Truth is the founders made a deal because when Neteller went public the founders cashed out big. The public who invested in this company will be big losers. This action by the Neteller founders is a betrayal of the company's public shareholders and likely former US customers.
I sure hope that the iMEGA litigation succeeds. It is our best chance to stop the DOJ war on Internet Gambling.

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
The charges being dropped to one count of conspiracy is pretty favorable to Mr. Lawrence...


[/ QUOTE ]

Wasn't there only one count charged?

[bossplayer]

So this means Neteller will most likely state that due to new developments no release of funds may be seen for quite a while if ever is what I am getting from this.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, this has the potential to be devastating. If the Feds want 100mill, fat chance we get our balances back. I wish I knew why he pleaded out, its going to bankrupt him potentially, and go to jail, would think he would fight even with long odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

By cooperating, he may not have to do a single day in jail. And it's not clear from the news reports how much money he will have to return.

Incidentally, I am currently in the middle of a multi-defendant trial and one of the prosecutors, I believe, is also the guy handling the Neteller case, or at least he was when it was first publicized.

[Doctor Who]

Likelihood he will never do a day in jail on this--and 100 million for this dude--still leaves him a billionaire. Smart move for him.

[coxquinn]

NETeller Founder Lawrence Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy Charge

How does this impact the return of US customers money?

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
So this means Neteller will most likely state that due to new developments no release of funds may be seen for quite a while if ever is what I am getting from this.

[/ QUOTE ]

The $100M would have to come from the defendants (not Neteller) correct? Since they are no longer affilated with Neteller, are we unaffected?

If so, I would imagine a lawsuit would be brought against the gov't for our funds where the legality of poker is decided once and for all. Thoughts?

[adanthar]

LOL you guys are all terrible at this.

1)of course he pled guilty, that had about a 99.9% chance of happening (there's a reason for those six continuances)

2)

[ QUOTE ]
So this means Neteller will most likely state that due to new developments no release of funds may be seen for quite a while if ever is what I am getting from this.

[/ QUOTE ]

the 100 million is from his personal funds (with the caveat of 'jointly and severably liable', but that liability will only be shared with future guilty pleaders, ie, LeFebvre)

3)Neteller has nothing to do with these fines at all, nor do our funds have anything to do with them

4)this has been a sports betting case all along and has nothing to do with poker. this does not mean that the DOJ will not eventually go after, say, epassporte, whose founder is conveniently based in California, but it does mean that epassporte's lawyers evidently believe that poker is not a DOJ issue at this time.

[bossplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL you guys are all terrible at this.

1)of course he pled guilty, that had about a 99.9% chance of happening (there's a reason for those six continuances)

2)

[ QUOTE ]
So this means Neteller will most likely state that due to new developments no release of funds may be seen for quite a while if ever is what I am getting from this.

[/ QUOTE ]

the 100 million is from his personal funds (with the caveat of 'jointly and severably liable', but that liability will only be shared with future guilty pleaders, ie, LeFebvre)

3)Neteller has nothing to do with these fines at all, nor do our funds have anything to do with them

4)this has been a sports betting case all along and has nothing to do with poker. this does not mean that the DOJ will not eventually go after, say, epassporte, whose founder is conveniently based in California, but it does mean that epassporte's lawyers evidently believe that poker is not a DOJ issue at this time.

[/ QUOTE ]

God I hope you are right, as far as this development not interfering with the return of funds. I really am having a hard time believing I left this much money in there.

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
but it does mean that epassporte's lawyers evidently believe that poker is not a DOJ issue at this time.

[/ QUOTE ]

As does Moneygram, a $2.3B publicly traded U.S. Company