TI fined $10,000 for backrooming incident

I was just roaming about the Nevada Gaming Control Board web site, in particular the list of complaints. I came across this one, involving a $500 bet in baccarat. Here is the executive summary:

1. A player placed a $500 bet in baccarat.
2. Prior to the dealer exposing the cards, the player changed his mind about making the bet and pulled it back.
3. The dealer informed the player that after the cards were dealt a bet could not be removed. A supervisor then came over and affirmed that policy.
4. Player then stomped off in a huff with his chips, including the $500 wager.
5. Security intercepted the player before he reached the exit and escorted him to the holding room.
6. Security performed a search of the player pockets and removed 5 $100 chips.
7. Security then led the player to the exit and trespassed him from the premises.

Casinos do have the right to detain players for cheating. When the casino invokes this right gaming regulations state that the casino must notify Gaming (NRS 465.070.3). Furthermore regulations state that casino security must turn the accused over to law enforcement (NRS 171.178). The TI complied with neither requirement.

The disposition states that TI and Gaming agreed to a $10,000 fine.

My comments:

I applaud Gaming for punishing the TI for this incident. The $10,000 fine seems small compared to the $100,000 fine Harrah's got for retracting three sports bets, as told in this deposition. I would have preferred to see a larger fine, but I'm still glad that Gaming is coming down the casinos for not following proper protocol when backrooming players. It was not too long ago the situation was much worse.

I'm not defending what the player did. Once a bet is made it can't be withdrawn unless by mutual consent. Had the player asked to remove the wager I think the TI would have allowed it. Once or twice I overbet in pai gow and asked to reduce my bet before examining my tiles. In all cases the request was granted. Once the player removed the wager without asking it escalated the situation. I think a good floorman would have let it slide with a lecture to the player on rules and etiquette, in the interests of not turning a small problem into a big one. However, in the heat of an argument I understand that things can escalate. I don't dispute that the TI had the right to backroom the player. Maybe it is easy to say this in retrospect, but I would have just let him go. Once they chose to backroom him proper protocol must be followed, to prevent the kind of abuses that have happened in the past with legitimate advantage players. That is my 2¢.

Did the player get his $500 back?

Quote: benbakdoff

Did the player get his $500 back?

Good question. I don't know. Maybe there is a civil case between the player and TI, where this would be more of an issue. The Gaming case was more about the security violations than the bet.

I recall this from July of 2010. It was mainly a question of ill trained personnel and I do think the fine should have been far more but sometimes its better to let a casino spend the money on training rather than fines. Communication in the pit may have been bad and security may have heard something about "taken 500 dollars" rather than "taken back his 500 dollar bet". The real problem was taking the chips from his person rather than offering him an opportunity to come to a voluntary decision as to how to deal with the situation. Taking the cuffs off him and talking to him, might have been a better option. Instead they stole the chips from his person, a felony. As I recall he was not trying to flee and showed no guilty knowledge, he was pissed after the argument and was walking away, not running. I never did see any video on this.

On-Edit: I've seen floor persons okay a "change of mind" at a Baccarat table AFTER the first card is out of the shoe but BEFORE its been exposed to view. I figure if the house doesn't mind, fine. Floor person did ask the other players if they objected though.

Thanks Mike. Yu've just inspired a new Nareed's Las Vegas Law which I've added to the official list on my blog post

Nareed's 28th Law:

29) For your sake, consider a bet made as soon as you put chips on the table.

Quote: FleaStiff

I recall this from July of 2010. It was mainly a question of ill trained personnel and I do think the fine should have been far more but sometimes its better to let a casino spend the money on training rather than fines...

I totally agree. Also, shame on myself for not knowing about this earlier. I see it is addressed at one of my favorite sites, The Bear Growls.

I agree with The Bear Growls. We need to Police the Police also.
The patron wasn't detained for Metro, not at all. He was detained to be shaken down.

Who benefits from fines paid? Does the GCB get to keep all or some to cover their expenses?

Quote: Ayecarumba

Who benefits from fines paid? Does the GCB get to keep all or some to cover their expenses?

I'm guessing it's general revenue to the State of Nevada. In a round-about way I guess it covers their expenses, insomuch as they are paid by the state and that money went to the state.

Quote: FleaStiff

I've seen floor persons okay a "change of mind" at a Baccarat table AFTER the first card is out of the shoe but BEFORE its been exposed to view. I figure if the house doesn't mind, fine. Floor person did ask the other players if they objected though.

My thoughts exactly -- I've seen this sort of thing happen in Baccarat before (although I've never played at TI), and the worst that occurred were some polite cautions not to do it again. It's kind of funny to think about how many things we see from time to time that could have turned into Gaming Commission disputes had they been handled differently, like here, where things descended into the guy essentially getting shaken down and robbed.

At the very least he should be entitled to a $500 bet, since it was never resolved. It's not like he lost the hand and grabbed his chips.

I'm curious about one thing:

Had the bet stood, would he have lost?

Clearly, that's the implication, although it certainly does not justify the TI's actions.

So the Wizard's quote line:
"It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet..."

Could be changed to:
"It's not whether you win or lose; if you put money in the circle, then that bet is going to the House and if you try to fight it at all, you'll be taken to a backroom, get robbed and humiliated and asked never to come back again."

I'd assume that the player filed the complaint. Assuming with the shakedown, it wouldn't have been the casino, no? Which might even add, is there any favoritism to the player(gambler) if there's some iffy stuff going on? And how much weight might their complaint have?

It possible that this event included some or all of the following:

Assault, battery, aggrivated assault or assault with a deadly weapon(if security was armed), robbery, armed robbery, false imprisonment, kidnapping, obstruction of justice, and most probably other felonies.

My question is: In the State of Nevada does the Nevada Gaming Control Board have the power to settle alleged criminal acts ,alleged felonies, with a fine without regard to law enforcement, the District Attorney, County Attorney, or States Attorney?

I've seen at least 2 Asian players take their bets back after
a card was seen. In both cases, the pit let them get away
with it. I guarantee if it had been me, they would have
insisted I put it back. Asians get away with anything they
want in bac in the casinos around here.

am i the only one who things the guy was trying to do something sneaky. deserved to be backroomed and the hand should have been played out and if he lost been liable for the $500 those exact chips in his pocket. not later in a judge judy trial.

Quote: matilda

It possible that this event included some or all of the following:

Assault, battery, aggrivated assault or assault with a deadly weapon(if security was armed), robbery, armed robbery, false imprisonment, kidnapping, obstruction of justice, and most probably other felonies.

I don't think the player's case is that strong. The TI could make a decent argument that the player stole $500 from the table, which was just cause to detain him. However, such detainment is supposed to be for purposes of making a citizen's arrest, which they never followed through on. Plus, I doubt they had a search warrant to go through his pockets. However, I think Gaming would have jurisdiction to prosecute for said violations, and the 10K fine was in exchange for a release of claims. Again, I think the TI got off light.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I'm curious about one thing:

Had the bet stood, would he have lost?

Clearly, that's the implication, although it certainly does not justify the TI's actions.

Wouldn't it be strange if after they detained the player they learned the bet should have won, and they forced the player to accept $500 in winnings.

Quote: Wizard

Wouldn't it be strange if after they detained the player they learned the bet should have won, and they forced the player to accept $500 in winnings.

LOL. I wonder if they would have handcuffed him and stuffed it into his pockets against his will? The player may or may not have been in the wrong. The player should have stayed at the table and presented his case there or since its 500 or above, insisted right there and then that they call for a Gaming Agent. Then they could have spoken, the agent would have viewed the film, etc. and made his on the spot determination.

A lot of things could have gone differently, the fine was for security having physically removed those five black chips from his pocket when he was handcuffed in the backroom. Retraining is a good idea for the lot of them though.

They stole from a customer. That is not good.

Quote: Wizard

I'm not defending what the player did. Once a bet is made it can't be withdrawn unless by mutual consent. Had the player asked to remove the wager I think the TI would have allowed it. Once or twice I overbet in pai gow and asked to reduce my bet before examining my tiles. In all cases the request was granted. Once the player removed the wager without asking it escalated the situation. I think a good floorman would have let it slide with a lecture to the player on rules and etiquette, in the interests of not turning a small problem into a big one. However, in the heat of an argument I understand that things can escalate. I don't dispute that the TI had the right to backroom the player. Maybe it is easy to say this in retrospect, but I would have just let him go. Once they chose to backroom him proper protocol must be followed, to prevent the kind of abuses that have happened in the past with legitimate advantage players. That is my 2¢.

If I was a shift manager and involved my first question would have been his bet level. Was the guy betting $100 and put $500 in by mistake? If so and no card was seen then I would let him lower it to his regular bet. If he was jumping up and down his bets then I would have made it stand. And of course if onecard was seen by any player, "if it lays it plays."

To the backrooming, it would depend on how out of hand the guy was getting. For a $500 play you would surely offer some privacy to the guy while the tape was being checked if indeed it was. But if the guy was getting loud to the point other players were noticing at that point you "offer" to take him to a private place to talk, no cuffs or force. If he still stays loud or even gets louder, then you need to backroom him and tresspass him.

Some players, even at a $500 level, just do not understand or accept that they are not playing "Monopoly" or some other game at home. They don't accept that putting that little disc in the little circle is a binding contract. They don't accept the reality of what is going on.

OTOH, a god dealer will call "cheques in play" or/and ask/mention "bumping it up?" when a player moves up a bet. If he did move up the bet. If he was flat-betting, I'd rule for TI.

Quote: Wizard

I don't think the player's case is that strong. The TI could make a decent argument that the player stole $500 from the table, which was just cause to detain him. However, such detainment is supposed to be for purposes of making a citizen's arrest, which they never followed through on. Plus, I doubt they had a search warrant to go through his pockets. However, I think Gaming would have jurisdiction to prosecute for said violations, and the 10K fine was in exchange for a release of claims. Again, I think the TI got off light.

It appears, on the surface at least, that this event is similar to OJ taking back "his" property in a hotel in Las Vegas. Since TI was fined there has to be some degree of wrongdoing. How egregious does it have to be to take it out of the gaming commissions hands and a real prosecuter take over?

Quote: matilda

How egregious does it have to be to take it out of the gaming commissions hands and a real prosecuter take over?

Good question. I have never understood exactly where the authority of Gaming ends and the state courts take over. In this matter I think Gaming has authority over punishing the casino for Gaming violations. The state courts would be the ones to hear a civil claim should the player initiate one.

Quote: Wizard

I don't think the player's case is that strong. The TI could make a decent argument that the player stole $500 from the table, which was just cause to detain him. However, such detainment is supposed to be for purposes of making a citizen's arrest, which they never followed through on. Plus, I doubt they had a search warrant to go through his pockets. However, I think Gaming would have jurisdiction to prosecute for said violations, and the 10K fine was in exchange for a release of claims. Again, I think the TI got off light.

The only thing that tilts me in the player's favor is that no action had occurred. I'm not saying it's a great defense, but saying that he "Stole" it when he himself put it in the betting circle and removed it before any cards were revealed or information was gathered could be a stretch to the NGC. If any cards were revealed, then yes, 100% it is theft. A civil suit arguing matilda's claims (with the fine as proof of wrongdoing by TI) would probably be settled out of court for more than $500!

The gaming commission still has to make a factual determination of what happened and its clear that the commission found the taking of the chips from the detainee's pockets while he was handcuffed was wrongful. Its up to the player to press charges and have any such criminal charges heard by a court of competent jurisdiction. The finding by the Commission would in no way be binding upon a later tiral court. The Commission is focused more on corrective action than punishment. None of this involves any civil claim for damages for duress, false imprisonment or larceny.

Some really good stiff fines would help since the situation is so bad with casino security guards but the primary concern is better training to avoid such incidents in the future.