Embezzler Blows All in Casino

How many of these stories have we seen. Some
woman embezzles money from her workplace
and blows it on the slots, thinking she'll win big
and replace the money. The locals around here
think the casino should give the money back.
Why would they do that, they didn't steal it.


Embezzler

Quote: EvenBob

How many of these stories have we seen. Some
woman embezzles money from her workplace
and blows it on the slots, thinking she'll win big
and replace the money. The locals around here
think the casino should give the money back.
Why would they do that, they didn't steal it.

Correct. If they had to give back stolen money imagine, let your employee steal, play, and they the employee crys for it back. Risk free betting.

She was going to the casino 5 times a week since
Feb, losing an averge of $300 a visit. These people
usually don't set out to steal 50K, they get behind
and have to steal more and more to try and win back
the losses. A total non understanding of how slots
work and what your chances of winning are, leads
people to act like complete morons.

Didn't the Atlantic City casinos give back some of the money embezzled from the story detailed in the movie Owning Mahowney? However, in that case, I think they were partially complicit in the embezzlement.

Quote: Wizard

... in the movie Owning Mahoney? However, in that case, I think they were partially complicit in the embezzlement.

Mahowny, as in "How many?"

There's now a "Mahowny day"?

A similar sort of story: Nun loses $million, Monday, Nov 21, 2011 | By CasinoGuide .

Anyone who has spent time in a casino has likely donated some money to a slot machine but few can match the tale of Sister Marie Thornton, the gambling nun who stole more than $1 million from the Catholic college she worked at to fuel her slots addiction at Atlantic City casinos.

The 65 year-old nun lost as much as $5,000 per visit to casinos with money stolen from Iona College over a ten-year period. Thornton submitted false invoices to cover her theft and also used college funds to pay off her own personal credit card debt, with over $1 million embezzled in total.

She managed to escape jail time, however after pleading guilty to one count of embezzling in federal court, with Thornton apologizing to friends, family, and her religious order:

"Somehow the words 'I'm sorry' fall short," she told U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood. "They don't convey the gut-wrenching sorrow I feel all day, every day."

She was fired in 2009 when the college discovered the embezzlement, yet authorities were not contacted at the time. A federal probe was launched after the school revealed the missing money in financial filings, with Thornton ultimately unearthed as the culprit.

Thornton had faced up to three years in jail but the judge claimed the rehabilitation and treatment she had undertook for gambling addiction was sufficient and that her religious order was in a far better position to oversee her "punishment".

Iona College recovered $500,000 of the lost funds from an insurance policy with Thornton ordered to pay the remaining balance, although chances are bleak she'll be able to do so barring a big win at a progressive jackpot.

Monday, Nov 21, 2011 | By CasinoGuide

This story has been discussed before, but also fits the theme: Gambling Addiction Drove Priest to Steal Money. I'm still hoping our own FrG fills in the vacancy.

Quote: EvenBob

How many of these stories have we seen. Some
woman embezzles money from her workplace
and blows it on the slots, thinking she'll win big
and replace the money. The locals around here
think the casino should give the money back.
Why would they do that, they didn't steal it.


Embezzler

This is my friends casino and it's funny how people expect the casino to give the money back. If the lady had spent the money in the mall the stores wouldn't pay it back. If she had bought lottery tickets I can't imagine the state would pay it back. So it's pretty stupid to think a casino should pay it back.

Quote: JimMorrison

If she had bought lottery tickets I can't imagine the state would pay it back. So it's pretty stupid to think a casino should pay it back.

They even mentioned it on a local newscast,
that the casino might make restitution. It took
10 years for this casino to get built because
of all the Bible Thumper opposition. This is
a story they're relishing, 'see, we told you this
would happen.' They harped on the addiction
thing relentlessly.

The big Daddy of them all was Brian Molony, a Canadian Bank Manager who stole millions, won it all back and then some, only to throw it back into the casinos because he was such an absolute gambling degenerate. He was played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman as "Dan Mahowny" in a brilliant film that'll give ANY serious gambler the heebee geebies. John Hurt was brilliant as the corrupt Casino manager who KNEW darn well where the money was coming from and didn't care - even relished it all. A MUST SEE for any forum member here who is a serious student on the dark side of gambling. Maury Chaykin plays his bookie who keeps him in line by cutting off his action until he gets up-to-date with him through some rough transactions. A must see.

See:Owning Mahownys

Quote: Wizard

I'm still hoping our own FrG fills in the vacancy.

Nope, Harrington DE has too strong of a hold on him! [g]

The book on the subject matter on Owning Mahowny is excellent. I recommended to the Wiz way back at 2003 (when I was working for OLG) that he see it. The true life of a gambling addict living down the road from me.

Quote: JimMorrison

So it's pretty stupid to think a casino should pay it back.

I'm too lazy to search through the recent threads ....

Wasn't there discussion here about how the bankruptcy court forced celebrity poker players to repay money they had won through gambling, since the person who lost the money had obtained it fraudulently? So if the embezzler/nun/priest/banker/whoever takes money from another and loses it gambling in a casino, could they not declare bankruptcy and have the court require the casino to give the money back to the "rightful" owner? What is the difference between these two stories? (Yes, I know that there was some question that the poker games were not legal in that Hollywood location, but there apparently was no issue of criminal charges being brought.)

Quote: Doc

Wasn't there discussion here about how the bankruptcy court forced celebrity poker players to repay money they had won through gambling, since the person who lost the money had obtained it fraudulently? So if the embezzler/nun/priest/banker/whoever takes money from another and loses it gambling in a casino, could they not declare bankruptcy and have the court require the casino to give the money back to the "rightful" owner? What is the difference between these two stories? (Yes, I know that there was some question that the poker games were not legal in that Hollywood location, but there apparently was no issue of criminal charges being brought.)

Yes! There is something in bankruptcy called "the law of fraudulent transfers." That means, if the debtor transferred money to a third party before the filing of bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee can get it back from the transferee. This is what happened in the Madoff case and the Tobey Maguire poker game you referenced.

There is a lot of law about it and it differs from state to state, but the trustee usually has to prove that the transferee took the money in bad faith or not for value. If the transferee has no notice of the fraud or insolvency of the debtor, they can claim that they took the money "in good faith." And the trustee can't get it back.

For a great (and controversial) case where the court found that the casino did not take the swindler's money in good faith, check out In Re Amstrong. This guy was a real degenerate!

Ya know, I often see people at the tables, who look like punks and/or degenerates and/or other low imcome types, reaching into their pocket, coming up with a fat bankroll, and peeling of many Benjamins to buy in or re-buy. Sometimes, it's $2K or more per buy-in, and they do it often.

I always wonder where they get that kind of cash, if not illegally.

This thread makes me wonder why the casino doesn't ask those kinds of questions.

I mean, if someone wanted to take $10K OUT of a casino, there is a variety of paperwork that makes it a PITA, but not at all difficult.

But it would be very easy to repetitively re-buy in cash, for a total that is a lot more than $10K, without the slightest hastle.

The casino doesn't ask those questions as it's not the casino's business to decide where the money came from, whether it is legally obtained or even morally. There's plenty of people who look "questionable" who have well paying jobs, and plenty who look fine who are to their arm pits in dodgy deals.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Ya know, I often see people at the tables, who look like punks and/or degenerates and/or other low imcome types, reaching into their pocket, coming up with a fat bankroll, and peeling of many Benjamins to buy in or re-buy. Sometimes, it's $2K or more per buy-in, and they do it often.

I always wonder where they get that kind of cash, if not illegally.

This thread makes me wonder why the casino doesn't ask those kinds of questions.

I mean, if someone wanted to take $10K OUT of a casino, there is a variety of paperwork that makes it a PITA, but not at all difficult.

But it would be very easy to repetitively re-buy in cash, for a total that is a lot more than $10K, without the slightest hastle.

The original "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". It really is none of the casino's business, and I am certain they don't want to know. What happens if some of their customers actually told the truth?

Oh, I get it. It just makes me wonder . . .

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Ya know, I often see people at the tables, who look like punks and/or degenerates and/or other low imcome types, reaching into their pocket, coming up with a fat bankroll, .

I've been seeing this since the mid 70's when I
first went to Vegas. I see it all the time in the
local casinos. Some kid, or a woman that looks
like she scrubs bathrooms for a living, have these
endless BR's of hundred dollar bills. I see some
of these people on a regular basis. They have
the cheapest, rattiest clothes on, yet they never
run out of gambling money. And they always
seem to lose a lot more than they win. They
must be meth dealers is what I think, or are stealing
from grandma's trust fund. They don't look smart
enough to pump gas, if that job was even still
around.

Quote: teddys

There is a lot of law about it and it differs from state to state, but the trustee usually has to prove that the transferee took the money in bad faith or not for value. If the transferee has no notice of the fraud or insolvency of the debtor, they can claim that they took the money "in good faith." And the trustee can't get it back.

I guess I don't understand, teddys. Does this mean that the celebrity poker players just need need to establish that they were gambling in good faith and didn't know that it was embezzled/defrauded money that they were winning from the other player, and then they could keep it? If so, why are they paying back any of it? Did they know their opponent had obtained the money fraudulently? I'm certainly no lawyer, but it's not clear to me why the individual poker players would need to repay the winnings but a casino would not. Note: I'm not trying to make a case that the money in either case should or should not be recoverable, just that the two cases seem to be the same.

Quote: Doc

I'm certainly no lawyer, but it's not clear to me why the individual poker players would need to repay the winnings but a casino would not. Note: I'm not trying to make a case that the money in either case should or should not be recoverable, just that the two cases seem to be the same.

Neither am I :) I would say that the two cases are certainly not the same, even if they seem to be on the surface. Maguire I believe settled for his lawsuit; some of the other players are contesting the trustee's claims. It is a very messy area of law and there a ton of fact questions for establishing the good faith defense. (I wrote a paper on it this year and only scratched about 1/16 of the surface).

Unfortunately these types legal questions can't be simplified into a "this is this way, the other thing is this way" explanation. It takes a ton of research on the case law and the answer is still often fuzzy. That's what they pay the attorneys the big bucks for -- to say, "it depends!" :)

deleted

The accused embezzler showed up at work today
and everybody freaked out. They thought she was
there to wipe the hard drives of the computers.
Because she's an elected official, even though
she's been suspended, she can collect full salary
and benefits until she's convicted. Which should
take at least a year.

Quote: Wizard

I'm still hoping our own FrG fills in the vacancy.

Not so much as i'd like to hear you try to rationalize away the negative news stories about bodog's federal crimes, etc, or your conflict-of-interest with respect to professionally endorsing it, and (in my opinion) the industry as a whole, across the boards.

Besides, how much, really, do bodog and the others(?) pay you to front for them? Can't be enough.