DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 182
  • Posts: 10375
May 3rd, 2021 at 6:27:57 AM permalink
Interesting read.

Sorry it didn’t go your way.

Quote:

At my cross examination, Defense said "Yes or no, did you yourself edit this footage, keeping in what you felt was relevant?"

I doubt it would have changed much, but the correct answer is “no”. I assume you said “yes”.

Yeah, you edited it, but you didn’t keep what you felt was relevant. You kept what the defense agreed was relevant.

That’s a BIG difference.

In life, it’s typical to give answers before fully thinking about the question, or the ramifications of the answer. In court, taking a moment to consider the question, and give the answer that’s both truthful and that they weren’t expecting, can be vital.

Then add an explanation: “During the editing process, both teams agreed as to what should be left in and what could be eliminated.” No mention of who did the editing, but a better answer and still truthful.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
zippyboy
zippyboy
Joined: Jan 19, 2011
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 1120
May 3rd, 2021 at 7:46:15 AM permalink
What I don't understand is why you are using multiple other players cards anyway? Are you trying to gain reward points for friends of yours? And just got caught? Why would the casino think you're playing with stolen cards? What benefit would that be to you? Must you play with a card at all? Just play with cash.
"Poker sure is an easy game to beat if you have the roll to keep rebuying."
Indy70
Indy70
Joined: Jul 30, 2015
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 26
May 3rd, 2021 at 7:53:17 AM permalink
darkoz,

I appreciate you trying to slay the dragon. I hope that when others read your account of how the trial went, and if they decide to move forward in court as you did. They do it differently.

1) IMO your lawyer failed you from start to finish.
How did she let the defense dictate everything from Jury selection, to witness testimony, evidence presented, cross examinations,
etc.

2) Timing of the trial. You may not have had a say in this, but if anyone expects a citizen jury to pay attention between Thanksgiving
and the New Year. Might as well try to push rope a waterfall.

3) As axel said Why was Mike there? the last thing you want to do is muddy the water, sounds like you were going to try to beat the
defense to their tactic? And then you couldn't at least use Mike as a rebuttal?

4) Editing of the surveillance footage, its incomprehensible that your side came to a consensus that this was a good idea. Of course
the defense agreed, it was their AP move of the trial.

Just my two cents.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 251
  • Posts: 7883
May 3rd, 2021 at 7:57:47 AM permalink
Quote: zippyboy

What I don't understand is why you are using multiple other players cards anyway? Are you trying to gain reward points for friends of yours? And just got caught? Why would the casino think you're playing with stolen cards? What benefit would that be to you? Must you play with a card at all? Just play with cash.



It's an advantage play that few people understand how to use even though there are plenty of people who do it.

A husband may use his wife's card because she has an offer and doesn't feel like going to pick it up herself.

Just extend that to other people.

In my case it's way more complicated than that. In fact the expert for the Defense explained what I was doing with multiple cards and was 100% wrong! But of course I couldn't jump up and scream he didn't know what he was talking about.

His conclusion was I did a low-level advantage play. Uggghh, if only he knew what I was really doing it would have blown his mind.

And he was their expert, lol.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1372
  • Posts: 22824
May 3rd, 2021 at 9:03:26 AM permalink
Quote: Indy70

3) As axel said Why was Mike there? the last thing you want to do is muddy the water, sounds like you were going to try to beat the
defense to their tactic? And then you couldn't at least use Mike as a rebuttal?



I was there to held explain to the jury gaming terminology in layman's terms. What player cards were for, how points worked, simple stuff like that. To be honest, I had a difference in opinion with darkoz's attorney on strategy. I thought she should press aggressively that it was a false detainment case and keep the focus off darkoz. Instead, she had a more defensive strategy that showed darkoz was abiding not just by the law but didn't break any casino rules. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't a rule at the time forbidding using other player cards, although one was added because of this.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 251
  • Posts: 7883
May 3rd, 2021 at 10:30:11 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I was there to held explain to the jury gaming terminology in layman's terms. What player cards were for, how points worked, simple stuff like that. To be honest, I had a difference in opinion with darkoz's attorney on strategy. I thought she should press aggressively that it was a false detainment case and keep the focus off darkoz. Instead, she had a more defensive strategy that showed darkoz was abiding not just by the law but didn't break any casino rules. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't a rule at the time forbidding using other player cards, although one was added because of this.



That is correct.

In fact quite a few people would walk up to the gift desk and hand multiple gift vouchers in other people's names. I saw one guy walk of with six different $50 gas cards. I knew eventually the Casino would get tired of that.

Sure enough Resorts World didn't care if you used another person's card... Until suddenly they did.

My attorney wanted to stress that but I agree with the Wizard it should have been handled differently.

I don't like to bad-mouth my attorney. She worked for five years for no pay. Whatever decisions she made she believed were best.

And all court cases have a winner and a loser. Too easy to lay blame on your attorneys. Not every case lost (and that's every case in the world which has a losing side) was because of the attorneys.

I was told it was a difficult case jurisdictionally from the get go.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1372
  • Posts: 22824
May 3rd, 2021 at 11:18:27 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

I don't like to bad-mouth my attorney. She worked for five years for no pay. Whatever decisions she made she believed were best.



She was super nice and worked very hard on your case. I got along with her very well. I'd be proud to be friends with her if I lived in NYC, assuming I didn't drive her crazy (in a bad way), as I do with most women.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 2285
May 3rd, 2021 at 11:44:34 AM permalink
I understand that the civil lawsuit was for false imprisonment?

I liken this to a shoplifting case where the charges are dropped. What I would need to see, is the statute under which DarkOz was detained in the first place. In many jurisdictions, merchants are allowed to detain someone for allegedly shoplifting if they have reasonable grounds (probable cause) to believe that shoplifting occurred. In other words, if the detention is viewed as reasonable under the circumstances, even if it turns out that no theft occurred, the merchant defeats a civil action for false imprisonment. But this is written into the statute that authorizes the shoplifting detention in the first place, which is why I would need to see the statute(s) under which DarkOz was detained.
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 251
  • Posts: 7883
May 3rd, 2021 at 12:30:42 PM permalink
Quote: MDawg

I understand that the civil lawsuit was for false imprisonment?

I liken this to a shoplifting case where the charges are dropped. What I would need to see, is the statute under which DarkOz was detained in the first place. In many jurisdictions, merchants are allowed to detain someone for allegedly shoplifting if they have reasonable grounds (probable cause) to believe that shoplifting occurred. In other words, if the detention is viewed as reasonable under the circumstances, even if it turns out that no theft occurred, the merchant defeats a civil action for false imprisonment. But this is written into the statute that authorizes the shoplifting detention in the first place, which is why I would need to see the statute(s) under which DarkOz was detained.



That's correct, this would fall under similar situations however you stressed where charges were dropped in a shoplifting case.

In my case no police were even called in, no charges were ever even filed.

Citizens arrest and shoplifting laws give citizens the opportunity to hold someone so that police authority can arrive in a timely fashion to take over. NOT carte blanche to hold and search someone's belongings.

Let me FURTHER STRESS, the Casino FOUND the cards of other players in my possession. If this had been a shoplifting case it would have been equivalent to finding stolen clothes with tags on them in my bag. The Casino did NOT call the police EVEN AFTER finding the cards. And no charges were ever filed.

Obviously the Casino knew all along using the cards was not illegal unless you believe Casinos locate criminals with the goods red-handed and then just release them with no consequences

The Casino simply felt they had the right to detain me for over and hour, and search through all my belongings. A citizens arrest with no arrest.

Citizens don't get to imprison and search through your belongings (hell, even the authorities need a search warrant).

Resorts World doesn't do that anymore after I sued them. Proof they know they were in the wrong.

EDIT: For the record, at the trial the Defense stipulated to the jury that my use of other players cards violated no laws.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 2285
May 3rd, 2021 at 2:34:51 PM permalink
This is sounding even more then like a lawsuit filed for wrongful detention along the lines of someone accused of shoplifting.

First off, the fact that charges were filed or not filed is not dispositive of whether there were reasonable grounds for the detention. Of course, no charges filed does cut in your favor, but doesn't settle the issue of reasonableness entirely.

And then - this further issue of being searched by the private actors (the casinos). That makes this even more akin to a wrongfully accused shoplifter lawsuit.
YES, there is a statute on the books in some states that disallows private security from searching the suspect's (shoplifter's) clothing (but does allow the security guard for example to search the accused's purse, bags, backpack, etc.) (But there are exceptions in some states, for example librarians and the actual store owners are in some states some circumstances allowed to search the clothing of the suspect.) But again, this all comes down to exactly WHAT statute(s) is/are involved and what powers given (and not given) by statute(s) to the private actor(s) who detain/s the suspect.

So again, to analyze this meaningfully I'd need the
(1) exact statute(s) under which you were detained,
(2) exact statutes under which you filed your suit (or, if no statute, an indication of whatever you filed the action under, for example under say common law false imprisonment).
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people.

  • Jump to: