Is the NETeller Money Gone?...By Hartley Henderson

[Uncle B]

Originally Posted by Don Eagleston

Uncle B, the Company operates within the US. It can't hide behind its domicile if engaged in US operations. US gov't not attacking operations that occur outside its jurisdiction. Neteller chose to operate within US for obvious reasons and is subject to US laws for better or worse. Otherwise, a Thai heroin smuggling operating could claim immunity.

by 'operates within', you mean the fact that they accepted customers from within the US, correct?


They are a payment precessor, not a gambling operation.. they are a middle man, in money transfers..is there any specific law that existed last year, that made anything they did illegal?


If so, can you post it for me?

Not being a smart-ass, i am just curious...i really don't know the specifics.


thanks in advance.

[value]

Good article. Keep them coming

[Don Eagleston]

Uncle B, the government's view is that Neteller aided and abetted the "illegal" offshore betting operations by "laundering" the money. Basically, if you get entangled in the government's prosecution web, you are probably screwed even if it turns out the government ultimately is wrong. The RICO statute empowered DOJ to defeat crime conspiracies like organized crime and can be applied here even though we disagree with this approach. The Patriot Act adds additional clout to the gov't view because it can be argued that some of the money sent offshore went to fund terrorist activities. Although we know that, at least for the most part, the latter is untrue, we can't prove a negative. Imagine, if Bodog or Pinny was a hugely profitable front for a terrorist group. It could happen and would gamblers' care?

As an aside, I think that legal onshore casinos get away with money laundering, but either no way to stop it or casino lobbies are sufficiently powerful to prevent gov't intervention.

[Uncle B]

Originally Posted by Don Eagleston

Uncle B, the government's view is that Neteller aided and abetted the "illegal" offshore betting operations by "laundering" the money. Basically, if you get entangled in the government's prosecution web, you are probably screwed even if it turns out the government ultimately is wrong. The RICO statute empowered DOJ to defeat crime conspiracies like organized crime and can be applied here even though we disagree with this approach. The Patriot Act adds additional clout to the gov't view because it can be argued that some of the money sent offshore went to fund terrorist activities. Although we know that, at least for the most part, the latter is untrue, we can't prove a negative. Imagine, if Bodog or Pinny was a hugely profitable front for a terrorist group. It could happen and would gamblers' care?

As an aside, I think that legal onshore casinos get away with money laundering, but either no way to stop it or casino lobbies are sufficiently powerful to prevent gov't intervention.

Thanks for the insight..

Actually, as soon as i re-opened this just now, i remembered one important detail.


I was thinking the guys arrested were British citizens..That is not the case with Neteller..Both actually held American citizenship, right?


Not sure what i was thinking really..So much shit going on these days, i just can't keep track anymore.

[The Major]

Uncle, both founders are Canadians.

[Uncle B]

Originally Posted by The Major

Uncle, both founders are Canadians.

Oh fuck it man, i give up...


Go wake the damn Prince, and tell him to attack dammit..


It's early, i am sure most of the military left in the states is probably still asleep.

[The Major]

Actually they are applying for political refuge in Canada. So they don't have to go get shot for Bush and his family's oil business.

[Don Eagleston]

The US gov't doesn't care about the defendants' citizenship. They had two choices, in the fed's view: either don't do business in the US or stay the hell out of the US and its territories. That said, I am receiving checks for gambling winnings drawn on US banks. The two Canadians obviously were targeted for arrest and the gov't pounced the minute both were within the US's jurisdiction. Not saying I agree with all of it, but I assume Americans are not free to violate Canadian or any other foreign country's laws and then hide behind US citizenship. I also assume there is a reason BoDog does not take on Canadian bettors.

[JC]

FWIW, I asked one of my lawyers to check the Neteller docket to see what he could find regarding seizure of funds. This was his response:

I reviewed the dockets in the Lawrence and Lefebvre cases, and there is
nothing in either case related to the seizure of any funds.

Plus, I can't find any case filed against Netteller. If there is a case
against Netteller its either (a) under seal or (b) located outside the
Southern District of New York [as my search was limited to that
district].
==========================================

As to citizenship, as I have espised on numerous occasions, nationality is not a defense.

But, where you are located should be, even though the present US courts don't seem to care. I am trying to find a case somewhere in my piles of legal garbage and briefs a case IIRC from the turn of the century that involved the telegraph and gambling. By memory the court said if someone were to telegraph a bet to the gambling houses of London, it would be preposterous to think the bet took place anywhere other than London. Details to follow.

[buddyboy]

as far a I knew there is no case against Neteller. Lawrence and Lefebvre are the ones charged not because they founded Neteller, but because they owned the US companies that processed ACH's for Neteller.

[Hartley]

I never suggested Neteller was charged with anything by the doj. What I said is that the funds in Neteller's ACH system were being held as "evidence" and one can only assume it's evidence related to Lawrence and Lefevre. But the fact that the FBI (Neil Donovan's public comment) said that some people may get some of the money back is indication that they plan on keeping the money as proceeds of crime.

As for what would happen if Lefevre and Lawrence are acquitted, my hunch is it won't matter. The DOJ has already stated they disagree with the court's ruling regarding the wire act and are doing what they feel is in their best interest.

[JC]

Here's some good stuff about where a bet take place:

in Lescallett v. Commonwealth, 17 S.E. 546 (Va. 1893), . A bet is a wager between two or more persons. It involves a concurrence of wills; that is, there must be an offer to bet made on one side, and accepted on the other. When the offer is accepted, and not before, the betting becomes complete. A bet, like an ordinary contract, may be made by telegraph, and when an offer to bet is accepted by telegraph, the acceptance, as in the case of a contract, takes effect when the message of acceptance is delivered to the telegraph company for transmission, and not when it is received by the other party *548 If, therefore, an offer to bet is telegraphed by a person in this city to another in New York, and the latter accepts by telegraph, the betting is done, not in Richmond, but in New York, because the offer, being accepted there, takes effect there.

AND

McQUESTEN v. STEINMETZ.N.H. 1904.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire.
McQUESTEN
v.
STEINMETZ.
July 1, 1904.

...that the defendant, acting as agent for persons at Nashua, upon receipt of their money telegraphed it to various persons in New York, who there wagered the money as directed. Under these circumstances the bets were made in New York, and the business conducted by the defendant at Nashua was lawful.

[(sportman)]

1904???

[JC]

The first one is 1893!

[SlipperyPete]

If there are no charges against Neteller, how can the DOJ seize their funds???
And how come Neteller is not fighting it?????????

[JeffP]

Article VII

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The above is the actual text of Article VII of the US Constitution. The bold font has been added by myself to provide emphasis.

Let's be clear about one thing: Neteller was trying to repay money owed to thousands of US Citizens. The US Government stepped in and seized (deprived the rightful owners of that) money while it was in transit. They didn't serve any notice beforehand (due process) and they certainly didn't provide any of us with just compensation. Thousands of us were left dumbfounded - none of us understood what actually happened until weeks later when the story came out in the press. The only thing any of us knew for a fact was that we were being deprived of our money.

I can't in my wildest dreams imagine this kind of action is what our founding fathers intended our Federal Government should be doing when they wrote the Constitution. I'll make the argument that just the opposite is true. I tend to think they wrote the Constitution as a way of preventing the Federal Government from even considering this type of action in the first place.

In my mind I can't help but think this is a clear case where thousands of US citizens have been wronged by the very goernment we put in place to protect us.

By depriving thousands of US citizens their property without due process of law and without just compensation, hasn't the FBI violated Article VII of the Constitution?


-jp

.

[No Party Paul]

As a professional gambler living in Las Vegas who has about $100,000 of Neteller money currently being held hostage by the Department of Justice, I will no longer be paying taxes to the U.S. government until I get that money back (which will probably be never, therefore I will claim to be breaking even on my tax returns for the next ten years). And that's that.

[buddyboy]

go for it... here is some info from bankrate dot com

You need Form 4684 to figure and report your casualty loss and Schedule A to itemize your loss deduction. Attach both of these to your individual income tax return Form 1040. You don't have to include supporting documents with your return, but you need those records to help you complete Form 4684 and to verify your expenses and losses, if the IRS ever questions the deduction.

[Uncle B]

Originally Posted by SlipperyPete

If there are no charges against Neteller, how can the DOJ seize their funds???
And how come Neteller is not fighting it?????????

exactly..none of this shit makes sense to me.

what a clusterfuk.