external image

Calvin Ayre/Bodog Have $24M in Funds Seized by US Government

pokeraddict

Webmaster
Joined
Aug 3, 2002
Location
Las Vegas
Other Bodog assets seized. One of the processors was also a part of another poker room's bad check problems because they got seized too.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


 
Zip Payments surfacing yet again, although this will probably see them out of the business. Despite his protestations that he has retired I suspect that Ayre must be a very worried man right now.

Strange that Fortune hasn't picked up on the patent issues Bodog faced, but then again that front has gone very quiet recently, and you have to wonder whether there has been a back door settlement.

I found this passage especially interesting:

"Ayre, says Carrow's statement, is president of Middleton Financial, a Nevada corporation described as a key cog in the U.S. Bodog machinery, as well as Stratham Finance, said to be based in Malta. Other entities linked to Ayre in the court filings are Gateway Financial Services, EBanx Ltd., Gregor Financial Ltd. and Calvtek Industries. The filings list dozens of businesses involved in processing Bodog transactions."
 
Despite his protestations that he has retired I suspect that Ayre must be a very worried man right now.
He was target Number 1 from Day 1. Even as time marched on and I was somewhat silenced from posting about Calvin (as I assume one reason was that two banned members were involved in several of the threads and I was asked not to give one of the banned members a voice, the request made sense and I respected it). Off the record I suspected even as time marched on since the Neteller arrrests and a few lesser publicized arrests thereafter that he was always target Number UNO (an ex member who oped out of this forum heard this often from moi) and despite the deafening silence and then a couple posts that Calvin claimed it was no problem entering the US, he may have entered (I doubt it) and even if so of course nothing is ever a problem to the narcisstic.

I also give Kudos to Rollo and iirc, Mousey who got the picture. Amazing that US gamblers may not understand the actual significance of this breaking story. The industry, well as I said, nothing is ever a problem to the narcisstic. Wanna Bet???.LOL;)
 
This is the biggest news related to online gambling since the passage of the UIGEA and will have very far reaching effects........imo. :)

I found this story which is an interview with Calvin himself. It's recent but was written before this news.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Last edited:
It's already had far reaching effects, most likely a hell of a lot more than we actually know about and the banks involved so far Wachovia, Bank of America, SunTrust Banks and Regions Bank are most likely just some of the few larger ones that they are willing to mention right now. I'm sure they are scanning everyone's account automatically for any and all transactions that involve any of the named processors...;)
 
Well I hope Calvin uses some of those billions to hire a team of really great lawyers and trounce the justice dept.

Until there is a LEGAL definition of what "Illegal gambling" is in the USA, Don't count anything out yet...
 
This check processor Zip Payments that got seized has also been linked to Full Tilt and Jazette (Sportsbook.com and friends). It is certainly possible that several other gambling sites got stuck there too.

There's several posts already on the board from players who got stuck with bad Zip checks from various (big) online casinos.

IMHO I don't think asking for a check is a very good idea right now.
 
Well I hope Calvin uses some of those billions to hire a team of really great lawyers and trounce the justice dept.

Until there is a LEGAL definition of what "Illegal gambling" is in the USA, Don't count anything out yet...
There is a LEGAL definition of structuring and failure to report taxable income. Hell, I do not expect US players to worry about such trivial matters.:D:rolleyes::D
 
UIGEA tells the BANKS that they are not to pass on money that is derived from ILLEGAL online gambling.

The wire act prohibits US citizens from betting on sports over the telephone.

Hence - illegal online gambling is sportsbetting.

These are the two laws on the books.

Individual states have a variety of laws, but the above is what's on the federal books.

You will note that with each case, Bodog, BOS, Neteller, you have a government official place a SPORTSBET to entrap the target.
 
You will note that with each case, Bodog, BOS, Neteller, you have a government official place a SPORTSBET to entrap the target.

Correct and that gets forgotten about alot. If you recall even though Epassporte was asked politely to shut down they were not seized or arrested. There may be some "you don't want trouble do you?" fine later but to this point they have been left alone even though they openly operate and are located in the U.S.

The sportsbooks that take U.S. bets are going to be the easiest to make cases against. Jay Cohen at WSEX tried to establish the wire act didn't apply but he lost and went to jail. To this point sportsbetting is the only thing courts have ruled are illegal.
 




THAT should be illegal! :mad:
 
From my mailbox:


 
US online gaming

Well now I wonder if this is the start of the end for all US players as far as casino and poker gaming goes.Now none of the US players will not get any of there winnings and probably lose the money from there accounts as well.But the good news is it sounds like Bodog is on its way down
 
According to the Mohawks it is just sensationalist and incorrect reporting and nothing more:

The facts are these: the first of these cases – relating to a seizure of funds from a processor known as JBL Services – happened some time ago and has absolutely nothing to do with the current payment processing challenges being experienced in the US. The constraints being experienced by payment processors in the US are universal in that region and not specific to any particular processor or site. Also, note that not one single player failed to get paid when this processor was disrupted.

The second case refers to a payment processor known as Zippayments.com and seizure of funds from this processor’s bank accounts in Nevada. The article falsely implies – but notably does not go so far as to state - that $9.9M seized from Zippayment’s Nevada bank accounts were funds on account for “Bodog”. This is simply false.

That makes the entire news incorrect and BS.
 
From my mailbox:
With all due respect Dom as I realize in this case you are simply the messenger but I could not even complete the Morris response without Absolute Poker's responses coming to mind for whatever reason as well as Calvin's blog responses to the 1st Technology patent lawsuit coming to mind as well.....That said, I learned long ago the media often gets the story wrong.....Will try to find the legal pleadings!!
 
Last edited:
It would make sense that the 9.9 million could be what was taken from Zip. That amount could be the combined loss of all that were using that processor. Bodog could just be one of the bigger customers. Since Forbes printed it maybe they are figuring there is some value in naming Bodog after their story about Ayre earlier.
 
After reading the actual complaints it seems this is entirely directed at Bodog, not other online gambling businesses. Bodog must be named 100 times in the complaint. The investigation dates back to 2006.
 
I've looked carefully at the Morris Mohawk statement, which was distributed widely to Internet gambling media yesterday, in conjunction with the Forbes report....and I can't see that the Forbes report can be dismissed as BS in its entirety.

I think it is more likely that the Mohawk statement is a damage control smokescreen.

Here's what the Forbes report said concerning the JBL and Zip Payments seizures:

"Court filings in Maryland say that in January and February a total of $14.2 million was seized from accounts in the name of JBL Services and Transaction Solutions at Wachovia, Regions Bank, Bank of America and Sun Trust Bank.

"In July, filings say, another $9.9 million was found in eight accounts at Nevada State Bank, a unit of Zion Bancorporation (nasdaq: ZION - news - people ), in the name of Zaftig Instantly Processed Payments, doing business as ZipPayments.com. The companies are described as helping to facilitate parts of the Bodog operation."

The motivation for the Mohawk statement could be the player-deterrent fears that this sort of government action might inspire. And who knows, perhaps that's an intended DoJ consequence of the article, with reporters tipped off on where to look for the detail. Stranger things have happened.

The Mohawk-Bodog failure to respond to Forbes invitations to comment on the piece pre-publication, added to pokeraddict's confirmation above that Bodog is principally named in the court filings, I think serves to reinforce that view.

The feds have clearly devoted a great deal of energy and time to looking into Ayre's business affairs, too and I think that has to give rise to more speculation that he must be a target when and if they can get at him.
 
Last edited:
The feds have clearly devoted a great deal of energy and time to looking into Ayre's business affairs, too and I think that has to give rise to more speculation that he must be a target when and if they can get at him.
The information I get clearly is hearsay I have assumed but in this case was spot on. If the hearsay is correct Ayre by no means is an isolated target as PA's post may imply. History and logic verifies that....Operation Malicious Mortgage may have taken some of the focus off the US online gambling industry but it is risky business regardless.
 
This is the US code section they are prosecuting under.


TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 95 > 1955

1955. Prohibition of illegal gambling businesses

(a) Whoever conducts, finances, manages, supervises, directs, or owns all or part of an illegal gambling business shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(b) As used in this section
(1) illegal gambling business means a gambling business which
(i) is a violation of the law of a State or political subdivision in which it is conducted;
(ii) involves five or more persons who conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, or own all or part of such business; and
(iii) has been or remains in substantially continuous operation for a period in excess of thirty days or has a gross revenue of $2,000 in any single day.
(2) gambling includes but is not limited to pool-selling, bookmaking, maintaining slot machines, roulette wheels or dice tables, and conducting lotteries, policy, bolita or numbers games, or selling chances therein.
(3) State means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession of the United States.
(c) If five or more persons conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, or own all or part of a gambling business and such business operates for two or more successive days, then, for the purpose of obtaining warrants for arrests, interceptions, and other searches and seizures, probable cause that the business receives gross revenue in excess of $2,000 in any single day shall be deemed to have been established.
(d) Any property, including money, used in violation of the provisions of this section may be seized and forfeited to the United States. All provisions of law relating to the seizures, summary, and judicial forfeiture procedures, and condemnation of vessels, vehicles, merchandise, and baggage for violation of the customs laws; the disposition of such vessels, vehicles, merchandise, and baggage or the proceeds from such sale; the remission or mitigation of such forfeitures; and the compromise of claims and the award of compensation to informers in respect of such forfeitures shall apply to seizures and forfeitures incurred or alleged to have been incurred under the provisions of this section, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent with such provisions. Such duties as are imposed upon the collector of customs or any other person in respect to the seizure and forfeiture of vessels, vehicles, merchandise, and baggage under the customs laws shall be performed with respect to seizures and forfeitures of property used or intended for use in violation of this section by such officers, agents, or other persons as may be designated for that purpose by the Attorney General.
(e) This section shall not apply to any bingo game, lottery, or similar game of chance conducted by an organization exempt from tax under paragraph (3) of subsection (c) of section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if no part of the gross receipts derived from such activity inures to the benefits of any private shareholder, member, or employee of such organization except as compensation for actual expenses incurred by him in the conduct of such activity.
 
My eyes hurt...Had Gore invented the internet yet when this law was written in the 1950's???....Saw the 1986 amendment but could have missed some!!
 
The information I get clearly is hearsay I have assumed but in this case was spot on. If the hearsay is correct Ayre by no means is an isolated target as PA's post may imply. History and logic verifies that....Operation Malicious Mortgage may have taken some of the focus off the US online gambling industry but it is risky business regardless.

I think that goes without saying - when it comes to companies that have been active in the US market, it would be a brave, uninformed or maybe plain foolish online gambling executive who risked travelling to or through the States since the Carruthers/Dick/Kaplan detentions.
 
I think that goes without saying - when it comes to companies that have been active in the US market, it would be a brave, uninformed or maybe plain foolish online gambling executive who risked travelling to or through the States since the Carruthers/Dick/Kaplan detentions.
Of course, it is now easy for you, I, and anyone else that wants to jump on the bandwagon to claim this was a no brainer. Yet, as time went on complacency may have made one wonder. Twice, over the last 10 months or so BB would post (paraphrasing) Ayre was entering this country with no problem. Maybe so, I dunno but I questioned the legitimacy of the most recent post. If I understood BB's response correctly, I believe BB clarified he was simply stating what Ayre personally claimed to BB but BB was not validating the authencity of Ayre's claim. If so, fair enough.

Do you think that only online gambling executives travelling to or through the US are at risk? If so I disagree. Aiding, abetting, fraud are keywords. I have been involved as a Plaintiff participant in a lawsuit (not a class action) against the DOJ now in its' 18th year (I can PM you a link if you may be interested in this mind boggling case). Our counsel expected 2 to 3 years upon the initial filing at most if not settled prior. Point being, the DOJ has its' own agenda and tactics. Thus, the legal expert's opinions are no better than mine or yours. There is great risk for those that simply are relying on such,imo. FINIS!!
 
"Jumping on the bandwagon" is perhaps an unfortunate phrase to use here because it implies imv that members commenting on this issue are doing just that and have limited knowledge of the issues, which I don't believe to be the case.

I'm afraid you've lost me on the reference to "BB", Nashvegas. Are you referring to Bryan and his posts with those initials?

Your question: "Do you think that only online gambling executives travelling to or through the US are at risk?" has an obvious answer - no, of course not. However, I'm focusing in this discussion on the online gambling industry and the dangers of a diversity of enforcement ploys that the American authorities have proved they can use in several high profile cases.

I personally doubt that there is complacency among online gambling top brass regarding US developments, which clearly are being closely monitored. It's a major and important market with interesting issues constantly ongoing and still has the lure of future legitimacy.

If it's relevant to the induistry and this discussion I would appreciate the link to the personal litigation to which you refer - I'm always happy to read and learn.
 
FINIS!
 

So the DOJ had to conduct undercover betting with Bodog through one of the 11 US states that have laws that specifically ban internet gambling in order to bring charges and justify seizure of money? Microgaming doesn't allow those 11 states but RTG I think does. Bodog accepted anyone anywhere.
 
So the DOJ had to conduct undercover betting with Bodog through one of the 11 US states that have laws that specifically ban internet gambling in order to bring charges and justify seizure of money?

That would be my guess.

Going back to the US Neteller issues: It was a US DOJ employee that made controlled wagers on sports betting using Neteller to transfer the funds that got Neteller tossed out of the US...

Moral of this story... Don't take wagers from the 11 states that specifically outlaw online gambling and don't take Sports Bets from anyone in the USA...
 
MAryland isn't a banned MG state is it? Considering this was sports gambling using a communication device it falls under the Wire Act too.
The fact that I do not remember a reference to the Wire Act of 1961 in the pleadings you provided seems to open Pandora's Box and establish a new and/or another legal precedent I would assume. The Wire Act of 1961 (geared towards racketeering and later RICO) has generally been the legal precedent in prior cases. I expected to see it referenced in the pleadings you provided but I do not recollect if it was ever referenced. Please correct me if I am incorrect!!

I swear when I read the following I went OH PH_CK and just kept reading over and over. I wonder if others read it more than once??? :
"(2) “gambling” includes but is not limited to pool-selling, bookmaking, maintaining slot machines, roulette wheels or dice tables, and conducting lotteries, policy, bolita or numbers games, or selling chances therein."
 
I swear when I read the following I went OH PH_CK and just kept reading over and over. I wonder if others read it more than once??? :
"(2) gambling includes but is not limited to pool-selling, bookmaking, maintaining slot machines, roulette wheels or dice tables, and conducting lotteries, policy, bolita or numbers games, or selling chances therein."

I guess the DOJ is using two tools:
1) the Wire Act for sports-betting which is applicable to the whole USA;
2) State laws against allowing access to regular gambling games (blackjack, craps, keno, etc.) in those states that specifically banned online casinos.

I guess they couldn't get Bodog on any violations of sports-betting so they try getting them on allowing regular online casino games in states that ban online casinos. But shouldn't those documents PokerAddict provided disclose the "evidence" used to prove violations?
 
But shouldn't those documents PokerAddict provided disclose the "evidence" used to prove violations?

They did. The feds placed $4000 in sports bets on 35 different events in Maryland. They then had a paper trail of processors because one of the checks bounced. I admit I didn't read the whole novel but I did get that part.
 
i was just thinking outloud, what happens to all this money in the end that the U.S goverment has seized?....laurie

Source:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


The Government uses the money to fund its self... Agencies like the DOJ and local police departments don't really need taxpayer money when all they have to do is "seize" large amounts of money or force people to forfeit their money and property...

Allowing government agencies to "seize" money, force forfeitures and keep the money takes control of the agency out of the hands of the people and politicos and puts total control of the Agency in question, in the hands of the heads of these agencies.

Just one of the reasons why the founding fathers put that little clause in the US Constitution about Illegal Seizure...

Oh ya, then there is the problem that these agencies that use "seized" money to continue to operate, give employee pay raises and employee benefits have a very big motive to seize as much money as they can.

The DEA, for example, operates almost entirely (about 78% of their total budget) on "seized and forfeited" funds...

These agencies continue to lobby Congress to allow them to "seize" even more money...

In case you can't tell this "seizure" issue is one of my pet peeves with the way our government is currently being run.
 


Write your reply...

Users who are viewing this thread

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top