Fontainebleau under investigation by Gaming for giving $2m credit to a known bookie, Damien "DJ" Leforbes

Nobody was supposed to know this yet, but the Nevada Gaming Control Board accidentally revealed at a meeting that Fontainebleau is under investigation related to extending credit to a bookie.

Damien "DJ" Leforbes was best known to the public as an occasional high stakes poker player who appeared on livestreams such as "Hustler Casino Live". He simply called himself "DJ" on these streams, and claimed he was a businessman. In reality, Leforbes was an illegal bookmaker, and ended up getting busted in the whole investigation which brought down both former Resorts World president Scott Sibella and Shohei Ohtani's interpreter Ippei Mizuhara:

https://x.com/ToddWitteles/status/1828824124866904299

Leforbes and fellow bookie Matthew Bowyer used Resorts World to launder money, and apparently Sibella was fully aware of it. This led to Sibella getting fired, and Resorts World paying a $10.5m fine.

Anyway, now it's come out that Leforbes also was across the street at Fontainebleau, and was extended $2 million credit upon opening in December 2023. This isn't new information. RJ "Robinhood702" Cipriani tweeted this in January 2024, but was largely ignored. This is because Cipriani puts out a lot of incredible stories about corruption in Vegas -- some of which turn out to be true, some of which turn out to be partially true, and some of which turn out to be complete bullshit. Therefore, it's hard to put a lot of faith in what he writes. In this case, it appears he was accurate:

https://x.com/robinhood702/status/1742594322846056711


Perhaps as an offshoot of the Resorts World investigation, now Fontainebleau is being investigated over the marker granted to Leforbes, but it wasn't supposed to be made public yet.

According to the Nevada Current, NGCB commissioner Rosa Solis Rainey asked Fontainebleau president Maurice Wooden, "With respect to AML (anti-money laundering), tell me about the issues that are currently going on at the Fontainebleau with respect to credit issuance. Are you aware of those?”

Another GCB member stated that it is "currently being investigated before further action", and then a debate followed whether this matter was confidential or not. It turned out that it WAS supposed to be confidential, but was erroneously not marked that way, and this caused it to actually be revealed to Fontainebleau's Wooden that his casino was being investigated. Oops!



Anyway, pretty hilarious that Fontainebleau was so incompetent. They allowed known bookie Leforbes to get $2m credit, win $1.5m, pay off the $2m marker, leave with the $1.5m (which he used to pay down other markers), and then AGAIN get a $2m credit marker right away,. He then chunked it off and never paid. The idiots should have told him to come back with the $1.5m he won, or get the fuck out, rather than extend additional credit until he lost.

Arguably most interesting here is the fact that neither Resorts World, Fontainebleau, nor Venetian (where they also gambled) attempted to file a complaint to the DAs office after the two guys apparently stiffed the casinos on markers. This is likely because they knew it would lead to the discovery that Leforbes and Bowyer were bookies, and thus it was worth it for the casino to just eat the unpaid markers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Anyway, pretty hilarious that Fontainebleau was so incompetent. They allowed known bookie Leforbes to get $2m credit, win $1.5m, pay off the $2m marker, leave with the $1.5m (which he used to pay down other markers), and then AGAIN get a $2m credit marker right away,. He then chunked it off and never paid. The idiots should have told him to come back with the $1.5m he won, or get the fuck out, rather than extend additional credit until he lost.

---

That is not quite the way it works.

I have big credit lines like that. Some casinos will temp close my lines after I win and cash out (they don't care if I win, hold the chips or deposit the chips - only cashing out triggers the temp closure). By temp close I mean - close for anywhere from 3 to max 7 days. After that period of time has passed, "it is a whole new ball game" and the line automatically reopens.

But there are casinos that, by special arrangement, will allow me to cash out any sum and not temp close my line.

And then also even casinos that do temp close lines do not always do it, it may depend on the amount of win weighed against the size of the line, and prior win/loss history.

My lines are permanent (not trip to trip) and permanent lines are the norm - I assume Leforbes' line too was permanent.

So, to say that Fontainebleu "screwed up" by not closing his line after he cashed out a big win - maybe. Maybe he had an arrangement with them, as I do, to never close his line no matter how much he cashes out. And in any case, at worst they would have temp closed his line for 3 - 7 days, after which he could have returned and blown through it anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Arguably most interesting here is the fact that neither Resorts World, Fontainebleau, nor Venetian (where they also gambled) attempted to file a complaint to the DAs office after the two guys apparently stiffed the casinos on markers. This is likely because they knew it would lead to the discovery that Leforbes and Bowyer were bookies, and thus it was worth it for the casino to just eat the unpaid markers.

---

There I might agree with you. There must have been some overriding reason why the casino didn't get too aggressive with collection efforts.

And when a marker, especially a large one, is defaulted on and not turned over to the DA Bad Check Unit, there is usually a reason. There are well known cases where for whatever reason the casino simply sued over the markers and never turned the matter over to the DA. For example markers from Brandon "Greasy Bear" Davis, or Girls Gone Wild founder Joe Francis. Those two or at least Francis claimed some kind of extortion from the casino (in Francis' case Wynn) to pay the debt under threat of death. In other words, somehow, these debtors and other debtors like them somehow muddied the water enough such that the casinos decided to sue versus pursue the criminal route. Or perhaps the casinos just didn't want the bad publicity of threatening to jail celebrities or celebrity types over markers. Or maybe the casino held onto the markers for too long hoping theses guys would pay and by then the markers appeared too much like long term notes versus immediately payable checks such that the criminal case had been weakened.

If you look at the history of publicized DA bad check cases in Vegas, it would seem like the casinos don't care who the debtor is, they will seek prosecution. But there are notable exceptions.

Perhaps the issue here, beyond Leforbes being a bookie, is the fact that he had other unpaid markers around town, which he then used his winnings to pay.

Provided Fontainebleau had access to this info, this screamed, "Dude is playing beyond his means", yet they re-extended the $2m which was lost and not paid.

But I think the general feeling about him was, "He'll be back and need to launder money again, so no biggie."

This is true, if a less than well established player (or even an established one) owes all over town, especially if maxed out on multiple properties, a casino might close an open line until the other lines are paid off or paid down some.

But, it also depends on how old the other markers are, how established the player is, and how much he has in the bank account(s) the casinos have access to for redemption.


Some casinos will close a line at the end of each trip (put what is called an "end of trip hold") on the line, and then reopen it when the player comes back into town for the new trip. End of trip may be considered no action for a period of time, or cashing out a sizable win. Wynn and Cosmo do this.

But, the extent of checking such casinos do when reopening the line varies - they might run the player's Central Credit to see if he owes any other properties, they might even get on the horn and call a property or two, or they might do not much checking at all.
Central Central doesn't get wind of outstanding markers right away - they might be in transit for a few days before they are even reflected on the player's profile.

I will tell you that I know of at least one Major in Vegas that doesn't seem to care about anything. I've not played at that one for months and months walked back in and the line has always been ready to go. Caesars Tahoe for example used to be like that, as long as you never stiffed them they simply left the line open even if almost a whole year had passed since you had last played there.

Most casinos however will run your personal credit (soft inquiry) and re-check bank balances via NCC-Reports once a year to make sure you are still financially sound.

Basically the longer you play and the more credit lines you have at different properties, and I have large ones at every Major in town, the more you learn about how things work. And not many people know exactly what they will tolerate as far as cashing out wins and leaving lines open as much as I do, because I am cashing out wins all the time, sometimes testing them to see how much I may cash before they temp close me out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

This is true, if a less than well established player (or even an established one) owes all over town, especially if maxed out on multiple properties, a casino might close an open line until the other lines are paid off or paid down some.

But, it also depends on how old the other markers are, how established the player is, and how much he has in the bank account(s) the casinos have access to for redemption.


Some casinos will close a line at the end of each trip (put what is called an "end of trip hold") on the line, and then reopen it when the player comes back into town for the new trip. End of trip may be considered no action for a period of time, or cashing out a sizable win. Wynn and Cosmo do this.

But, the extent of checking such casinos do when reopening the line varies - they might run the player's Central Credit to see if he owes any other properties, they might even get on the horn and call a property or two, or they might do not much checking at all.
Central Central doesn't get wind of outstanding markers right away - they might be in transit for a few days before they are even reflected on the player's profile.

I will tell you that I know of at least one Major in Vegas that doesn't seem to care about anything. I've not played at that one for months and months walked back in and the line has always been ready to go. Caesars Tahoe for example used to be like that, as long as you never stiffed them they simply left the line open even if almost a whole year had passed since you had last played there.

Basically the longer you play and the more credit lines you have at different properties, and I have large ones at every Major in town, the more you learn about how things work. And not many people know exactly what they will tolerate as far as cashing out wins and leaving lines open as much as I do, because I am cashing out wins all the time, sometimes testing them to see how much I may cash before they temp close me out.

---

And yet you are on multiple web sites 20 hours of the day trying to impress elderly hacks with your fairy tale bullshit….Yeah, makes sense

Keyshit, I expect the majority of readers would much sooner agree with the facts a proven high limit player has explained than the envious words of a hack like you. Nowhere have you ever provided any evidence that you can even come close to matching the play level or bank account prowess of mdawg. In fact, there's no doubt you are seriously addicted to nickel keno at Stations casinos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Keyshit, I expect the majority of readers would much sooner agree with the facts a proven high limit player has explained than the envious words of a hack like you. Nowhere have you ever provided any evidence that you can even come close to matching the play level or bank account prowess of mdawg. In fact, there's no doubt you are seriously addicted to nickel keno at Stations casinos.

---

You don’t really know what I do, do you hack? A couple of things I don’t do however, are taking pics inside of vehicles at dealerships trying to pass them off as my own or posting fake jackpots pics in some exercise room…..sound familiar? Wise up moron

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Keyshit, I expect the majority of readers would much sooner agree with the facts a proven high limit player has explained than the envious words of a hack like you. Nowhere have you ever provided any evidence that you can even come close to matching the play level or bank account prowess of mdawg. In fact, there's no doubt you are seriously addicted to nickel keno at Stations casinos.

---

I guess I'm always shocked when people are shocked that these kinds of situations are ongoing. This stuff happens all the time, and any reportage is just tip-of-the-iceberg peekaboos because somebody pissed somebody off or somebody got extraordinarily sloppy.

Bookmakers laying off money in Las Vegas? God forbid!! At one time in the 70's to early 90's, little Binions downtown was either the first or second biggest sports handle in the city (depending on whether the Mirage had opened and how much volume Caesars was doing that week). And, if anything, what was known for sure was an undercount. Binions had reps from major cities camped out in their hotel laying stuff off all the time.

To think that kind of thing somehow went completely extinct is naive.

The other thing I want to say is that the kinds of numbers being thrown around vis-a-vis credit lines, a million here and a million-and-a-half there, are not terribly large numbers. A million dollars today is about 200K in 1975 terms, for those who want to watch the movie Casino this week.

I can see accounting not being overly concerned while knowing what was going on.

It's not the laying off of action where the concern is right now.

Apparently it's straight up money laundering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

It's not the laying off of action where the concern is right now.

Apparently it's straight up money laundering.

---

It would be appreciated if someone would define and give examples of both viz. LV casinos.

Laying off of action:

Someone I know who basically lived in one of the Majors on the Strip was just such an illegal bookie who laid off action at the casino book. Was from the midwest and friends and associates from there would place book with this bookie. Was constantly FEDEX'ing cash back and forth. I would estimate made a few grand a day doing this enough to support all the money was dumping at the tables and slots, was definitely not a winner at the casino and the casino had no idea where the cash came from, and would comp allow to stay in house for extremely long stretches.

It took me a while to figure out exactly what was going on.


Money laundering is basically converting cash to some form of non-cash. The intent of money laundering is to get cash somehow into the stream of commerce without alerting the government to the cash to other than cash conversion.
Within a casino, merely depositing cash doesn't get you anywhere, so for purposes of a casino, money laundering is converting cash directly (without winning) to a casino check or casino outgoing wire.

Depositing cash and withdrawing cash doesn't really help a money launderer because he ends up with the same problem - how to get the cash into the stream of commerce.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iti_gWbz1U

I imagine casinos these days especially are concerned both with anyone buying in regularly for five or six figures cash, or paying off casino credit lines with either the same ranges of cash, or non-cash funds that they had reason to believe were of questionable origin.

Casino compliance has gotten very picky over the years and not just over cash but also over the origins of all funds - they investigate every bank account being used for payment or to support the grant of a credit line at least to the point of who is a signatory on the account and if a business account, who is the business owner (and more and more of the casinos these days are not allowing payments from business accounts, period).

I am not sure how many, if any, of the participants on these forums even have a casino credit line, let alone a large credit line, or deal with large front money deposits. I am a large credit line player, always have been, and many of my associates are large front money deposit players, so I am aware first hand of what has changed over the years and the casinos are stricter and stricter about turning a blind eye to where the money comes from.

Just giving your social security number is no longer enough.

Any attempt by a player to convert directly (without winning) cash to check within the casino is money laundering and is illegal. I know how it works because I get cage checks for wins all the time, and I know they won't issue a check for above the verified win.

I think "Owning Mahoney" is a nice study in manipulation of business accounts. It explores how easy it is (or was). True story, and it's actually a humorous movie.

The Stardust always had parallel sets of books, as did some other casinos who shall remain nameless. Parallel books; parallel managements. This looks like a junior varsity version of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

It's not the laying off of action where the concern is right now.

Apparently it's straight up money laundering.

---

It would be appreciated if someone would define and give examples of both viz. LV casinos.

---

I’m a sports betting moron, but I think a bookie “lays off action” when they have more exposure to one side of a bet than they’re comfortable with, so they simply bet the other side with another book to more or less balance their exposure (at a cost of the house edge).

Little people go to federal “pound me in the ass” prison for money laundering.

But corporations, if they get caught, get off with a fine.

https://youtu.be/oBzvMLW0ii4?si=ark4c-Ukprl_XxGq

Money laundering is so confusing to me, I in no way understand it. We're told it finances terrorist activity and threatens the financial system, but I'm not sure this is actually true or as bad as "they" say. The better solution is to just let people buy drugs and have sex for money without having to go to medical or dental school or get married.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGenBen

Little people go to federal “pound me in the ass” prison for money laundering.

But corporations, if they get caught, get off with a fine.

https://youtu.be/oBzvMLW0ii4?si=ark4c-Ukprl_XxGq

---

Classic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theywontpayontuesday

Money laundering is so confusing to me, I in no way understand it. We're told it finances terrorist activity and threatens the financial system, but I'm not sure this is actually true or as bad as "they" say. The better solution is to just let people buy drugs and have sex for money without having to go to medical or dental school or get married.

---

Here’s how money laundering works:

If the police stop you while driving or boarding an airplane with a lot of money……then you’re money laundering! And the police seize your money.

If you are a big bank or corporation that assists criminals with taking cash earned illegally through illegal activity such as bookmaking or drug dealing and getting it into the financial system so it appears to be money earned legitimately, that might be money laundering too.

And although the later was really what money laundering laws were designed to prevent you won’t see any criminal charges against officers of big banks or corporations, you’ll maybe see a fine that is a small percentage of what the bank / corporation earns in profit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

It's not the laying off of action where the concern is right now.

Apparently it's straight up money laundering.

---

It would be appreciated if someone would define and give examples of both viz. LV casinos.

---

Laying off action = "I'm a bookie, I have a high stakes client who sucks at sportsbetting, but I can't handle the swings of his $500k bets. So instead of losing his business when he bets too big, I just go to Resorts World and bet 80% of his money on the same side he wants, and I pretend it's me booking the entire action."

Money laundering = "I'm a bookie, and I just made a shitload of money from Shohei Ohtani's interpreter, who is a complete ploppy and somehow has $16 million to lose. But I can't buy anything with it, or deposit it, or law enforcement will know I obtained the money illegally. But if I go wager it in a casino, any 'winnings' I cash out can simply look like I got lucky at the casino, and I can declare/deposit that."

The latter is what was occurring with Bowyer and Leforbes. At Resorts World, president Scott Sibella knew all about this, and knew at least Bowyer personally, and allowed it. It's very possible that Fontainebleau and Venetian did the same, as they curiously didn't go after Bowyer or Leforbes for stiffing them on big markers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Money laundering = "I'm a bookie, and I just made a shitload of money from Shohei Ohtani's interpreter, who is a complete ploppy and somehow has $16 million to lose. But I can't buy anything with it, or deposit it, or law enforcement will know I obtained the money illegally. But if I go wager it in a casino, any 'winnings' I cash out can simply look like I got lucky at the casino, and I can declare/deposit that."

---

Somewhat. If the input of the cash is registered via CTRs or SARs, that defeats money laundering because then the person has to explain where it came from in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

Money laundering is basically converting cash to some form of non-cash. The intent of money laundering is to get cash somehow into the stream of commerce without alerting the government to the cash to other than cash conversion.
Within a casino, merely depositing cash doesn't get you anywhere, so for purposes of a casino, money laundering is converting cash directly (without winning) to a casino check or casino outgoing wire.

Depositing cash and withdrawing cash doesn't really help a money launderer because he ends up with the same problem - how to get the cash into the stream of commerce.

---

Keep in mind too that casinos do not report table game wins to the government. Only machine wins (if high enough) will be reported via the W-2G. Table wins are recorded via WIN/LOSS statements that aren't attested to under penalty of perjury.

Dan the Dandruff Man's scenario also presumes that the player won. If he did not win, all the cash input in the world isn't going to show any kind of register of winning.

Over all, you need have had some kind of experience with this to understand what will and will not work within the context of casinos. I am not a cash player I play with large credit lines, but I do know how it works for table games.

If someone could get all that cash into slot machines without being recorded (no CTRs, no SARs) at least all of the W-2Gs for the larger payouts would seem like wins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

It's not the laying off of action where the concern is right now.

Apparently it's straight up money laundering.

---

It would be appreciated if someone would define and give examples of both viz. LV casinos.

---

Laying off action = "I'm a bookie, I have a high stakes client who sucks at sportsbetting, but I can't handle the swings of his $500k bets. So instead of losing his business when he bets too big, I just go to Resorts World and bet 80% of his money on the same side he wants, and I pretend it's me booking the entire action."

Money laundering = "I'm a bookie, and I just made a shitload of money from Shohei Ohtani's interpreter, who is a complete ploppy and somehow has $16 million to lose. But I can't buy anything with it, or deposit it, or law enforcement will know I obtained the money illegally. But if I go wager it in a casino, any 'winnings' I cash out can simply look like I got lucky at the casino, and I can declare/deposit that."

The latter is what was occurring with Bowyer and Leforbes. At Resorts World, president Scott Sibella knew all about this, and knew at least Bowyer personally, and allowed it. It's very possible that Fontainebleau and Venetian did the same, as they curiously didn't go after Bowyer or Leforbes for stiffing them on big markers.

---

The bookie can also be middle shooting, as in, the client is laying 4 points to the bookie but the bookie is laying just 3 points to the Vegas books.