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

[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.

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.

I'm not talking about internal win-loss statements or handpays.

If the player can either dodge CTRs buying in (or get shady casino employees to go along with him dodging these CTRs), he can cash out and make it appear to just be a lucky win, and the money is clean.

Casinos and poker rooms have long been used for money laundering in this fashion.

In poker, it's even easier, as there's no close monitoring of the movement of chips, so it can simply appear that one player cleaned up in a poker session, starting from orders of magnitude less money. This does require cooperation from casino employees to look the other way regarding the buyins, and not filling out the CTR forms.

Various phony high-stakes "heads up" matches took place at the Bicycle Casino for exactly this purpose. After a few busts, and an ownership change, I don't think this is happening anymore.

[Rob.Singer]

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.

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.

Are you crazy? Keystone says you're all BS & fairy tales and you don't know what you're talking about compared to him. He's a "big shot" all over town with the "Majors", dontcha' know....and casino credit is his game.

Those who actually play hi limits know where the nonsense comes from.

[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.

I'm not talking about internal win-loss statements or handpays.

If the player can either dodge CTRs buying in (or get shady casino employees to go along with him dodging these CTRs), he can cash out and make it appear to just be a lucky win, and the money is clean.

Casinos and poker rooms have long been used for money laundering in this fashion.

In poker, it's even easier, as there's no close monitoring of the movement of chips, so it can simply appear that one player cleaned up in a poker session, starting from orders of magnitude less money. This does require cooperation from casino employees to look the other way regarding the buyins, and not filling out the CTR forms.

Various phony high-stakes "heads up" matches took place at the Bicycle Casino for exactly this purpose. After a few busts, and an ownership change, I don't think this is happening anymore.

So you are stating that there will be no record of the win? No internal win-loss statements, no handpays? How does this cash that is handed to the player at the end of whatever then any different from the cash he put into play at the casino? No record of input, no record of output?

Money laundering is basically converting cash to some form of non-cash.

Unless there is some key ingredient to all this that you are not mentioning or I am missing, your scenarios accomplish nothing and woul appear to stem from a misunderstanding of how any of this works, combined with lack of experience.

If the money launderer has so much cooperation from the casino as to bypass CTRs and SARs why even play at all? Why not just deposit cash at the cage, get a cage check and walk.

I actually have read about casinos looking the other way as to CTRs and SARs for the input of cash, but most of those players were just gamblers who wanted to play with dirty money didn’t care about laundering it. In most of those cases that were publicized the casino just wanted to get their hands on the money (think, Owning Mahowny) they weren’t thinking about facilitating its withdrawal.

Those who went on to play, win and get checks or wires – they accomplished something in the field of money laundering, why go through all that just to walk with cash if the intent is to launder money.

To rinse the cash there has to be some record of win (and no record of entry) to 'splain where the cash came from, or better yet, conversion to a non-cash instrument (casino check).

[The Boz]

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.

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.

Are you crazy? Keystone says you're all BS & fairy tales and you don't know what you're talking about compared to him. He's a "big shot" all over town with the "Majors", dontcha' know....and casino credit is his game.

Those who actually play hi limits know where the nonsense comes from.

Come on Rob, you know he’s full of shit. No one is “jealous” of his claims because they are IMPOSSIBLE to be the entire truth.

Sure he’s a high end losing player with his daddy’s money. He’s very similar to Tony Khan, son of Shad Khan. Shad owns the Jags and is a very successful billionaire businessman who has a misfit son. He gave him money to start a wrestling promotion and a job title that no one else has in the NFL to keep him happy. Parents love their kids but also can see which ones have it and which ones don’t.

This fantasy story running years and his constant infatuation with KJ shows he’s got mental issues. And you also know how Vegas works.

I get you like to be controversial but deep down you would bet huge money on him being full of shit about the winning.

[Tasha]

Speaking of money laundering, I pointed out that drug dealers most likely put their ill gotten money into Casinos to hide where they REALLY got the money from and I was called an Idiot for saying that. Another Poster admitted he was a drug dealer and puts his ill gotten money into Casinos so he can launder where he REALLY got that money from and the same Posters who called me an Idiot for saying drug dealers most likely launder their ill gotten money through Casinos responded to the drug dealer saying something like,"I completely believe that you do launder your ill gotten money through Casinos to hide where you REALLY got that money from. Makes perfect sense. I myself pointed out that Drug Dealers most likely do that and I was called an Idiot, Drug Dealer admitted he did exactly that and the same Posters who called me an Idiot completely believe him when he said the exact same thing I said. Go figure.

[mcap]

Tasha,

let me make it simple for you. The real reason people called you an idiot is because you're just an idiot.

I mean you tried to beg people for money in private forum messages. Only two types of people do that: Idiots and/or scammers.

[MisterV]

Actually there could be a third category, to wit: black autistic women who look sort of like the Huxstable character on the Cosby show who lack common sense, life experience, child hood guidance and intelligence.

[Rob.Singer]

Tasha certainly is an idiot but she's not a scammer. She's simply a broke lowlife, who has a low-end job making a pitiful wage, and is just like many poor people across this country: a degenerate losing gambler who hasn't the ability to control her impulses. The casinos are filled with them throughout each week, and most of them are fat, ugly foreigners or minorities with lives as useless & hopeless as hers.

[Keystone]

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.

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.

Are you crazy? Keystone says you're all BS & fairy tales and you don't know what you're talking about compared to him. He's a "big shot" all over town with the "Majors", dontcha' know....and casino credit is his game.

Those who actually play hi limits know where the nonsense comes from.

Lol, you’re an idiot

I hope God gives me more to live for when I’m 80 than he did for you. We already know he did you no favors in the looks department. You look like Kramer’s retarded uncle

[Tasha]

Tasha,

let me make it simple for you. The real reason people called you an idiot is because you're just an idiot.

I mean you tried to beg people for money in private forum messages. Only two types of people do that: Idiots and/or scammers.

Idiot? No. Scammer? No. Audacious and desperate, yes. I asked people to loan me money after I willingly and purposely risked it to play Bingo, knowing fully well that there was a possibility that I could lose the money I used to qualify for Bingo and still lose Bingo and I still went for it. I lost Bingo and had the audacious audacity to ask people who barely even knew who I was to loan me the money I purposely and willingly risked chasing Bingo cards. No, just no.

The second time I asked for loans was a legitimate SMALL mistake that ballooned into a huge problem. A SMALL payment went through and caused my Bank to be overdrawn and then temporarily closed. I get direct deposit, so my paycheck went into the ether. I asked for loans so I could fix my temporary bank account problem and get my paycheck back. I got the $300 loan and got my Bank Account opened again and my paycheck back.

[Dan Druff]

It is bizarre to me that MDawg doesn't understand that casinos have long been used for money laundering.

In fact, the main reason former Resorts World president Scott Sibella is no longer there (and got hit with federal charges) was because he looked the other way regarding money laundering taking place there.

If you look at the indictments regarding the casino action of Matt Bowyer and Damien Leforbes, nowhere is it mentioned that they're laying off action. Instead, it's alleged that the casinos were used for money laundering.

Go read this article: https://igamingbusiness.com/casino/b...ing-customers/

It states that Bowyer himself got 10 years in federal prison due to both illegal bookmaking and money laundering.

Even the title states that Bowyer "washed money through Las Vegas and California casinos".

What do you think these guys are doing at these casinos? Just shooting off millions like degenerates?

[MDawg]

Obviously we’re not connecting because what you’re describing is not money laundering. At this point I simply have to accept that you don’t know what you’re talking about because I gave you opportunities to clarify but you just returned to the same cash in cash out without any record of a win accomplishes something.

That doesn’t mean the individuals you’re describing aren’t rinsing cash they’re just not doing it the way you’re describing.

Why is it hard to understand that inputting cash at the casino even without incurring CTRs or SARs and then withdrawing cash without a record of a win accomplishes nothing.

[Dan Druff]

I'll give MDawg a simple example.

Let's say John Smith sells $200k worth of cocaine today. He wants to be able to declare and deposit the money, but obviously can't say it was a coke deal.

John then calls his friend Mark Jones, so they can stage a phony heads up match at a local poker room.

John has a friend at the poker room who works as a floorman, who is aware of what's going on, and gets tipped well for keeping his mouth shut.

John and Mark come down, each buy in $100k chips, but the floorman makes it to where no CTRs or SARs are filled out. Mark then dumps the chips to John in the match, and John ends up with all of them.

John then cashes out $200k. He takes a check from the casino, and deposits it in his bank account. It looks the same as if John sat at a game with $5k, got really lucky, and wiped the floor with everyone and won $200k. There is no indication anywhere that this was a heads up match, and unless the government is already suspicious, it doesn't appear abnormal.

Understand yet?

You can apply the same to a casino. Someone with a large cashout, whether by cash or check, can appear to have just gotten lucky, and not bought in huge.

You are correct that it's pointless to, say, buy in for $2m, fill out all of the associated forms, and cash out for $1.8m. That doesn't clean the money. But the above does.

[MDawg]

Now you’ve injected the conversion of cash to check which puts us on the same page.

Keep in mind though that if the casino is caring enough to document a win (such as through your phony heads up match) before issuing a check (that’s an AML requirement - checks only for documented wins) then it would also want to follow the rules as far as issuing CTRs and SARs for the cash input, no?

If the money launderer has so much cooperation from the casino as to bypass CTRs and SARs why even play at all? Why not just deposit cash at the cage, get a cage check and walk.

[Dan Druff]

I think I see the disconnect here.

MDawg seems to think there needs to be a "record of a win" to wash the money.

Not necessarily. These guys don't need to play with a player's card. They can also make friends with floormen who might put down a phony win when one didn't actually occur. They can also quietly add chips to their stack, to where they cash out with a "win" when in reality they lost. And then there's the times they actually won, and those winnings are automatically clean.

And at poker rooms, they don't record "wins" and "losses" at all.

If it didn't happen the way I described, how did it happen? Bowyer and Leforbes are NOT accused of laying off action.

[MDawg]

I’m beyond at expert on how it works at table games.

I don’t play any high stakes poker. But I assume that the AML rules are the same such that the cage isn’t going to convert those chips to a cage check absent a record that the amount of chips exceeds the buy in via a documented win. It’s very easy to track exactly what a player buys in for, no?

And if there is no record of where the chips came from I guarantee the cage will not issue a check for any of them. Otherwise the poker room cage would be the go to cage for money launderers. (So someone has to fabricate such a win record if there is in fact none.)

I’m back to that you need to step back and think about all of this if you’re thinking that “quietly adding chips to their stack” will help anything.

Have you ever actually done any of this, gotten casino checks for wins, or just speculating? When I get my checks at the cage they won’t issue the check for anything over the amount of the sum of the verified wins that pit bosses have documented during my trip / play.

[The Boz]

Tasha,

let me make it simple for you. The real reason people called you an idiot is because you're just an idiot.

I mean you tried to beg people for money in private forum messages. Only two types of people do that: Idiots and/or scammers.

Idiot? No. Scammer? No. Audacious and desperate, yes. I asked people to loan me money after I willingly and purposely risked it to play Bingo, knowing fully well that there was a possibility that I could lose the money I used to qualify for Bingo and still lose Bingo and I still went for it. I lost Bingo and had the audacious audacity to ask people who barely even knew who I was to loan me the money I purposely and willingly risked chasing Bingo cards. No, just no.

The second time I asked for loans was a legitimate SMALL mistake that ballooned into a huge problem. A SMALL payment went through and caused my Bank to be overdrawn and then temporarily closed. I get direct deposit, so my paycheck went into the ether. I asked for loans so I could fix my temporary bank account problem and get my paycheck back. I got the $300 loan and got my Bank Account opened again and my paycheck back.

Still sticking with the “only 2 times lie”? Not surprising at all based on your history of lying. Note for a while I’ve posted I’ve been told by people I trust that it’s happened MANY times with you never commenting.

Then just recently MDawg, you know your “advocate” and friend confirmed it. I’ll also say he never was one of those who said anything to me about it.

Again, another LIE in your history of it. I get it, you can’t help yourself, just like your floor shitting.

[coach belly]

I assume that the AML rules are the same such that the cage isn’t going to convert those chips to a cage check absent a record that the amount of chips exceeds the buy in via a documented win.

Axel has long been claiming that he can buy in for cash, and then cash out for a check, without a documented table game win.

Druff seems to be confirming that this is possible.

John and Mark come down, each buy in $100k chips...Mark then dumps the chips to John in the match, and John ends up with all of them. John then cashes out $200k. He takes a check from the casino

In his example above, John is buying in for $100K with cash, and then cashes his $100K in chips for a check. Even though his table game win is $100K, he is still able to cash out his winnings and his cash buy in ($200K total) for a check.

Is this scenario the industry's standard operating procedure?

If John is able to cash out his $100K buy-in for a check, then what's the point of going through the charade of winning $100K of his own money from Mark at a table game?

[Dan Druff]

In my example with "John", he is buying in secretly, to where it doesn't trigger any reports.

So his winnings appear to be around $200k -- his cashout value.

In my example, John would need an accomplice at the casino to make this happen.

[coach belly]

In my example, John would need an accomplice at the casino to make this happen.

How many accomplices?