Originally Posted by BoSox View Post
Dan Druff wrote:

- If you find a glitch in a machine which makes it behave contrary to how it was intended, then I feel that's cheating and is wrong. An example was the Game King "double up" case. The guys busted for this deserved it. They were basically doing the same thing as repeatedly using an ATM which is overpaying. They're just lucky that the government was stupid and charged them with crimes which didn't apply to the case (lol computer hacking).


I could not agree more. If a case could not have been made by the government in that instance for intent to defraud something is definitely wrong. The government messed up the case big time. If that was not a clear case to defraud, I don't know what the hell is, and this goes way beyond when is a hand is over in video poker. Is there anyone else besides Dan and myself who thinks that the Game King play was unethical? I am not affraid to say that if I was aware of the play 10 to 15 years ago I do not think I would have would have had the balls "on what I consider cheating" to carry it through and would have passed on the play. Personally, over the years I have seen many, many cases of unethical behaviour on the casinos part and really enjoy when they get burnt somewhat by advantage players, but where is the line drawn? Imagine finding and using something like that play in the Mob run casino days how it would turn out?
It may or may not have been unethical, but like I said before, ethics to me is just a cost/benefit like anything else. I'll happily reevaluate my ethical integrity when I'm sitting on two million dollars, or so, and I would certainly have plenty of time to do so. I'll call into question my sense of right and wrong during my post ninth hole cup of tea on my second round of golf that day at the country club where I would live.

As far as crimes applying (or not) to the case, again, there were simply no (criminal) crimes that fit the boundaries of the case. It wasn't a matter of failing to charge them with something that's on the books and is strictly applicable, it was a matter of them trying to charge them with the thing most likely to be the case. They can't charge them with a crime that doesn't exist nor make a new crime definition apply retroactively.

Just look at the states, in particular Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania had Nestor up on some 600 individual counts (including theft) and dropped every single one of them. Why would they do this? Because there is no crime on the books (or wasn't at the time) that actually describes the events that took place.

Just because something might be considered, even if Universally, 'Wrong,' or, 'Unethical,' doesn't automatically make that thing a crime.

Finally, any of the casinos could have in theory brought a civil suit. Not that they would have prevailed, but you can bring a civil suit for pretty much anything you want.