I dated a girl in the Sacramento area briefly a few years ago, thus spending a fair bit of time playing at TV. Played with Lon several times, and always regarded him as a super nice guy and a class act..
Guess I was wrong. Very disappointed (and surprised) to see him take this position.
It's not surprising, he is on Stone's pay roll ... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by go_buccos
I was surprised to see that Wikipedia has Lon being 62-63. I figured him to be in his late 60s at least. What I have noticed over the last few years of the WSOP Main Event streaming live is that Lon has been making an increasing amount of mistakes for years. I don’t know if anyone else has noticed but it gets worse and worse each year. He reads the board wrong, loses track of the action, forgets player’s names etc. He has been doing this enough for me to think he’s really lost more than just his fastball.
My theory is he clearly has relationship(s) with people high up at Stones. Those people have probably told Lon everything is fine & if he wouldn’t mind talking up (shilling) for the joint to please do so. Lon has (maybe had after today) a reputation as a really nice guy in the community. I think he’s sort of been unwittingly sent out to try and spin what we know can’t be spun.
Circling back to his mental state I hope I’m not coming off ageist here. What I’ve noticed is as people get to a certain point their ability or even desire to think critically or re-evaluate their loyalties becomes basically non-existent. If I had to guess this is what happened to Lon. He didn’t watch Joey’s streams, he is totally out of touch with the community on this and these people connected to Stones have taken advantage of that fact. If I’m right shame on those fuckers that put him up to it.
Or maybe Lon is a paid shill & has really been Keyser Soze this whole time.
Correct:Quote:
Originally Posted by sah_24It's not surprising, he is on Stone's pay roll ... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by go_buccos
https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-new...-lon-mceachern
No, he's literally a paid shill ...Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDime
Makes more sense now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Still would be nice if SOMEONE affiliated with Stones would have the balls to say "hey, we fucked up. We'll fix it going forward."
I guess given the legal corner they've backed themselves into now, that really can't happen.
So Lon is done having anything to do with hole card commentary.
Kind of sad but I guess he was done anyway.
lon is the type of person that would write for sports illustrated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
if you don't know wut that means lol@ u
Mac Verstandig is now making most (but not all) documents related to the case available on his website: https://mbvesq.com/e-d-cal-litigation
The most recent documents posted were from April 28.
DE 054 is a motion for sanctions against Postle for having an attorney "ghostwrite" his response. I never thought this was any kind of violation under California law, but Mac claims it is. Guess we will see.
DE 055 is their opposition to Postle's motion to dismiss the case. I am guessing that this opposition will be successful, and the motion to dismiss will be denied.
Postle must have some serious cabin fever by now. He was basically self-isolating many months before he legally had to under California law. Still all and all the pandemic is kind of a lucky break for him as more time passes naturally interest in the case fades a bit which is part of what he is hoping for I’m sure.
I am curious if he filed for unemployment benefits as a poker player using partly the money he won at Stones on his 2019 tax return. If approved he would be getting the maximum under California law plus the federal $600 week on top of that. I wouldn’t put it past a guy like him whose money faucet was turned off a while ago.
I don't know about unemployment, but I would bet a $100 against a doughnut that he did it for the EIDL and PPP grants.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDime
Good thread on the case that had a legal conference call/oral arguments regarding the Motions to Dismiss by Mike Postle, Stones & Justin Kuraitis.:
Do we know who this is? Justin the floor guy is a named plaintiff so it must be someone else, right?
lol
Yeah probably someone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
Do we know who this is? Justin the floor guy is a named plaintiff so it must be someone else, right?
lol
There's a few names I can think of, though I'm not sure which one is being referred to here.
I saw in that Twitter thread that the judge gave Mac a hard time for having a bad internet connection (he was connected via internet to the proceedings, presumably because of COVID-19).
I didn't think that was fair. Mac doesn't have control over his house or office's sporadic internet outages, nor can he be expected to maintain an expensive backup connection just in case this happens.
I am hearing that both Stones and nearby Thunder Valley will reopen on June 8.
Stones will have 6 fewer poker tables than before, but otherwise operate normally.
This is an article from May 12 from the online pro Postle rag known as Rounderlife. This one is written by the esteemed journalist Evert Caldwell entitled “New Revelations Deflate “Postlegate” Narrative”. This goes on for a while but mainly jumps on the Marle hand and her lawsuit.
In a vacuum the Marle hand was certainly not absurd that someone would fold top pair on the turn playing that deep. I do wonder why Marle went on her own as I am guessing she really is pissed she didn’t get paid off for that hand. I could only speculate on reasons why she went at it alone. Mac Verstanding I’m sure wasn’t crazy about not keeping this under one umbrella but when she was determined to sue for this hand specifically he really had no choice but to represent her to not over complicate things.
Unfortunately, as has been part of the Postle strategy from the start Veronica Brill is attacked in the article.
https://www.rounderlife.com/10459-2/
Postle case dismissed
Un-fucking-real
In before dipshit @themouthmatusow says I told you so.
https://www.pokernews.com/news/2020/...udge-37385.htmQuote:
According to court documents obtained by PokerNews via Pacer, the judge sided with the argument put forth by King’s that the plaintiffs' various claims were “not cognizable under California law because California public policy bars judicial intervention in gambling disputes, in part because the asserted damages are inherently speculative” as laid out in Kelly v. First Astri Corp.
That is Horse Shit!Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTickle
We will likely have Eric Bensamochan on the show (I think -- he's very busy this week, but I might be able to get him to squeeze in some time for us) to discuss this.
From what I can tell, it looks like California law is simply immature when it comes to poker and gambling, and thus gambling losses are not recoverable, even if cheated. This is a huge hole in state law obviously, but I don't see it changing, as the judge noted that this potential change has been pending for over 20 years.
https://twitter.com/Angry_Polak/stat...73906521006080
https://twitter.com/Angry_Polak/stat...78181410140161
Veronica posted the above, and then got trolled by a new fake account likely controlled by Postle himself.
It has been sickening watching the various vicious attacks and threats against Veronica since outing this, mostly by Postle under fake accounts and by friends of his. It appears that some Stones asskissers have also been attacking her at times, as well.
She deserves much better. Interestingly, it looks like the 88 plaintiffs hurt Veronica in her (small) libel claim against Postle, as the judge seems to have dismissed it because Postle's comments could have been aimed at any of the 88 plaintiffs.
I have to criticize Joey Ingram here. I certainly hope he understands that the dismissal of this lawsuit has zero to do with Postle’s guilt. Postle is not a person that deserves another chance he stole hundreds of thousands of dollars and everyone with any understanding of poker knows it. He has shown zero remorse and I believe never will. If Joey is angling for an interview I can tell him right now he is not going to get it. Postle is never going to come on with Joey after Joey streamed endless hours of him cheating and was the main catalyst in uniting the poker world against him.
My guess is Postle will make a statement and have maybe a softball interview or two from someone he either knows very well or that promises to basically let him blabber on about how great he was on UB. I guess Joey knows if he can get an interview with Postle it will do a huge number of views on his channel. It’s not going to happen. The courts have let him get away and the poker community must not. The only reason he should be given a platform for is if he decided to confess and we know that isn’t going to happen.
I understand everyone is entitled to a defense but the fact is he is not going to be prosecuted so there’s no need to hear some kind of victory lap tour disguised as him just defending himself. The best we can do is to shun him from the poker world & that includes poker media. This is not censorship he can make statements or post videos as he pleases.
Joey's tweet is trying to entice Postle to come on his show in backdoor fashion, attempting to make it appear that Joey isn't judging him until he hear's Postle's side.
I agree this isn't a good thing to tweet, because Joey has a big following, and this could confuse people. Also, as you said, it's unlikely Postle will take the bait. Other than his appearance with Matusow, Postle has kept away from making statements to the poker community, after he abandoned his Twitter account when his denials were failing to convince anyone.
what did u fuckwads think was going to happen. of course it was going to get thrown out.
only justice you're going to get is if somebody beats his ass senseless..it will still be hollow though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
That’s what it is Druff a percentage of the mob is going to think because they are talking and Joey is saying let’s hear the guy out it’s going to cause confusion. You and I know he’s just trying to reel him in to come on the show because it would be huge. I can’t blame Joey as fruitless an effort that is to still try.
The other part is Postle really seems to think that having the civil case dismissed may get him in some way back in the poker community. How delusional that he can’t he just be happy that it looks like he’s getting away with it at least from a legal perspective.
I’ll give the devil it’s due though by contacting Joey and probably saying something like “I want to come on the show I just need to wait for some advice etc”. Postle keeps delaying it but dangles it out there while Joey goes easy on him publicly in the meantime. Not a bad strategy.
This fuckwad didn’t expect this to go well but was hoping for it to not be dismissed with prejudice. I’m doing so effectively never giving the victims a day in court.Quote:
Originally Posted by mulva
Full decision PDF:
https://pokerfraudalert.com/postle-dismiss.pdf
Small victory.
A radio listener notified me that Stones appears to be about to settle the suit against them.
https://twitter.com/RouletteKing4/st...28855498825728
Article by Haley Hintze on that matter: "Settlement Talks Disclosed Between Stones Gambling Hall, Alleged Cheating Victims"
https://www.pokertube.com/article/se...eating-victims
OH MY!!!
https://twitter.com/berlinmadchen/st...57636009721857
:popcorn
Some information about the settlement was "leaked" to me today. I have not independently verified any of the below information, but the source seems reliable.
Here's what's happening with the case against Stones.
Background
- There are 88 plaintiffs. However, this is NOT a class action suit. It's 88 individual plaintiffs suing together, who can make their own individual decisions.
- The case against Postle was dismissed in early June. However, this is a separate case against Stones for allowing the cheating to happen. This case does NOT involve Postle, other than naming him as the main perpetrator of the scheme at Stones.
- In June, attorney Mac Verstandig said that he was still "going forward" with the Stones case
- In May, Stones had asserted in a filing that they don't owe a "general duty of care to gamblers", which in this case essentially means they feel they do not guarantee third parties won't cheat you in their casino. Stones was basically arguing that their responsibility ends at not cheating you themselves, but that they can't police all of their games for cheating. Stones also stated that these gamblers were suing them simply because they lost, and were unhappy about it. Mac responded by stating that Stones profited from the cheating (as it helped promote their poker room on a live stream, and Postle was used as a major attraction), thus this was more than just a situation where a player at a Stones table cheated someone else.
- The Stones case was likely a difficult one for the plaintiffs to win. They had no concrete evidence of the cheating -- only circumstantial. Additionally, the circumstantial evidence was complicated, and difficult for players not closely familiar with poker to understand. Furthermore, and perhaps most problematic, there was no hard evidence that Stones assisted Mike in the cheating. Even if Mike did cheat, it was possible that he did it on his own without any Stones employees helping him. (I don't believe this, but it would be hard to prove in court that Mike had help.)
The Present
- At some point, presumably because he knew that his clients' chances of winning was low, due to the difficulty of proving these accusations, Mac became open to a settlement with Stones.
- Stones was very aware of the fact that they were very likely to prevail in court. However, the publicity of such a case wouldn't be good for them, and the publicity would be especially horrible if they unexpectedly lost the case. Additionally, some of their own actions regarding covering up the cheating (such as the initial fake investigation) would come to light if this were to play out in court. Therefore, this was one of those cases where the party very likely to prevail was still better off settling.
- In early August, a settlement was reached in principle. However, terms were not disclosed, and all 88 plaintiffs needed to individually agree to accept or reject the terms. Therefore, the matter was extended to September 11, 2020. Here is the PDF of a short settlement document: https://media.cardplayer.com/assets/...13-20Story.pdf
- I have been told that the settlement offer is a fairy low, nominal sum of money. This is likely due to the fact that there are 88 plaintiffs. A number was given to me, but out of respect for Mac and the plaintiffs, I won't post it here.
- I have also been told that Stones stipulated that a minimum of 65 of 88 people must accept, or the deal is off. I was NOT told how many are planning to accept.
- I have also been told that the settlement includes a mutual non-disparagement agreement. The non-disparagement covers Justin Kuraitis and Stones, but NOT Postle. Additionally, Kuraitis and Stones will waive their right to sue over previous disparagement. All sides will acknowledge that no evidence of cheating was found by Kuraitis or Stones. I believe they will have to sign their name to a statement as such, put out by Mac.
My Amateur Legal Analysis
Stones is basically paying out a nominal sum of money in order to keep the plaintiffs quiet, going forward. This is actually smart on their part. If 88 people are hammering social media for years regarding being cheated at Stones, that could really be harmful. With most of the 88 going silent, this will help the discussion die more quickly.
However, the value of this silence is not all that high. For example, Stones isn't going to lose a million dollars from these people continuing to bash them, even over time. Thus, Stones had to figure out what they were willing to spend to put an end to this whole thing and to keep these people quiet, and they arrived at a relatively low number.
Why are they requiring 65 of 88 to say yes? For exactly the reason stated above. If roughly 3/4 of the plaintiffs don't agree to keep their mouths shut, the settlement isn't worth much to Stones. For example, say that 78 out of 88 refuse to the settlement. Even if 10 people go silent about Stones on social media, that won't help very much if 78 others are ripping them. Therefore, Stones wants the vast majority of the people agreeing to keep quiet, or even this settlement isn't worth the paper it's printed on to Stones.
Would I accept this if I were one of the plaintiffs? Only if I was really hurting for money. The loss of ability to speak out against Stones wouldn't be worth a nominal payment. I don't know most of these 88 people, but I assume that the vast majority are not in dire need of a nominal payout.
Why is Mac entertaining this small settlement at all? He knows that's the best they're going to do. Stones is aware they will win in court, and Mac probably knows it, too. While I can't say what's in his head, I'm guessing that he feels something is better than nothing. Since each plaintiff will decide individually, Mac probably feels that he will give them all the chance to take the settlement, rather than roll the dice in court and most likely get zero point zero.
Once again, I want to reiterate that I have not verified the information given in this post, and I am going by what I was told. If I have any of the details wrong, I apologize.
Mac realizes he will likely lose money trying the case. Hence the settlements. It's just a business decision.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Marle's case also dismissed.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EfbIHcxU...name=4096x4096
https://twitter.com/Angry_Polak/stat...569625601?s=20
Skimmed the thread, looks like that's an actual legit producer.
Imagine if Postle gets a documentary making him out to be the victim.
That happened with the Absolute Poker guys. They had a book written by Ben Mezrich of "21" fame, which was sympathetic to them, and acted as if their Black Friday bust was the only interesting part of their story.
https://twitter.com/Angry_Polak/stat...681750528?s=20
The two front attack from the Postle Pologists again starts with this disgraceful smearing and harassment of Veronica. As Druff said on PFA radio, it’s important for many of us to be there to support her while this slimebag and his people continue this disgusting behavior. There is support, but we know many of the casual followers of the story when it was hot have lost interest to a large extent. This is the first time Veronica hints at Postle going to jail for domestic violence. We can only suspect this is coming from the ex-wife, and hopefully we will have further clarification as to the actual details soon.
There seems to be a real effort to make Postle-Gate look like the Salem Witch Trials. I think they are hoping to rely on making Veronica look like she had a personal vendetta against Mike. On top of that, much of the population not being swayed or understanding the mathematics as proof. Pushing the fact that no device was actually ever recovered, his case was dismissed etc. We know it doesn’t mean shit, but if done right it could convince many of the uninitiated.
Seems to be a legit producer who probably overstated and exaggerated the status of a project he is considering to get Veronica to commit participation.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
This particular subject matter does not seem to me to be documentary-worthy by itself, nor does Stones deserve any kind of positive publicity out of this.
If it is part of a bigger story and documentary on poker scandals I can understand the interest, but I just don't see Postle-gate in and of itself having any kind of broad appeal outside of the poker community. It is better suited for Joey Ingram's videos and podcast.
Though I suppose if Netflix can have shows on Indian Matchmaking and Love is Blind, anything truly is possible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYKgBvJu-AY
Go to 28:20 mark
Veronica listened to last week's PFA Radio segment about her and Stones, btw.