New Life Games Tech Forums

Casino bans sisters-in-law for life
By J. Harry Jones, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
Sunday, July 18, 2010 at 12:01 a.m.

(http://i31.tinypic.com/15zp13.jpg)
John Gastaldo / Union-Tribune

Laura (left) and Jill Waters, sisters-in-law, both in their late 50s, have been barred for life from the Pauma Casino. They are considered undesirables and were accused of money laundering.

All sisters-in-law Jill and Laura Waters of San Marcos wanted to do that night in late May was earn enough credits on their Casino Pauma rewards cards to get two free sets of china.

By the end of the evening, they were banished from the casino for life, accused of being money launderers and denied the $2,000 jackpot they had won.

Here’s what happened, according to the women:

It was getting late, and the women had earned enough points playing slots to receive the dishes. They were thinking about leaving until an announcement came over the loudspeakers at midnight about $1 hot dogs. Laura Waters went to get some franks for the two of them. Her card was in a Super 8 Race slot machine, and Jill Waters took her sister-in-law’s place in front of it.

The women said they visit various Indian casinos, share their cards and split their winnings.

On this night, one yellow car, two cars, then eight cars popped up on the slot machine’s screen. It seemed to take forever for the last wheel to stop spinning: another car. Jackpot. $2,000.

“I’d never seen anyone get all nine symbols,” Jill Waters said.

Laura Waters, 62, had returned by then with the hot dogs. Because it was her card in the machine, she took over the spot that Jill had occupied temporarily.

Eventually, a casino worker came over. Laura Waters gave the employee her driver’s license because jackpots surpassing $1,199 must be declared for tax reasons. Fifteen minutes went by before a security agent approached the women and asked who pushed the winning jackpot button, the sisters-in-law remembered.

Jill Waters, 57, said it was she and explained why they later switched seats.

The security agent began shaking his head and repeating the words “malicious intent” and later “seat switching,” the women recalled.

One thing led to another, and finally the women were led to a hallway in the back part of the casino. They were followed by several security guards.

“They remained behind us like a barrier,” Jill Waters said. “I guess they thought two old ladies were going to bolt and make a run for it.”

Then, the women said, they were taken into a locked room.

“The next thing I see was a bench with built-in handcuffs,” Jill Waters said. “This was not a commissioner’s office. It was an interrogation room.”

A guard was posted at the door while another man began filling out paperwork, asking Jill Waters questions such as whether she had any scars or tattoos and what her maiden name was.

“We were uncomfortable but still trying to laugh about it. We were waiting for someone to come in with common sense and explain what was going on,” Jill Waters said. “But no one ever did.”

Their photographs were taken and copies of their driver’s licenses were made, the sisters-in-law recounted.

Hours had gone by when the women had some papers put in front of them. It was explained that by signing the papers, they were acknowledging that they were banned from the casino and could be arrested if they ever tried to re-enter.

“I said, ‘Whatever, whatever. I just want to get out of here.’ So we signed,” Jill Waters said. The women said they were then escorted out of the casino, right past a mound of boxes containing the china sets they sought.

Later on, when they scrutinized what they had signed, the women realized they were considered “undesirables.”

“We have never been called anything so ugly and malicious in our entire lives, we didn’t do anything wrong,” Jill Waters later wrote in a letter to the California Gaming Commission.

Calls to Casino Pauma’s head of marketing last week went unanswered.

A Friday visit to the casino led to a short interview with security supervisor Jacob, who declined to give his last name. He said the rules are straightforward: Whoever pushes the button is the jackpot winner. If someone else tries to claim the winnings, it’s considered tax evasion and money laundering under Title 31 of the United States Code.

“It’s a violation of the law,” Jacob said, but enforcement is up to the supervisor in charge at the time. “It’s kind of a gray area.”

Gaming experts said that sometimes, especially when large jackpots are hit, people will try to get someone else to claim it. Perhaps they hope to avoid being taxed on the winnings. Perhaps they have had legal problems and a term of their probation is not to gamble. Perhaps they don’t want their spouse or former spouse to know they have come into some cash.

Jacob said Jill and Laura Waters can appeal to the tribal gaming commission, which they haven’t done.

Jill Waters said she called the number on the forms the next morning to start the appeal process but was told there was no way she was going to get her money.

So she wrote the letter to the California Gaming Commission and sent copies to the state attorney general; to Al Majel, a Pauma gaming commissioner; and to a representative of Stand Up California, a statewide organization that focuses on gaming issues.

Something is missing in their story.

Someone posed in the VPFree digest that according to the casino, the person that the woman who actually pushed the button that hit the winner (not her card in the machine but they didn't care about that) refused to sign a W2G stating she already had IRS problems. She wanted her sister in law to get the payout since it was her card in the machine.

Nobody wins here...

Security have the same power as police as long as you're on the property they're contracted to protect

The motto of a security officer is to "detect, take actions and report". An officer generally do not make any arrests, but has the authority to make a citizens arrest. In some parts of United States, security officers are invested with arresting powers like those of a county sheriff. In contrast to the above mentioned motto, a Private Security Officer's actual primary duty is prevention of crime.

All uniformed private security guards who are employees of alarm response companies or private patrol businesses, such as those contracted to patrol exclusive communities, must undergo training in the process and procedures of making an arrest. According to title 16, division seven, article six of the California code, security guards must pass a test at the end of the training program, and must score 100 percent on the test. An employer may offer power of arrest training, provided that the employer has a an instructor who understands and can deliver the training set out in the Standard Training Manual of the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (BSIS).

You technically have no rights on any private property in the US anyway, this is why you can be criminally trespassed from anywhere anytime for anything.. come back and you'll be making bond. Stat you may be correct in some areas but if this were true everywhere why would anyone bother paying the state for a private security license.. you could just do it without one.

From google:

And from the CA book:

But like was mentioned.. these are indians and they'll pretty much do whatever they want.

I just have one question, just how jammed up with the IRS can you be to not want to have taxes taken out of a jackpot?