Las Vegas GF Chat Room

If the very UNKewl one (who will remain UNKewl 'til the end of time, as Ozzy is fond of saying) really did file a police report, the police could get a copy of that video upon request. But even after getting it the police would not share it with the alleged victim, they would use it to investigate any alleged crime, and purposefully not allow the victim to see the video because it would taint his possible testimony if the defense could claim that he was led to claiming whatever he claimed after viewing the tape and not solely by his recollection of the actual events.

It's funny because UNKewlJ often rants, crying his eyes out about how "that's NOT the way things are done" - whining with cheese about the way comps work or don't work in Vegas (when he's never been comp'ed much of anything beyond a hot dog) or whining without cheese about how high rollers are treated or not treated in Vegas when he obviously has no idea - but in this instance anyone in the legal profession could easily say "that's not the way things are done" as far as casinos (or any business really) freely handing over video or other evidence of what happened or didn't happen to an alleged victim's attorney prior to a civil lawsuit being filed.

Just go to a bank or corporate retail store sometime after something or other happened to you in view of their cameras and see how far you'll get in obtaining a copy of any video just by asking, with or without an attorney behind you, absent some kind of pending legal action. Even a mom and pop store these days would know not to share any video with you unless compelled. And casinos are the tightest when it comes to disclosing anything they don't have to disclose. And given that UNKewlJ supposedly filed a police report the night of the incident, which made it a pending investigation criminal matter, even less chance that the casino would just turn over the video to anyone other than the police.

Even notwithstanding this glaring gap in logic with the video being shared "instantly" upon request, if you add up the sum of all the other holes in the story - no real explanation for why he was supposedly roughed up in the first place, no mention of a cast on his arm (a fracture needs to be set in a cast the same as a separated bone - a fracture IS a broken bone in fact), no mention of continuing to play in casinos with a visible cast on his arm for weeks after this incident, no explanation for why he was so keen to file a police report and call an ambulance in front of the casino and yet is afraid to push the matter in civil litigation, no mention of what happened to the chips he was supposedly carrying and claims he was able to walk away from the table with, etc. etc. - the most obvious explanation is that something or other happened to more than one person, and UNKewlJ created a composite story that assembled unrelated facts and incidents.

You also can't reconcile the nervous constantly whining and complaining indignant over what's supposedly right or wrong, what supposedly is or isn't, in matters that are none of his business, always sympathy seeking persona UNKewlJ has made clear is the person that he is, with someone who would allow himself to get beat up in a backroom and then just walk away without even pressing the issue civilly, even after filing a police report.

Keep in mind too that UNKewlJ knows that his continued presence, assuming he even plays blackjack at all, which is doubtful, on these forums is anathema to his being able to fly under the radar in casinos, and yet he keeps coming back for more abuse here and at other forums. So how can you reconcile that stubbornness and refusal to do what is good for him, with someone who would just let a great insult and injury like this go unanswered?

Seriously, I wouldn't put it past an inveterate liar like UNKewlJ to have been involved in a clumsy road bike accident and hurt his arm and then gone around claiming that he fractured his arm in a casino. If any of this story is even true in the first place, and didn't all happen to other people UNKewlJ has heard of, and not to UNKewlJ himself.

 

Over at VCT, UNKewlJ scrambles to cover the illogic of his lie about getting the video of the alleged backroom roughing up prior to filing any lawsuit with a "I think there was a reference to needing a judge to sign off or order it or something but am not sure how that goes." - which is even more absurd, come on V, wherever you practiced law the rules can't be that different from any other state - in civil matters judges don't sign off orders and subpoenas aren't issued absent some underlying court case - judge's orders and subpoenas are issued pursuant to a civil action.

A judge's civil authority to order someone to do something or other doesn't come sua sponte it derives from a court action.

As I mentioned above, it's only in criminal matters that businesses cooperate with law enforcement during the investigatory phase, and even then, if a given business didn't want to cough up whatever was at issue, the police would have to go to a judge to get a search warrant, which would have to be supported by probable cause that the item being sought was supportive of a crime had been committed. For example, Apple, and Google, they have a longstanding policy that they will not cooperate with law enforcement absent a search warrant or court order. But that's criminal - in criminal judges do order the release of evidence to law enforcement for investigatory purposes if supported by probable cause that a crime has been committed.

In civil, you don't get judge's orders or subpoenas just to investigate something, they have to be attached to a pending civil action.

At some point you just have to throw your hands up and say that once again, UNKewlJ has come up with a story that doesn't make sense, and is actually proof of that he doesn't even know what he is talking about and just making up things as he goes along, desperate to seem like a person who actually plays blackjack - the card counting sharp shooter who even gets roughed up backroom, Robert DeNiro Casino style.

accountinquestion nails down how questionable UNKewlJ is: I actually thought you had credibility. I now regret repeating that story to others where I come across as "I have it on good authority" with what is likely a at best 50/50 story.

Mission146 on the UNKewl one: I'm just going to assume that everything you say vis-a-vis your personal life, both previously and ongoing, is probably a lie.

monet on the UNKewl one: Nothing you post is 100% true.
From faking your own death to using multiple sockpuppets.
Like Coach said... you are constantly lying to the forums and you have admitted to it time and time again.

accountinquestion on the UNKewl one: Literally, your story is something anyone who cares enough could figure out via books and reading the internet. While I find your stuff interesting to read, you've never said anything interesting except for some story you told me in private. I believed it but now I wonder if I wasn't just fed bullshit. At the time I thought you were a legitimate person and have taken things from that convo as true. I now believe this was a mistake.

 

While what you say is true viz. releasing videos in criminal cases and in filed civil suits, that appears not to be the case here: call it "an exception to the rules."

The wild card would have to be attorney Robert Nersesian.



The question simply is this: Does Bob have the clout, the contacts, the reputation to call up loss prevention / legal at Sweat Point, tell him KJ is his client and request the video?

While they'd likely blow off most attorneys Bob isn't "most attorneys" in Sin City: they know he can beat them, as he has many times.

Fear and respect, that would be key.

 

Don't the contradictions in the testimony below trump your wild card?

He has asserted that he is not a client of his attorney. Is there a truthful way to explain that?

 

V: This is an interesting conversation. And, let's forget again about the fact that Nersesian has disavowed knowing who UNKewlJ is other than as some nut who keeps dropping his name. (SeedValue apparently verified this by contacting Nersesian, and someone else I know also contacted Nersesian to verify this in the past, and SeedValue might make contact again to see what Nersesian or his secretary have to say about knowing, or rather, not knowing UNKewlJ, right now.)

But, putting that aside, your theory is that the casinos volunteered up the video in deference to, or in respect or fear of Nersesian. Okay. A private business may do whatever it likes. But first of all, UNKewlJ claimed that Nersesian got some kind of court order to compel South Point to cough up the video.

Well, whether a private business decides to kowtow to a bigwig attorney or not, judges don't bend the law no matter who the attorney is, at least not with a paper trail and not legally. So, no judge is going to sign a civil subpoena to get that video absent an underlying civil case, I mean, under what guise would such an order even be signed, or be valid? The subpoena has to refer to an active court case to be valid, and where there is an actual valid civil case the subpoena doesn't even usually need a judge's signature, in most courts it's just issued pursuant to an active court case, and unless the recipient fights it is presumptively valid and must be obeyed. But an order directing discovery or even a request for discovery isn't valid without an underlying active civil case.

Now let's just assume that UNKewlJ lied about that civil court order / subpoena, which, I mean once you assume he lied about that, why go further in the analysis, but let's just say....

All right then, why would the casino volunteer up the video just because Nersesian asked? What weight would Nersesian have on them to compel them to give it up voluntarily? Would he have threatened to sue if they didn't cough up the video? Would he have promised to drop the matter if the video doesn't support what his "client" claims? In good conscience and proper representation of his client he couldn't make any promises to sue or not sue in his quest for the video to try to bait the casino into complying.

And then when you add UNKewlJ's claim that he filed a police report, which would mean that the police would have contacted the casino by then and asked for the video themselves, the casino would piss off the police if they gave up that video without a subpoena / civil court case behind it, not to mention that the casino would want to insulate their possible criminal liability by not letting the victim look at the evidence and come up with a version of events that fits the video versus his recollection of the matter, unless they had to give up the video pursuant to an active civil case.

If you can come up with some scenario that makes sense for WHY the casino would cough up the video in a civil context that makes sense and fits with the UNKewl claims of a "court order" and police report filed, I am all ears.

 

I can only IMAGINE the amount of pain kew's experiencing right now as he reads thru all this. And YES.... kew does read EVERYTHING here because he knows his credibility is shot and he needs to find his best escape routes.

 

KJ said he wasn't sure how the attorney got it, but he said he got it immediately after his attorney requested it, and that KJ viewed it.

So I see no issues viz. a subpoena or its alleged issuance, nor involvement of a judge.

Rather, assuming it went the way KJ claims, his attorney rquested and received via email the video from his counterpart at Sweat Point as a "professional courtesy."

Presumably the attorney is well known there and rather than have him file a lawsuit and get the video via discovery they may have simply bit the bullet in a "damned if we do, damned if we don't" type of situation in the hope of avoiding negative publicity.

You and I both realize, I hope, that if in fact it happened the way KJ claims he has a very strong tort claim.

 

What's this all about?...was it an imagined reference?

 

Could be he was confused.

Also, KJ seems to feel uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the legal process.

Note he qualified it with "or something."

 

V, are you ready to agree that kew's house of cards has fallen apart?

Certainly, he's made a gigantic fool of himself. Forget the part that says you can't say anything demeaning to him because that would be viewed as agreeing with Singer and MDawg.

This is so easy it's not funny.

 

He imagined that the attorney mentioned a judge?

 

Perhaps he was confuse.

 

Normal I would say. His posts are always somewhat confused, erratic and contradictory.

Mr V you claim you don’t know much/play bj yet you believe kewlj winning claims versus others that claim a win on various games here.

I assume that post is directed to me , is that correct?

Cheers

 

Correct, Punkcity.

I've read KJ's posts for quite awhile and he seems to know what he's talking about.

I am impressed how he's taken boatloads of shit from detractors and held his ground.

As for Rob Singer: I think he's a smart, clever man and probably a decent enough sort of fellow in real life, but he adopts a curious personae when posting on gambling forums.

Most forum members seem to believe he enjoys bullshitting, in fact he has admitted to posting stuff simply to get a reaction, or something along those lines.

His claims of selling an expensive RV and winning $1.5M on one VP pull have seemingly been debunked by close scrutiny and analysis.

Rob is the kind of guy who'd make a good used car salesman.

KJ is emotional and a bit histrionic but seems credible when it comes to card counting issues.

I have questions about his latest claim but am attempting to keep an open mind, feeling I almost owe the guy the benefit of the doubt after all the shit he's had to endure over the years due to being gay and outspoken.

 

Besides the fact that he doesn't know what he's talking about (already backpedaled the claim that a judge's order was obtained by Nersesian to get the video, saying that he thought that no one ever told him that, probably pretty soon will backpedal the claim that Nersesian told him that he would have to go to the media to get any action, and claim that he thought that too and that no one ever said that to him too), there are all of the glaring holes and contradictions in UNKewlJ's story. What's clear is that he never spoke to any attorney and nothing has been done whatsoever. If you don't believe me, call Nersesian and ask him or his secretary about the nutjob that has been claiming to have him on speed dial for years now - and he'll tell you that he doesn't know this guy (just refer to UNKewlJ by his first name, he knows that first name only to the extent of recognizing him as the nut who has been falsely claiming all over the internet to know Nersesian).

The whole story is just a composite of what happened to some others, a story that UnKewlJ appropriated as his own to get attention and sympathy. I mean the guy makes such a big deal of any contradictions in Rob.Singer's stories, and then he comes up with this whopper of a contradictory ever changing story himself and expects people to buy it.

 

I cannot imagine a scenario where any attorney or his staff would comment one way or another as to whether someone is or isn't their attorney.

Is that how you do it in California?

Like "Hello, this is the FBI calling to confirm that you've talked to J(insert name here)."

Me, I'd have told them to go pound sand and hung up and that's the feds; I'd be less inclined to talk discuss anything with an anonymous stranger.

Secrecy cuts both ways it seems to me.

Might be interesting to see if the bar has any ethical opinions on the matter.

 

Perhaps you're just giving UNKewlJ the benefit of the doubt, versus that your recollections and abilities as an attorney are fading, but that you didn't know cold from the getgo that there were major discrepancies in UNKewlJ's story is puzzling. I knew for a fact that "this is not the way discovery works" and that no attorney would tell his client that "going to the media" is the way to get this case handled. Why, it should be clear to a child that UNKewlJ made all of this up, never consulted with any attorney.

As far as whether an attorney would disclaim association with some nutcase who is running around the internet claiming that he is his client or knows him well or to disavow that he is giving him legal advice, there's no ethical bar to that. I am not the one who contacted the attorney but the two people I know who did, said that the response was one of anger and exasperation as in "Will you and this nutcase [meaning UNKewlJ] just leave me alone!" Whether the exact word nutcase was used or not, I don't know, but if someone as looney as UNKewlJ were running round claiming falsely that I was his attorney on speed dial and that I was advising him on matters and anyone called me, I would be under no requirement to say anything other than the truth - that I don't know him, I don't advise him and to just leave me alone.

It's not just that Nersesian disavowed knowing UNKewlJ, and disavowed advising him on any matters, it's the tone and exasperation that he presented that makes it obvious that he has heard of this nutcase, knows who he is, and wants nothing to do with him.


So, based on the latest iteration of UNKewlJ's story, you're still saying that given that UNKewlJ claims that he filed a police report, that this casino would STILL just freely offer up the video to a civil attorney simply because he asked for it??

 

Could he be making it all up?

Of course he could, just as other posters (ahem) seem to have done.

KJ is histrionic and emotional as you well know; he knows little of the legal system and may well have misremembered whatever was discussed, e.g. the attorney may well have talked about publicity in prior cases which the attorney handled and KJ could well think that meant his case would also require publicity.

As for the video, as I discussed elsewhere the attorney in question is the Bull of the Woods, the number one Swinging Dick in Sin City when it comes to suing casinos, so yeah, the loss prevention / legal dept. at Sweat Point may well have given it up without a court order out of fear, respoect, and / or porfessional courtesy.

I agree there are definite questions and inconsistencies in his story, but I've no skin in the game and for now I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

 

What would be SP's "upside" for providing this evidence under these circumstances? (no filed action/court order)

 

Preventing a lawsuit being filed with the attendant negative publicity would be the main thing.

Minor benefit: perhaps saving on attorney fees.

They know he's going to get it eventually so why not show it to him early on?

Who knows, perhaps unbeknownst to KJ there was something exculpatory in the video that would benefit the casino and induce KJ's attorney not to pursue the matter.

Gotta think there's some "professional courtesy" involved, given they probably all know each other, perhaps even socially.