In sessions where Mike Postle is in God Mode his hat tends to look a bit puffy and you can see a weird bulge along the brim. He also makes these very weird and unnatural motions where he presses the hat against his head, presumably to hear better. It's almost certainly bone conduction. Can be installed in any regular old baseball cap, allows audio to go into your inner ear via vibration without being detectable to anyone else. As effective as an earpiece would be, but hidden inside the hat rather than easy to spot in your ear.
Mike Postle, Stones Gambling Hall, Justin Kuraitis Sued by Players
Suburban Sacramento’s Stones Gambling Hall is one of the defendants in a $10 million fraud and conspiracy lawsuit.
Twenty-five poker players join initial filing
Mike Postle, Justin Kuraitis, and King’s Casino LLC, the parent company of California’s Stones Gambling Hall, have been sued today by 25 players who believe they were defrauded by Postle’s alleged cheating play during dozens of episodes of “Stones Live” poker cash games. Kuraitis was the director of the streamed program during the period the alleged cheating occurred.
The lawsuit asks for $10 million in damages resulting from a lengthy list of civil torts, including conspiracy, fraud, and — in the instance of one of the plaintiffs, Veronica Brill — libel. Brill first brought the cheating story to public attention though her claims, according to a Twitter post made on Stones’ social accounts, were “completely fabricated”.
The RICO claim also allows for possible trebled punitive damages, pushing the maximum award to $30 million. The lawsuit seeks a trial by jury and features lawyer and poker player Maurice “Mac” Verstandig as lead attorney. Verstandig will appear pro hac vice in this case, with California counsel Julian K. Bach officially filing the action. Attorney/poker pro Kelly Minkin and Pennsylvania lawyer William Pillsbury will also work on the plaintiff’s behalf.
“John Doe” defendants added
The lawsuit also names John Does 1-10 and Jane Does 1-10 as defendants. This inclusion allows other Stones employees and members of the “Stones Live” production team to be added to the lawsuit at a later date.
The case’s initial plaintiffs are Brill, Kasey Lyn Mills, Marc Goone, Kavroop Shergill, Jason Scott, Azaan Nagra, Eli James, Phuong Phan, Jeffrey Sluzinski, Harlan Karnofski, Nathan Pelkey, Matt Holtzclaw, Jon Turovitz, Robert Young, Blake Alexander Kraft, Jaman Yonn Burton, Michael Rojas, Hawnlay Swen, Thomas Morris III, Paul Lopez, Rolando Cao, Benjamin Jackson, Hung Sam, Corey Caspers, and Adam Duong.
Conspiracy, fraud top claims list
The 34-page filing details nine separate claims of action filed against Stones Gambling Hall, Postle, and Kuraitis. either collectively or as singular allegations. Those claims and the specified defendants are as follows:
The libel count on behalf of Brill over the “fabricated claims” seeks only a nominal $1,000 in damages plus allowable punitive awards.
All told, any damages won by the plaintiffs will be distributed on a pro rata basis among the plaintiffs. Each plaintiff would be awarded a share based on the number of minutes he or he spent at the table during the 68 streamed sessions where cheating allegedly occurred. Lead attorney Verstandig himself participated in one of the streamed games but is barred from being one of the plaintiffs under state and federal law. Nonetheless, he brings first-hand knowledge of the streamed games to the proceedings.
Lawsuit points to probable cheating methods
While thousands of poker observers’ internet comments have proposed innumerable schemes for how Postle’s alleged cheating occurred, the lawsuit hones in on the likeliest methods. According to the complaint, the cheating activity “involved Mr. Postle’s cellular telephone being grasped by his left hand while concealed under the poker table and/or Mr. Postle’s baseball cap being imbedded with a communications device creating an artificial bulge in its lining (that is notably absent in photographs of the same baseball cap on Mr. Postle when he is not playing on Stones Live Poker).”
The cellular phone, according to consensus, was used to receive either the RFID (card-identifying) data itself, a hijacked live stream, or text messages from collaborator(s) inside the “Stones Live” production team. Likewise, the alleged concealed listening device, possibly a bone-conducting headset, could have received direct voice communications from a collaborator monitoring each player’s hole cards in real time. (A less likely scenario involves a text-to-voice conversion app running through Postle’s phone.)
The lawsuit also accuses Stones of providing inadequate security for the entire streaming enterprise, thus creating the opportunity for Postle and any collaborators to cheat.
Suit will advance analytical conclusions
Dozens of individual hands showing suspicious betting patterns by Postle have already been preserved and analyzed. These hands will play an important role as the case moves forward. However, the fraud claims will also lean heavily on deeper statistical analyses showing Postle’s win rates to be far beyond the skills of even the elite professional players.
Verstandig wrote: “[The] Plaintiffs make their allegation of Mr. Postle systematically, habitually and regularly cheating at Stones Live Poker games based not on a hunch or suspicion correlative to any one specific cheating device but, rather, based on a statistical analysis of his results and analytical review of the manner in which he played.” Numerous elite poker pros have offered third-party analyses of the situation, and some of these players could be called as expert witnesses.
The lawsuit also notes Postle’s customary practice of leaving the table immediately after the livestream ended. This further infers that Postle’s profits were due to being fed illicit information, since the purportedly juicy games usually continued on once the streaming ended.
- $10 million lawsuit involves racketeering and conspiracy claim against Postle and any Stones Gambling Hall-employed collaborators
- Claims detail probable cheating activity that stretched 14 months, from July 2018 to September 2019
- Statistical analysis of Postle's suspicious streamed performances to play a role in civil case
Suburban Sacramento’s Stones Gambling Hall is one of the defendants in a $10 million fraud and conspiracy lawsuit.
Twenty-five poker players join initial filing
Mike Postle, Justin Kuraitis, and King’s Casino LLC, the parent company of California’s Stones Gambling Hall, have been sued today by 25 players who believe they were defrauded by Postle’s alleged cheating play during dozens of episodes of “Stones Live” poker cash games. Kuraitis was the director of the streamed program during the period the alleged cheating occurred.
The lawsuit asks for $10 million in damages resulting from a lengthy list of civil torts, including conspiracy, fraud, and — in the instance of one of the plaintiffs, Veronica Brill — libel. Brill first brought the cheating story to public attention though her claims, according to a Twitter post made on Stones’ social accounts, were “completely fabricated”.
The RICO claim also allows for possible trebled punitive damages, pushing the maximum award to $30 million. The lawsuit seeks a trial by jury and features lawyer and poker player Maurice “Mac” Verstandig as lead attorney. Verstandig will appear pro hac vice in this case, with California counsel Julian K. Bach officially filing the action. Attorney/poker pro Kelly Minkin and Pennsylvania lawyer William Pillsbury will also work on the plaintiff’s behalf.
“John Doe” defendants added
The lawsuit also names John Does 1-10 and Jane Does 1-10 as defendants. This inclusion allows other Stones employees and members of the “Stones Live” production team to be added to the lawsuit at a later date.
The case’s initial plaintiffs are Brill, Kasey Lyn Mills, Marc Goone, Kavroop Shergill, Jason Scott, Azaan Nagra, Eli James, Phuong Phan, Jeffrey Sluzinski, Harlan Karnofski, Nathan Pelkey, Matt Holtzclaw, Jon Turovitz, Robert Young, Blake Alexander Kraft, Jaman Yonn Burton, Michael Rojas, Hawnlay Swen, Thomas Morris III, Paul Lopez, Rolando Cao, Benjamin Jackson, Hung Sam, Corey Caspers, and Adam Duong.
The sessions spanned the period July 2018 through September 2019.
Each of these plaintiffs played in one or more of the 68 livestreamed sessions featuring Postle in which cheating allegedly occurred. Those sessions spanned the period July 2018 through September 2019. Postle played in a few streamed sessions between late May and late July 2019 that are not part of the cheating claims; extensive research and allegations published elsewhere suggest Kuraitis was not present at Stones during those excluded sessions. However, the claim does not specify Kuraitis as one Postle’s cheating partners.Conspiracy, fraud top claims list
The 34-page filing details nine separate claims of action filed against Stones Gambling Hall, Postle, and Kuraitis. either collectively or as singular allegations. Those claims and the specified defendants are as follows:
- RICO Violation (Conspiracy) – against Mike Postle, plus John and Jane Doe defendants
- Fraud – Postle, John and Jane Doe defendants
- Negligent Misrepresentation – Postle, Stones Gambling Hall, Justin Kuraitis, John and Jane Doe defendants
- Negligence Per Se – Postle, John and Jane Doe defendants
- Unjust Enrichment – Postle
- Negligence – Stones Gambling Hall, Kuraitis
- Constructive Fraud – Stones Gambling Hall
- Fraud – Stones Gambling Hall, Kuraitis
- Libel – Stones Gambling Hall
The libel count on behalf of Brill over the “fabricated claims” seeks only a nominal $1,000 in damages plus allowable punitive awards.
All told, any damages won by the plaintiffs will be distributed on a pro rata basis among the plaintiffs. Each plaintiff would be awarded a share based on the number of minutes he or he spent at the table during the 68 streamed sessions where cheating allegedly occurred. Lead attorney Verstandig himself participated in one of the streamed games but is barred from being one of the plaintiffs under state and federal law. Nonetheless, he brings first-hand knowledge of the streamed games to the proceedings.
Lawsuit points to probable cheating methods
While thousands of poker observers’ internet comments have proposed innumerable schemes for how Postle’s alleged cheating occurred, the lawsuit hones in on the likeliest methods. According to the complaint, the cheating activity “involved Mr. Postle’s cellular telephone being grasped by his left hand while concealed under the poker table and/or Mr. Postle’s baseball cap being imbedded with a communications device creating an artificial bulge in its lining (that is notably absent in photographs of the same baseball cap on Mr. Postle when he is not playing on Stones Live Poker).”
The cellular phone, according to consensus, was used to receive either the RFID (card-identifying) data itself, a hijacked live stream, or text messages from collaborator(s) inside the “Stones Live” production team. Likewise, the alleged concealed listening device, possibly a bone-conducting headset, could have received direct voice communications from a collaborator monitoring each player’s hole cards in real time. (A less likely scenario involves a text-to-voice conversion app running through Postle’s phone.)
The lawsuit also accuses Stones of providing inadequate security for the entire streaming enterprise, thus creating the opportunity for Postle and any collaborators to cheat.
Suit will advance analytical conclusions
Dozens of individual hands showing suspicious betting patterns by Postle have already been preserved and analyzed. These hands will play an important role as the case moves forward. However, the fraud claims will also lean heavily on deeper statistical analyses showing Postle’s win rates to be far beyond the skills of even the elite professional players.
Verstandig wrote: “[The] Plaintiffs make their allegation of Mr. Postle systematically, habitually and regularly cheating at Stones Live Poker games based not on a hunch or suspicion correlative to any one specific cheating device but, rather, based on a statistical analysis of his results and analytical review of the manner in which he played.” Numerous elite poker pros have offered third-party analyses of the situation, and some of these players could be called as expert witnesses.
“Such a winning percentage… is not known to have been achieved by any other poker player… over such a significant period of time.”
For example, the action notes that Postle posted a profit (usually of several thousand dollars), in over 94% of the cash games streamed from July 18, 2018 onward. “Such a winning percentage,” the claim notes, “under these confined circumstances in a streamed environment, is not known to have been achieved by any other poker player — professional or amateur — over such a significant period of time.”The lawsuit also notes Postle’s customary practice of leaving the table immediately after the livestream ended. This further infers that Postle’s profits were due to being fed illicit information, since the purportedly juicy games usually continued on once the streaming ended.
What Mike Postle's own brother said about him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=4dHt8yhhXuk
Commentator: I wanna go back to the wheel of destiny.
Mike Postle's brother: The wheel ... so....there is always different things. So usually you spin this wheel for 50 cents or 1 dollar, so my brother had the wheel perfectly lined up and my brother put some quarters behind the wheel....so when you would spin it you would always get close to a $5 bill. So most of time when you rolled, like 90% of time it would stop just before the $5 dollar. And he would say "oo you were so close". And it would be the worst prize ever, so my brother would win half the winnings from what it gave out so my brother would make $30-40 bucks . So if there is an angle -- -my brother would do it. He will do it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=4dHt8yhhXuk
Commentator: I wanna go back to the wheel of destiny.
Mike Postle's brother: The wheel ... so....there is always different things. So usually you spin this wheel for 50 cents or 1 dollar, so my brother had the wheel perfectly lined up and my brother put some quarters behind the wheel....so when you would spin it you would always get close to a $5 bill. So most of time when you rolled, like 90% of time it would stop just before the $5 dollar. And he would say "oo you were so close". And it would be the worst prize ever, so my brother would win half the winnings from what it gave out so my brother would make $30-40 bucks . So if there is an angle -- -my brother would do it. He will do it.
