Jump to content

Poker Player Kills Parents


Recommended Posts

If he wouldn't have used his credit card across the street from where a bat and sneakers were purchased I don't think the prosecutor could have proceeded. The entire case is very circumstantial but those are some fairly narrow circumstances. That the jurors are citing "lack of emotion" as a reason to convict is disturbing. I mean, if he's a poker pro that's what he does, hides emotional responses. I remember an old WSOP where a guy won the main and didn't even really crack a smile. Even Gabe commented on it. Control of emotional responses is a big part of some peoples toolkit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's quite surprising he actually got convicted based on the evidence. He prob did it, but buying something across the street from where the supposed weapons were purchased and having your phone off? And not showing enough remorse in the courtroom? Hardly seems like enough to send a guy away for murder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet he hired someone to do it.he probably planned it all, and maybe even drove the guy to the parents house.. but I dont think he would beat them with a bat then slice their necks.It also goes with the fact that he was shaking his head "no" to the jury... almost as if he is upset because he didnt physically do the killing, yet they are convicting him for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
l_etranger_albert_camus.jpgMeursault was convicted for murder (an Algerian dude on a beach) largely based on his lack of emotion concerning his mother's death, rather than actual evidence.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the video of the car, and the baseball bat/sneakers evidence is enough to convict, whether he did it or if he hired someone to do it. The cell phone and lack of emotion stuff is bs.I've heard this guy's name in tournament updates or cash game reports. I wonder if any reg's at the commerce or somewhere in LA know him. There is probably a 500 page thread on 2+2?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This really is somewhat of a joke he got convicted. A lot of the evidence is strong - The country club showing a car fitting his description going in/out. The basbeall bat being purchased minutes after he used a card to pay for gas across the street... etc.Seriously though, you need some actual evidence that he was there and he did it. That's the way the judicial system (should) work. It's pathetic that the jurors' can backup the conviction with; "Oh, he had no emotion...". So what? Maybe he was still in shock from the news of their deaths. Maybe he is just used to showing no emotion as a pro poker player. The jurors can't truly assume how he'd react if he did/didn't kill them. If he was outraged in court I'm sure the jurors would have said some BS about how his 'outrage' in court showed them he had anger issues and was potentially dangerous. Yes, the evidence is a long list of coincidences (which probably aren't really coincidences), but you need at least a little bit of direct evidence. Not 'Oh, his cell phone was off.'I really hope his lawyer is able to get a re-trial by the longest stretch of the word 'technicality' and the guy goes free.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This really is somewhat of a joke he got convicted. A lot of the evidence is strong - The country club showing a car fitting his description going in/out. The basbeall bat being purchased minutes after he used a card to pay for gas across the street... etc.Seriously though, you need some actual evidence that he was there and he did it. That's the way the judicial system (should) work. It's pathetic that the jurors' can backup the conviction with; "Oh, he had no emotion...". So what? Maybe he was still in shock from the news of their deaths. Maybe he is just used to showing no emotion as a pro poker player. The jurors can't truly assume how he'd react if he did/didn't kill them. If he was outraged in court I'm sure the jurors would have said some BS about how his 'outrage' in court showed them he had anger issues and was potentially dangerous. Yes, the evidence is a long list of coincidences (which probably aren't really coincidences), but you need at least a little bit of direct evidence. Not 'Oh, his cell phone was off.'I really hope his lawyer is able to get a re-trial by the longest stretch of the word 'technicality' and the guy goes free.
I definitely agree that the jury being swayed from no emotion is just ridiculous. However from what I've read that little detail about the cell phone is actually quite important. Apparently his cell phone was never off and its pretty substantial that its off during the time frame of the whole ordeal. The baseball bat, video of the car, nike shoes, cell phone, those are all important evidence and I wouldn't be so quick to say I hope this guy goes free. You have to have a REAL emotional disconnect with someone to beat them to a pulp with a baseball bat and then slice their wrists afterwards. That's not done by someone who just wants them dead, that's done by pure hatred.
Link to post
Share on other sites

when they investigate, they look for patterns in everything used like cell phones, house phone, they look at all credit card and itm purchases. they look at patterns in purchases ,time lines and other things. Forensics is an interesting area. Especially how we study human emotions and range of emotions. Interesting to see that they based it on emotion. sometimes pro players show leaks and tells? Or is his behavior out of character from everyday living? It's strange for one living in the LA area to be in NV then just a few hours away from his parents place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why so many innocent people take the deal. Very few juries really take "beyond a reasonable doubt" seriously. They instead seem to usually apply the "does the prosecutor's accusations pass the smell test".To be fair, this probably results in 100 guilty guys getting convicted when they should have got off for every innocent guy who gets screwed. but that still sucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I hear Barry Zuckerkorn might be available.
I prefer Bob Loblaw.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems pretty ridculous. You would think this should go through to appeals and maybe something can be done. Either way the inheritance is gone and who the **** would do that to their parents for money. How do some people live with themselves?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...