Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tobey Maguire Sued Over Multi-Million Dollar Illegal Poker Game; DiCaprio, Affleck & Damon Involved.
radar online.com ^ | 6/22/2011 | Dylan Howard

Posted on 06/22/2011 8:17:39 AM PDT by Beave Meister

Spider-Man star Tobey Maguire is among more than a dozen high-profile Hollywood celebrities being sued in connection with a mega-millions illegal gambling ring that ran high-stakes underground poker games, Star magazine is reporting exclusively.

Maguire, 35, won more than $300,000 from a Beverly Hills hedge fund manager who embezzled investor funds and orchestrated a Ponzi scheme in a desperate bid to pay off his monster debt to the star and others, it's alleged.

An FBI investigation into Brad Ruderman, the CEO of Ruderman Capital Partners, uncovered how he lost $25 million of investor money in clandestine poker games held on a twice weekly basis in suites at the luxury Beverly Hills hotel, Four Seasons, and the Viper Room on Sunset Boulevard.

(Excerpt) Read more at radaronline.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Conspiracy; Society
KEYWORDS: benaffleck; gambling; hollywood; leodecaprio; liberals; mattdamon; poker; tobemaguire
Silly Celebrities... ONLY the Government can make money off of Gambling.
1 posted on 06/22/2011 8:17:46 AM PDT by Beave Meister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

To be fair, the issue isn’t the poker game. This is about some idiot using his businesses $ to pay gambling debts. So he’s in jail. Now he’s suing the guys who he lost to! Only in America. Is John Edwards his lawyer?


2 posted on 06/22/2011 8:21:33 AM PDT by thefactor (yes, as a matter of fact, i DID only read the excerpt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister
Maguire, 35, won more than $300,000 from a Beverly Hills hedge fund manager who embezzled investor funds and orchestrated a Ponzi scheme in a desperate bid to pay off his monster debt to the star and others, it's alleged.

Casino Royale

3 posted on 06/22/2011 8:25:32 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (Posting news feeds, making eyes bleed: he's hated on seven continents)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thefactor
This is about some idiot using his businesses $ to pay gambling debts

To be more fair, it is about some idiot embezzling his client's funds to spend on his own lifestyle, in this case, a game of poker, which he is apparently not very good at.

4 posted on 06/22/2011 8:27:29 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

Illegaly obtained cash (embezzled) used in an illegal poker game.

If the plaintiff can prove that the embezzled funds were used in this illegal poker game, he’ll win.


5 posted on 06/22/2011 8:28:26 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

Win a worthless judgement against a penniless, unemployable gambler.
Woo Hoo!


6 posted on 06/22/2011 8:33:36 AM PDT by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister
An FBI investigation into Brad Ruderman, the CEO of Ruderman Capital Partners,

Sore Ruderman.

7 posted on 06/22/2011 8:37:22 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

So if he proves that he used illegal funds in the game, he’ll get the funds back? I assume he’ll have to pay those funds back to the business.


8 posted on 06/22/2011 8:37:33 AM PDT by thefactor (yes, as a matter of fact, i DID only read the excerpt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE
If the plaintiff can prove that the embezzled funds were used in this illegal poker game, he’ll win.

But to do that wouldn't he have to confess in sworn testimony that he embezzled those funds, thus opening himself up to some serious prison time?

9 posted on 06/22/2011 8:38:19 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! Tea Party extremism is a badge of honor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister
If the guy had embezzled money and then bought a yacht, and if the yacht had subsequently been sunk because he was a bad sailor, would these lawyers be suing the yacht maker?

The guy stole, and he spent money badly. What does any of this have to do with poker players?

10 posted on 06/22/2011 8:39:23 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The USSR spent itself into bankruptcy and collapsed -- and aren't we on the same path now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

This stuff happens all the time, though usually on a lower level. Around here, the local bookie (small-time football betting) got busted because somebody’s wife got pissed at her husband for losing a couple thousand bucks, so she ratted out the bookie.


11 posted on 06/22/2011 8:43:36 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

Is playing poker illegal in LA?


12 posted on 06/22/2011 8:52:19 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

I’m sure all the Hollywood leftists reported this income to the IRS (so that it could be redistributed to the poor). (/sarc)


13 posted on 06/22/2011 9:03:21 AM PDT by Qbert ("The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry" - William F. Buckley, Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

If Wesley Snipes had to do time, then I hope these wuzzy Leftists get the same treatment.....would LOVE to see DiCaprio and Damon spend some time in the hooch....


14 posted on 06/22/2011 9:21:30 AM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE
If the plaintiff can prove that the embezzled funds were used in this illegal poker game, he’ll win.

Well, no. Even if we are to stipulate that the embezzled funds were used in a poker game, once they hit the table, they were gone. The alleged victims of embezzlement are seeking money from other players in the poker games. How do you determine that Maguire "won" $300,000 from the embezzler? How do you know Maguire did not subsequently "lose" that money to another person at the table?

For that matter, if the embezzled funds were used to purchase a Slurpee, could the victims sue 7-11?

This is unlike Madoff's ponzi scheme. In that case, victims' lawyers pursued funds from other participants who had profited from the underlying scheme (wittingly or no). In this case, Maguire et. al. were not participants in the underlying act, i.e. the embezzlement. It's a lost cause.

15 posted on 06/22/2011 9:39:15 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

“Maguire won as much as $1 million a month over a period of three years, one source told Star, which is on newsstands Wednesday”.

The IRS is going to be very interested in this. They are only interested in the income from gambling. Not whether it is legal or illegal. They especially like “high profile” people to prosecute. They are looking at their tax returns as I type this, I’m sure.


16 posted on 06/22/2011 10:26:31 AM PDT by upbeat5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

There are going to be some IRS audits in these peoples’ future.


17 posted on 06/22/2011 10:28:14 AM PDT by Keith in Iowa (FR Class of 1998 | TV News is an oxymoron. | MSNBC = Moonbats Spouting Nothing But Crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

They’re all FAGs...members of the Film Actors Guild.


18 posted on 06/22/2011 10:34:02 AM PDT by Lee'sGhost (Johnny Rico picked the wrong girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beave Meister

Tobey is obviously a much better poker player than an actor.


19 posted on 06/22/2011 10:58:20 AM PDT by Cyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thefactor; KarlInOhio

I read this as a suit by the bilked investors against the crook’s poker-playing buddies. I believe the law allows them an avenue to “claw back” their losses from the recipients of those losses, as the recipients were also engaged in an illegal activity.

Similar to what the goobermint is trying with Madhoff investors who got out early and lost only a little or even made a profit. In that case, however, the government will have a hard time proving that the receipients of the fraudulently obtained funds were themselves committing a crime, as if they knew Madhoff was running a scam or were part of the operation.


20 posted on 06/22/2011 10:59:48 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Maverick68

I would prefer to see justice. If all they did was gamble illegally, then they might face the courts for that. However, as a conservative, I would prefer that the government stay out of the private lives of all Americans, no matter how much I detest their politics.


21 posted on 06/22/2011 11:02:26 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I don’t know about yachts, but consider homebuilding.

If you pay a contractor to build you a house, and that contractor takes your money, builds you a house, but does not pay his suppliers (brick, tile, services, etc.), those supplies may place a lien on your property, even though YOU paid the contractor. The house is the expression of the fraud.


22 posted on 06/22/2011 11:05:38 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dead
LOL!

(I've been around here long enough to get it, heheh....)

Leni

23 posted on 06/22/2011 11:09:46 AM PDT by MinuteGal (Bring Back the MISERY INDEX! Obama's INDEX! Include Food & Energy in a TRUTHFUL INDEX!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE
Unless you get a “stipulation against liens” which states that as long as you pay the general contractor, the subs cannot place a lien against your property.
Believe me, it comes in handy when your general contractor declares bankruptcy and leaves his subs hanging.
24 posted on 06/22/2011 11:17:51 AM PDT by cuz_it_aint_their_money (I'm voting for Sarah Palin in 2012. Even if I have to write her name in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird; SJSAMPLE
"Even if we are to stipulate that the embezzled funds were used in a poker game, once they hit the table, they were gone"

Actually, not exactly. I won't bore you with the legal finer points, but in law there is something known as an "ill-gotten gain". This would be that. Gambling like this in California is illegal. In fact, it's a felony.

"How do you know Maguire did not subsequently "lose" that money to another person at the table?"

For the purposes of this discussion, whatever Maguire did with the funds once he received them, is irrelevant. He still benefited from the ill-gotten gains. "This is unlike Madoff's ponzi scheme."

To an extent. If the Feds could have proved that Madoff used those monies in another illegal enterprise, and the other party to the transaction knew it was an illegal enterprise (and in some instances, even if the other party didn't know), the money could be recovered under the same principle.

The plain legal truth is that Maguire is in a corner and he'll probably be on the hook for this cash. The reason the others aren't named in the suit is probably because they weren't stupid enough to accept a check like Maguire was.

If other checks do surface, you can bet you'll see additional defendants added to the complaint.

25 posted on 06/22/2011 6:42:05 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Qbert
"I’m sure all the Hollywood leftists reported this income to the IRS "

I have absolutely no doubt that the IRS is coming through the tax returns of all those named. From what I understand, Maguire actually accepted a check for payment of a marker he gave to this guy. I'm not sure if anyone else was that stupid. It was probably a (for the most part) cash business, which would make it a bit more problematic for the IRS - not impossible, but problematic.

26 posted on 06/22/2011 6:44:16 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Thanks for the clarification; I hadn’t read that the payment was by check. I agree with you; Maguire is in a pickle.


27 posted on 06/23/2011 5:03:03 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson