Online Casinos in general: Charge of unauthorized gambling ( 285 StGB) (Page 49)

XxGameBoyxX wrote on 03.11.2024 at 21:51: I don't think you can compare Bavaria with any of the other German federal states either.

I'll send the hearing form back to the CID tomorrow with the cross that I won't make a statement. 🙈

This post has been translated automatically

Druff wrote on 04.11.2024 at 18:09:
Yes, the Bavarians are just Bavarians, we all know that.


Just for me, for classification, why does everyone here advise you to check the box that you don't make a statement?

I mean honestly, you are not obliged to make a statement to them and you are also not obliged to respond to this hearing form, I must confess I have already received a few letters, and NEVER answered these forms, why should I?

My thought is and has always been: I see nothing, I don't hear anything and I don't say anything, why should I say that I say nothing and thus signal my "willingness" to cooperate with them even minimally and to strive for any solutions & possibly to speed up the proceedings ? Then a letter is sent to the public prosecutor's office with the reply form, and of course they then recognize the willingness to compromise and a letter is sent with the discontinuation in exchange for a fine and, more recently, also the letter with the seizure of the instrument of the crime/confiscation of the resulting funds (money).

I think of it like this: you ignore the letter, if they really had something tangible in their hands, a second letter should be sent if necessary (with a certificate of delivery - registered letter).

Has anyone received a letter stating that the proceedings have been discontinued WITHOUT responding to anything, or a letter stating that the proceedings have been discontinued WITHOUT responding to the reply form?

If you receive an AZ and proceedings are opened, only then would I contact a lawyer and turn it around so that there are two scenarios (to be selected depending on what the lawyer thinks is better):

Scenario one:

You registered regularly where the market was NOT yet regulated, and you closed your betting account there on the day listed, or it was closed and the funds were transferred, you did not know that there was still money there or that it was transferred.

Scenario two:

You don't even know what it's all about, you never deposited there let alone gambled etc. Someone could have registered there with my data, and you had no knowledge of it yourself, no knowledge of the matter at all anyway because you would only play in legal booths, since the public prosecutor's office certainly does not receive any support from the operators, they would have to prove that you had actively deposited and played there.

You can only do that if:

a) the casino cooperates with them and provides the necessary data.

b) the bank has the data and provides it (which is usually not the case, as it is ALWAYS exclusively about PAYMENTS), and the necessary deposits are never listed.

c) The "perpetrator" admits and confesses to everything and agrees to the cessation.

Everyone can imagine for themselves how likely these scenarios are; as far as I know, no one has taken the chance yet, but this is how I would react.

These are just my personal thoughts on the matter and how I would react and argue.

PS: My criminal record is clean and it's been 15 years since they last wiped it, but the legal situation is unlikely to have changed.


Addendum: it has become a lot longer than I thought but I hope it is reasonably organized, readable and you can understand my thoughts on it 🙂

1. You have never registered at an illegal casino, never played there, and the money you received actually came from money laundering.


2. You don't want to be prosecuted for money laundering and say that the money came from illegal gambling.

This post has been translated automatically

gamble1 wrote on 04.11.2024 at 18:36:


Honestly, nobody buys this "I didn't know anything and never played there", especially because there must usually have been transactions in advance for a complaint and the core is often money laundering. That leaves you with two options:

1. You have never registered at an illegal casino, never played there, and the money you received actually came from money laundering.


2. You don't want to be prosecuted for money laundering and say that the money came from illegal gambling.

The problem is not even what you tell them, but what you can prove.

This post has been translated automatically

This post has been translated automatically

gamble1 wrote on 04.11.2024 at 18:36:


Honestly, nobody buys this "I didn't know anything and never played there", especially because there must usually have been transactions in advance for a complaint and the core is often money laundering. That leaves you with two options:

1. You have never registered at an illegal casino, never played there, and the money you received actually came from money laundering.


2. You don't want to be prosecuted for money laundering and say that the money came from illegal gambling.

The problem is not even what you tell them, but what you can prove.

This post has been translated automatically