Online Casinos in general: Public prosecutor's office wants compensation for lost value. (Page 11)

Druff wrote on March 18, 2025 at 12:50 pm:


To 1) That all are punished may still come, right are not all the same, is also right so, then the one who steals a loaf of bread because you are starving would receive the same punishment as someone who steals 60 boxes of champagne....

2) No, it's not actually a retrial, what makes you say that? The public prosecutor's office recognizes that it was only negligent, low culpability, no public interest, etc. But that has nothing to do with the unlawful monetary advantage that you supposedly have.

This post has been translated automatically

This post has been translated automatically

Druff wrote on 18.03.2025 at 13:40: 1) Yes that some are accused and charged and others not, is unfair, but can have various reasons, e.g.b no notification of the bank or concealment of the payment via crypto etc, since you have not received a letter, which you certainly think is good, you will certainly not use the house bank for these payments, so your objection is not really "good"... others are lucky that the OC also adapt and/or partly conceal the payment, partly they will certainly go under. As you say, you shouldn't "wish" too hard that they all belong in court.

2) A disguised retrial? No, because the former defendant is not to be prosecuted, but only the means of the crime, the illegally acquired money, is to be confiscated.

And yes, this procedure only exists in Bavaria so far, by the way, I also think it's a mess, don't get me wrong, but they are simply two different processes, I'll save my personal opinion as to why Bavaria is a pioneer in this, it doesn't belong here, but soon there will certainly be corresponding changes in this respect, and it will set a precedent nationwide, everyone can look forward to that.

This post has been translated automatically

frapi07 wrote on March 18, 2025 at 1:56 pm:

1) Yes I do, used my house bank for many years. Of course I don't wish that, but de facto we are not equal before the law. Regardless of whether I benefit from it or not. I'm not the only one. There are still too many people who make deposits and withdrawals at banks like this. Crypto is simply too complicated for many and I understand the fear. I mean, if you use the wrong network, your money is gone. It's just too risky for high-rollers who Deposit several thousand euros.

2) He is still punished for a crime that has been stopped. I've written and read it often enough, but most players don't live from casinos. Demanding a 5 or even 6-digit sum is a knockout blow. They should rather get the compensation from the casinos. There is certainly much more to be gained there than from the average consumer.

This post has been translated automatically

Druff wrote on 18.03.2025 at 14:46:
1) We all did that for a while, and used your house bank for payments, I even had my account blocked for some time because of withdrawals from legal casinos 😂


Now objectively you complain that not everyone who plays illegally is accused and charged, i.e. that not everyone is equal before the law, but say that YOU, for example, have not yet received a wipe, but conceal the payment, successfully, that is not an accusation against you now.

In order to prove that not everyone is equal, you would have to emigrate to Bavaria (if you don't live there) and could pay out by bank from an unregulated bank, of course a sum that is not too small, tell the bank that they have to report it because it comes from there and there, make sure that it has been reported and also ends up with the public prosecutor's office, and only if you don't get a wipe is your statement and your accusation correct... wouldn't that be a challenge? 😂 Of course it wasn't meant seriously, it was just to make a point.

2) It is de facto not a punishment, it is only the seizure of something that you wrongfully possess, a punishment would be the seizure of the money + a fine on top (100% of the confiscated amount/ of the damage caused | purely fictitious value).

Yes, so far they are only demanding these 5 or 6-digit sums, so far they have not yet been confiscated, so legally everything is (still) open.

It should not be forgotten that public prosecutors are bound by instructions as to how hard they generally take action against this or that, determined by the respective state's Ministry of Justice, which is why it is Munich (Bavaria) and not Berlin.

It's not about value replacement, but about skimming off money from non-"legal" sources... a distinction must be made, and yes of course they should also get it from the casinos, but in Austria, for example, even illegal OCs pay taxes voluntarily, which could also be the case here in Germany.

This post has been translated automatically

Druff wrote on 18.03.2025 at 12:24 pm:
Regardless of whether you pay out €100 on five days or €500 on one day, the monetary advantage is still €500 and the point is simply that you cannot/should not/must not have a legal monetary advantage through "illegal" activities. Even if you Deposit €10,000,000 and only pay out €100, the monetary benefit is €100, because the most you could claim as an "expense" and deduct is the bet of the spin that leads to the win.

This post has been translated automatically

Gerdi wrote on 18.03.2025 at 17:03:

You misunderstood me. My example was that I Deposit 100 every morning, turn it over during the day and get out plus/minus zero and pay out my 100 in the evening. Then the public prosecutor's office sees: 5x100 euros paid out, i.e. 500 euros pecuniary advantage = confiscation of 500 euros.
However, if I deposit 100 on Mondays and play in the same way so that I am left with plus/minus zero every evening, except that I do not deposit the 100 every evening, but only once on Friday, the public prosecutor's office sees a pecuniary advantage of 100 euros and only confiscates 100 euros. Same behavior, but completely different assessment. Hence my question as to whether this is legal (or fair)?

So my question is whether it could be a basis for argumentation to address how the pecuniary advantage is actually measured. As the casinos do not, of course, provide game histories and the public prosecutor's office often only sees the casino group and not the individual site, or perhaps only makes the (unproven) assumption that the money comes from the illegal game on the basis of a specific payment Provider, it can only use the sums that were paid out. I could also argue (in individual cases): I transferred 500 euros there, then found out that it was illegal to gamble there and had the money paid back to me without any gambling activity. Do I then have a burden of proof and is confiscation possible?

In any case, this means that more money is confiscated from those who have often moved money back and forth, while those who have simply left the money in the casino account have to pay less, even if they may have broken the law much more "intensively". So what is the amount of the confiscation based on? On the illegal gambling activity or on the frequency of the payout?

This post has been translated automatically

frapi07 wrote on 18.03.2025 at 16:24:
1) Funnily enough, I'm from Bavaria Not only suspicious depositors are reported. You often read that a certain period of time is always taken. There were times when I easily paid out 20k/year (but was either slightly in the red or +-0). It goes faster than you think, especially if you place high bets. I even paid out almost 5k at once in February 2023 by bank transfer. So far nothing has come in this regard. Just so much for now ^^

2) Guarantee or not - it would leave a financial loss. But they want to collect these sums, that's the annoying thing. It is not yet clear whether they will succeed, but it would be a scandal. In addition, those affected suffer psychological damage. The fear of having to pay so much money... all the insecurities that go with it. Some have families, debts... but they don't care, the main thing is that they try. Some OCs have really given the impression of being legal. Platincasino/Pinocasino have deducted this 5.3% tax. That suggested that it was legal. Do they care about that? Nope. Will they be punished? Nope.

This post has been translated automatically

Gerdi wrote on 18.03.2025 at 17:03:

You misunderstood me. My example was that I Deposit 100 every morning, turn it over during the day and get out plus/minus zero and pay out my 100 in the evening. Then the public prosecutor's office sees: 5x100 euros paid out, i.e. 500 euros pecuniary advantage = confiscation of 500 euros.
However, if I deposit 100 on Mondays and play in the same way so that I am left with plus/minus zero every evening, except that I do not deposit the 100 every evening, but only once on Friday, the public prosecutor's office sees a pecuniary advantage of 100 euros and only confiscates 100 euros. Same behavior, but completely different assessment. Hence my question as to whether this is legal (or fair)?

So my question is whether it could be a basis for argumentation to address how the pecuniary advantage is actually measured. As the casinos do not, of course, provide game histories and the public prosecutor's office often only sees the casino group and not the individual site, or perhaps only makes the (unproven) assumption that the money comes from the illegal game on the basis of a specific payment Provider, it can only use the sums that were paid out. I could also argue (in individual cases): I transferred 500 euros there, then found out that it was illegal to gamble there and had the money paid back to me without any gambling activity. Do I then have a burden of proof and is confiscation possible?

In any case, this means that more money is confiscated from those who have often moved money back and forth, while those who have simply left the money in the casino account have to pay less, even if they may have broken the law much more "intensively". So what is the amount of the confiscation based on? On the illegal gambling activity or on the frequency of the payout?

This post has been translated automatically

Druff wrote on March 18, 2025 at 9:36 pm:
1) Yes you read payments in the period from x to y ... who has insight into your payments ? Who reports payments ? 🙄 Public prosecutors can only prosecute what is reported by banks etc, so a law enforcement agency can't help that unfortunately not everyone is charged.


But you're right, especially in Bavaria, the law doesn't apply to everyone, the state is really after the money, they don't care about people there 🤷


2) The fact that it causes financial damage is the point of the measure, it is intended to cause damage so that rules are adhered to in the future, that's how it is in beautiful Bavaria with the food blogger and the hubsi 🤷

Oh come on and stop trying to make Platin look legal, 99.9999% of users knew and know exactly what is legal and what is not 🙄
That's right, they deducted these taxes, and what if they paid them regularly to the state? Why should the state skim money from them? After all, they paid 🤷

This post has been translated automatically