How far does Surveillance go to investigate a player?

**blackjackomaha** · 01-31-2012, 03:23 PM

Obviously, beyond the information contained in a player's card (if one is presented). Do they typically google suspected players as part of their normal procedure, or would this fall under the realm of curiosity? Do they have reports they need to fill out that remain internal (keep their own lists of players to watch) as opposed to entering a player into a national database? There haven't been any barrings/86'ing, and action is still welcome and no extra scrutiny is present while playing.

I can provide more details regarding my inquiries if it will help formulate a more-specific answer.

If any of this is too sensitive, feel free to PM me.

Appreciate the responses in advance!

**Ouchez** · 01-31-2012, 03:39 PM

BJO

They will do all those things except the National Data bases are only turned to when checking you out or putting you in, better hope that never happens.

All casinos are different, people are different. When you are barred, backed off, you will know it, and then it will be to late.

Ouchez

**blackjackomaha** · 01-31-2012, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by Ouchez

BJO

They will do all those things except the National Data bases are only turned to when checking you out or putting you in, better hope that never happens.

All casinos are different, people are different. When you are barred, backed off, you will know it, and then it will be to late.

Ouchez

Appreciate the response. Surveillance wasn't careful enough when trying to find information on an AP.... They have given away a good deal of personal information about themselves.

**RWM** · 01-31-2012, 05:59 PM

They have also been known to try to "friend" you through Facebook.

**Ouchez** · 01-31-2012, 06:08 PM

No AP should ever be on facebook.

Ouchez

**blackjackomaha** · 01-31-2012, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by RWM

They have also been known to try to "friend" you through Facebook.

I've heard this as well. Is there really any use for the information obtained from their search of him (surveillance employee's names, previous employers, etc)?

**Norm** · 01-31-2012, 06:12 PM

What's Facebook?

**blackjackomaha** · 01-31-2012, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by Ouchez

No AP should ever be on facebook.

Ouchez

Well, I disagree to a certain extent. You can be on there, while keeping everything private, even excluding yourself from public search results. You can also specifically choose what each of your friends see.

Yes - use caution. More caution for those full-time AP's. As a side note - Facebook was not the means of search used in the OP.

**Brock W** · 02-06-2012, 01:04 AM

How far they will go will be directly related to how big of a threat they perceive you to be and for what reason they believe you to be a threat. My worst.. I personally had a casino use police to run vehicle plates (which came back to a company) and then send police to the company (first posing as potential clients) then the police brought in casino surveillance photos asking staff if they would identify said person because he/she was wanted for questioning. However if you're still welcome to play and not using a card, I'm not sure why you fear you are being investigated.

**blackjackomaha** · 02-06-2012, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by Brock W

How far they will go will be directly related to how big of a threat they perceive you to be and for what reason they believe you to be a threat. My worst.. I personally had a casino use police to run vehicle plates (which came back to a company) and then send police to the company (first posing as potential clients) then the police brought in casino surveillance photos asking staff if they would identify said person because he/she was wanted for questioning. However if you're still welcome to play and not using a card, I'm not sure why you fear you are being investigated.

The individual referred to in the OP is still welcome to play, but has used a player's card every time. The fear of being investigated stemmed from confirmation that the surveillance supervisor was looking at the player's online professional reference.

**bigplayer** · 02-12-2012, 03:05 PM

If casino surveillance gets a big enough hard-on for you to begin searching various databases on you (running credit checks, Biometrica, OSN, etc) you are probably already toast. If you have a well established alias you know you can put things like Facebook and other social networks to work FOR you instead of against you. Unlike a players club, Facebook does not require a photo ID to start a new account. In 30 minutes you can, as Andy Dufrene says in Shawshank Redemption, "conjure out of thin air" a complete persona. Open up a public profile on Google + and Facebook, full of completely fictitious personal history (i.e., you're the CEO of XYZ Property Management, etc)

**Norm** · 02-12-2012, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by bigplayer

If casino surveillance gets a big enough hard-on for you to begin searching various databases on you (running credit checks, Biometrica, OSN, etc) you are probably already toast. If you have a well established alias you know you can put things like Facebook and other social networks to work FOR you instead of against you. Unlike a players club, Facebook does not require a photo ID to start a new account. In 30 minutes you can, as Andy Dufrene says in Shawshank Redemption, "conjure out of thin air" a complete persona. Open up a public profile on Google + and Facebook, full of completely fictitious personal history (i.e., you're the CEO of XYZ Property Management, etc)

This is one of the most valuable posts I have seen in ages. And probably the only ref to Andy Dufresne in a BJ site.

Facebook and Google+ are probably the most dangerous threats to personal privacy existant today. Why not use their desire to subjugate your privacy to obscure same? They won’t care. It just adds to their stats.

KJ · 02-12-2012, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by Norm

This is one of the most valuable posts I have seen in ages. And probably the only ref to Andy Dufresne in a BJ site.

Facebook and Google+ are probably the most dangerous threats to personal privacy existant today. Why not use their desire to subjugate your privacy to obscure same? They won’t care. It just adds to their stats.

Not so sure this is a good idea. A couple of cases in the past few weeks involved charges against people for creating fake facebook accounts.

A 51 year old Pa man created facebook accounts for 2 young males to lure young underage females for sex. Among the 68 charges brought were charges for "criminal use of a communication facility".

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...139103504.html

second case involved a man creating fake facebook accounts to harrass his girlfriend. He was charged with violating california's new impersonation law which went into effect january 1. I have no idea what that law entails.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...ds-no-contest/

I am not sure creating fake accounts is the greatest idea, but I certainly would advise closing any accounts that you might already have and not make it easier for casinos/surveillance or anyone else to look you up. I learned that the hard way as part of my 'issues' last summer.

I guess that is one of those things you don't think about until it bites you in the ass. Also one of the 'normal' (and that's debatable...lol) things you have to give up if you really pursue AP seriously, whether professionally or not. Kind of sad, really.