Question about enforcement of a trespass

[UK-21]

Out of interest, is trespass a criminal or civil matter in the States. If it's a civil matter, why is it that anyone who's formally read the Trespass Act (or whatever it's called) is subject to arrest if they offend against it?

I'm pretty sure in the UK Trespass is a civil matter, and so if police officers were summoned all they would do is escort someone from the premises/venue/land at the request of the owner/manager/agent. Refusing to leave could be construed as "behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace", and that is a criminal offence and would get you an appearance before a magistrate.

[zengrifter]

User is banned, content deleted.

[moo321]

Trespass can be a crime and a tort. Someone walking across my property without my permission is a tort. Showing up at your ex wife's house after you've been warned multiple times that you aren't welcome is a crime.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

C.T.R.'s [triggered by transacting an aggregate of $10,001 or more within a 24 hr. "casino day"]

and S.T.R.'s [suspicious transaction reports, e.g. structuring] do NOT go directly to the I.R.S.

It goes directly to the Treasury Department.

The I R S only looks into C T R's if and when they are considering a possible Tax Delinquent.

I have had maybe 50 C.T.R.'s over the years, and they have never created problems for me.

[Brock W]

If a player were to receive a notice of certified mail from an establishment they played rated at, what then? This player does not know 100% what was sent, but assumptions can be made. If said player never signs for delivery and never receives the intended letter, but has reason to believe the letter was a barring from the establishment, what actions could the establishment take against the player if they were to return and get caught?

I'm traveling in the same vessel. My understanding is that a registered letter sent to last known address is sufficient in certain jurisdictions. But until it gets in front of a court one does not know. I think it would certainly be grounds for arrest, but arrest does not = conviction. If it happens to me I will PM you.

[Brock W]

Out of interest, is trespass a criminal or civil matter in the States. If it's a civil matter, why is it that anyone who's formally read the Trespass Act (or whatever it's called) is subject to arrest if they offend against it?

I'm pretty sure in the UK Trespass is a civil matter, and so if police officers were summoned all they would do is escort someone from the premises/venue/land at the request of the owner/manager/agent. Refusing to leave could be construed as "behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace", and that is a criminal offence and would get you an appearance before a magistrate.

My understanding is the same as yours. In the UK it is (with exceptions for military/royal/government lands) a civil matter (though perhaps you could be sued for the losses you inflicted on a casino???) In the US and Canada it is criminal trespass and in almost all cases the act governing is state/province. Now your intent and actions in all cases will be taken into account as to severity of the charge. It is possible to be charged with felony trespass but for the gamblers purposes and intents it would be a misdemeanor.
I should add that it is also possible to be held liable for trespass civilly in the US and Canada. This has been done when the trespassers are wealthy activists (think hollywood).

[UK-21]

My understanding is the same as yours. In the UK it is (with exceptions for military/royal/government lands) a civil matter (though perhaps you could be sued for the losses you inflicted on a casino???) In the US and Canada it is criminal trespass and in almost all cases the act governing is state/province. Now your intent and actions in all cases will be taken into account as to severity of the charge. It is possible to be charged with felony trespass but for the gamblers purposes and intents it would be a misdemeanor.
I should add that it is also possible to be held liable for trespass civilly in the US and Canada. This has been done when the trespassers are wealthy activists (think hollywood).

Thanks. In the UK we do have a criminal offence of "aggrevated trespass" - I think the distinction between this as a criminal offence and simply trespass as a civil matter is what you do, or intend to do, once you've entered the property/venue/land against the owner's wishes. Possibly something that gets hung on the bottom of the charge sheet? Of course, charging people with criminal offences based on what police officers think they're going to do, and not what they've done, is fraught with problems around proof.

[WRX]

Once the payout crosses a certain odds-threshold, taxes are withheld.

Nyne has already given accurate information on this point. Note, however, that it's a matter of the payout being REPORTED to the IRS. This does not ordinarily result in the WITHHOLDING of any taxes, although there are exceptions for certain nonresidents. Your actual tax liability is determined by your aggregate wins and losses during the tax year. Just because a tax report is made does not necessarily mean that you will have any tax liability. Just because no one makes a report of any payout to you doesn't mean that you DON'T have a tax liability.

There is a further, important wrinkle on all of this. Certain states, notably Mississippi, assess a state SURTAX on any payout that requires a report under federal law. THIS IS NOT AN INCOME TAX. YOU CAN'T GET THE MONEY BACK BY FILING A STATE INCOME TAX RETURN. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE ANY NET WIN FOR THE YEAR. It's simply a flat tax on the amount of the payout. When you're playing in one of these states, it becomes a very big deal that the casino get it right, and not make reports on payouts for which one is not in fact required by law. With respect to Mr. Munchkin, it is both possible and essential to put up a fight if the casino gets it wrong. I have taken part in cross-country post-midnight research sessions and conferences on this subject, and have successfully got casino upper management to see the light. That's what having partners is for.

[WRX]

C.T.R.'s [triggered by transacting an aggregate of $10,001 or more within a 24 hr. "casino day"] and S.T.R.'s [suspicious transaction reports, e.g. structuring] do NOT go directly to the I.R.S. It goes directly to the Treasury Department.

This states two misconceptions. First, the CTR requirement is triggered by a cash transaction of precisely $10,000 or more. Not "more than $10,000" or "$10,001 or more." Second, transactions totaling at least $10,000 within any 24 hour period are ipso facto treated as a single transaction requiring a report. They don't have to be within a single "casino day." Also, deliberately breaking a transaction, that would otherwise be a $10,000 cash transaction, into pieces, and spreading the pieces over a period longer than 24 hours, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirement, is an example of "structuring," which is a criminal offense. A person may have other, legitimate reasons for conducting multiple cash transactions with a casino, or with any other business, over a period exceeding 24 hours, individually all less than $10,000 but totaling more than that amount. Conducting such multiple transactions for legitimate purposes is not an offense. Defining cases of legitimate purposes, as opposed to those of deliberately evading reporting requirements, quickly gets very hazy.

[WRX]

Bob Nersesian has expressed the OPINION that in Nevada, one commits a criminal offense of trespass only if one enters private property and then refuses to leave upon demand--"defiant trespass," if you will. He has argued, with a degree of success in the lower courts, that simply returning to a casino after having previously been thrown out, or after having received a written notice to stay out, is not a crime, no matter what citations of the Nevada Revised Statutes, assertions that a return will be a trespass, or threats of arrest accompanied that notice. There is currently no citable appellate court decision on point. The statutes of other states tend to be similar to those of Nevada, so the same argument may be valid in other states. On the other hand, there may be states with decisions on point finding mere peaceable return to private property to be an offense. Read what Mr. Nersesian has written in his book on this subject. Listen to his comments in radio interviews. Do your own research in the state in which you are going to play. Reach your own conclusions.

There may be reasons to make exceptions. But as a general rule, I think that as players we should seek to avoid hostile confrontations with casino management. Therefore, we have strong reasons to refrain from returning to places we know that we are not wanted, and where we know that it's likely we'll be accosted and told that we're trespassing, even when we're confident that the law is on our side. As others have said, by being confrontational you put yourself at risk of arrest, false imprisonment, injury, and criminal prosecution. Possibly you'll be vindicated in the end, but it could cost you a lot in money and time, and you might not receive compensation for your damages. Furthermore, what takes place in the courts doesn't always adhere to an objective interpretation of the law. As in the casino, much is determined by random events.

There is a theoretical possibility of civil liability to a property owner for trespass. But you have to ask yourself what damages a casino owner incurs if you simply peaceably set foot in the casino without breaking and entering, without assaulting any staff, and without causing a disturbance.