The Mike Postle cheating scandal carries on, even though Postle himself has been allowed to bow out of proceedings.
The most recent twist on this shadowy tale comes from new filings from Maurice VerStandig, the lawyer prosecuting the case for the 88 plaintiffs. The filing requests a further extension in the already twice-delayed case and includes the following language:
“Counsel for the parties have reached an agreement as to the principal terms of a settlement of this case but require additional time to finalize the settlement. Specifically, inasmuch as there are 88 plaintiffs in this case, some additional time is needed to communicate with each about final settlement terms […].”
So, it looks like Stones and Kuraitis might be folding.
How much they might cough up to the injured parties isn't clear yet. This is, however, a marked turnaround from attempts by Stones Gambling Hall and Justin Kuraitis’s to have the case thrown out on its ear.
Previously on Postlegate
The legal aspects of this case have been evolving for several months, but the scandal as a whole dates back to last year when Veronica Brill suggested a player on the "Stones Live!" streaming show might be cheating.
Brill brought her concerns to the Stones’ management and Kuraitis, who acted as the Stones tournament director and the showrunner for Stones Live!.
She was dismissed out of hand.
So, she took it to Joey Ingram. And Ingram more or less tried the case in the court of Youtube, Twitter, and public opinion. The jury of Postle’s online peers voted broadly to convict.
The actual law courts, however, never got to the point of deciding if Postle was a cheat or not. They dismissed him from the case in part because of California's relatively loose restrictions on cheating at gambling games.
Postle was denied a chance to prove his innocence and didn't seem terribly upset at not having to face that challenge head-on.
What’s next?
The case continued against the other two defendants: the Stones Gambling Hall and Justin Kuraitis.
Stones defense lawyers had previously argued that Stones “did not owe [the players] a duty of care enforceable through a negligence claim to protect them from potential cheaters.”
This settlement deal suggests that maybe they'll end up owing their players something though.
We'll be covering the tail end of this case as more on this as details come to light.
