www.Usenet.com
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
JCT: Since the Project Robin Hood raid on Casino Turmel case was
brought up in the Big Five Marijuana appeals at the Ontario
Court of Appeal recently arguing against judges imposing new
criminal sanctions, rather than Parliament, I've decided to to
publish the transcripts of the trial on the biggest gaming house
raid in Canadian, probably world, history. 28 tables/155 dealers.
See: http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/gambler.htm
#93-18193
ONTARIO COURT (PROVINCIAL DIVISION)
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
against
JOHN TURMEL
**********
T R I A L
HELD BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUDGE P. WRIGHT
on Thursday, February 24th, 1994, at Ottawa, Ontario.
CHARGE: S. 201(1)
**********
MR. SAGLE: Your Honour, I know it's awkward for both of us to
be speaking, and I hope I don't cause any problems, but maybe if
I could clarify what the defence is going to be in this? One is
that I want to establish to this court that gambling is not
illegal, gaming is not illegal, and running a business of gaming
is not illegal. They're not criminal activities. And neither
is winning money from any of those activities. Our position is
that that's what we have here. We have gambling, we have
gaming, we have the business of gaming, but we do not have - and
we have winnings from that - but we do not have a common gaming
house, and I believe I'll establish, through case law, that what
I'm saying is accurate and that, in order to be convicted, we
have to have a common gaming house which is defined in the act.
But more than that, like all of these gambling sections that
we're going to be dealing with here, they're interpreted by the
courts since the first act of 1892, and that this section has
always been interpreted in a restrictive way, as is natural when
you're dealing with criminal legislation, of course. And what
the Crown is asking the Court to do is to interpret in a wide,
more of a common-place vernacular type of way, and I hope to
show to the Court that that's not the way the courts have done
it historically, that the cases will indicate, as Mr. Turmel has
said, that the "kept for gains" section has been interpreted to
refer to businesses which sold items to players which increased
their separate business activity by reason of having people
there. And I think the main thing to keep in mind from a
Defence point of view is that what we are talking about here is
winning money at playing games, which is legal. And I'll leave
it at that. Thank you.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MR. MARIN: I'll try not to argue the law before Your Honour's
heard the evidence, but I'll simply be content with saying that
the Crown obviously disagrees with that interpretation, Your
Honour, and that's the issue at this trial. As for prohibiting
me from calling evidence to argue my legal interpretation, quite
simply, if Your Honour hasn't heard the evidence, it's difficult
to allow me to argue it later on, so that's why the Crown will
calling evidence, so the Crown's prepared to call its first
witness, Your Honour.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. MARIN: I'd ask Your Honour, in exception to the exclusion
of witnesses, to allow the investigators to attend. Constable
Young and Sergeant Cleary, who, in any event, have met all these
witnesses and know what they are going to say, and I believe the
evidence I will call is not disputed, in any event.
THE COURT: Any issue with respect to the investigators?
MR. SAGLE: Nothing in particular. I'm not sure why they are
required to be in the presence of - I think there was an
indication that they don't know if he's going to be called later
or not. That determination has not been made; am I correct on
that? In a general way, however, the defence has no objection
to all the witnesses being in. We don't have any particular
dispute with anything any of them are going to say. We know what
they're going to say. And so the answer's no, I have no
objection.
THE COURT: Exception, then, for the officers.
MR. MARIN: Yes, thank you.
MR. TURMEL: Your Honour, could the order excluding the other
witnesses be varied in that they've all been looking forward to
hearing their fate, and frankly, no one is going to contradict
anyone else. I don't believe it's the kind of situation where
there's going to be any contradiction of the facts.
THE COURT: If both parties are content that the order be
lifted as to witnesses, then I will do so. Mr. Marin?
MR. SAGLE: There are no Defence witnesses here, Your Honour,
if that helps.
THE COURT: There are none?
MR. SAGLE: At the present time, there are no Defence
witnesses.
MR. TURMEL: They're all Crown witnesses.
THE COURT: They're your witnesses, Mr. Marin?
MR. MARIN: Your Honour, I'm always in favour of the more
prudent course, and if there are any arguments to be raised
later as to what somebody said and the order they're called, I
mean, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution, and there's no
harm done by excluding them, and so I'd prefer to have them
excluded.
THE COURT: That's fine.
MR. MARIN: Thank you. Sergeant Fotia.
JOSEPH FOTIA: SWORN
--------------------
EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MR. MARIN:
Q. All right, Sergeant Fotia, I understand you're a sergeant
for the OPP; is that correct?
A. That's correct, sir; I've been in the OPP for approximately
25 years.
Q. And I understand, sir, that you were involved in the
investigation of Mr. Turmel's casino; is that correct?
A. That's correct, yes.
Q. And when were you first involved in the investigation?
A. The first time I was involved in the investigation was in
1991, where I was asked by the Nepean Police to go to his residence
at Baseline Road and see what was going on, so I went there in 1991
and...
Q. Now, sorry to interrupt you, sir, but just to get where
you're from - you're from the OPP - but what section are you from
in the OPP?
A. From 1988 to 1993, I was with the anti-gambling section of
the Rackets Branch, Ontario Provincial Police, in Toronto
Headquarters. And my duties were to investigate illegal gaming
activities in the province and to assist other municipalities in
relation to gaming investigations.
Q. And in this particular case, originally you were assisting
the Nepean Police Services; is that correct?
A. That's correct, yes.
Q. Now, did you ever attend a location on Baxter Road in the
City of Ottawa?
A. Yes, several times.
Q. Okay, and can you tell us the first time you attended that
location, sir?
A. Yes, may I refresh my memory by using my notes, Your
Honour?
THE COURT: Are these notes made by yourself?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And when were they made?
THE WITNESS: At the time.
THE COURT: Any questions or submissions in respect to the use
of the notes?
MR. SAGLE: No, that's satisfactory.
THE COURT: All right, you may refer to your notes.
THE WITNESS: The first time I entered Baxter Road was
Wednesday, June the 3rd, 1992, at approximately 2230 hours,
which is 10:30 p.m. I did so by - it was 1141 Baxter Road at
the corner of Iris - I located the premises and, outside of the
premises, I had to ring a push-button ding-dong type of a bell.
MR. MARIN: Q. Yes?
A. And I was asked to identify myself, and, having identified
myself as "Joe," someone came out and opened the door for me and
let me in.
Q. Now, I understand that to be the normal routing every time
you attended at Baxter Road; is that correct?
A. Yes, that was the normal routine.
Q. How often did you attend Baxter Road?
A. Oh, I would say approximately, one, two, three, four, five,
six, seven, eight - nine times.
Q. When you went to Baxter Road, can you tell us, sir, what you
did for those nine times?
A. I made observations. My first night there, I noticed that
there was seven blackjack tables and one poker table inside the
premises. Two blackjack games were in progress. I went to the
cashier, which is located at the back, and I cashed in $200 in
money and they gave me chips worth $200. The person behind the
chip bank - they had a computer there of some sort - he was
entering something; I don't know what he was entering. I took my
chips and I began to play blackjack at one of the tables.
Q. All right.
A. I continued to play blackjack and make observations, and I
noticed John Turmel was playing poker at the time. I kept playing
blackjack for a while.
Q. What can you tell us about the betting limit of that
establishment?
A. The betting was a minimum of $5 and a maximum of $200.
Q. Was there any sign that you noticed within that
establishment?
A. There was a big sign behind me, "Turmel's Casino."
Q. M'hm?
A. And the dealers were all dressed in white, with a white
shirt, very clean.
Q. Yes?
A. There was beverages on location there. No liquor, just pop
and coffee and chocolate bars...
Q. M'hm?
A. ...and a fridge in the back. Everything was free.
Q. All right.
A. I began to play this game of blackjack and I was asked by
one of the dealers that I had to be the bank. I said, "Why?" He
says, "Because that's the rule; you have to bank once." And I
said, "Well, okay, if that's the rule." So they turned the cards
over to me and I was the bank, and I played with the dealer, only
the dealer, one time, at that particular time, and after I played
him once, then it went on to the second player. If he was not the
bank that day, he was told that he had to be the bank.
Q. How many players are there for each table? How many
players are there?
A. Some tables are six, some seven, depending on the tables he
had. Some tables were seven spots, some were six.
Q. Okay, six and seven spots and one bank.
A. One dealer, yes.
Q. One dealer. All right. Now, when you wanted to be the
dealer of the bank...
A. M'hm.
Q. ...was there anything different?
A. Well, you can only bank against - he would tell you you had
to bank against the house once...
Q. Yes?
A. ...to circumvent the rules, the law.
Q. And where would you go to do that banking?
A. Just right there, my position. He just turned the shoe the
other way...
Q. Okay.
A. ...and I would be the bank and he would bet up to whatever
I wanted against him.
Q. All right. Now, was this on your first visit, or was this
on all visits to that location?
A. This is on most visits. My last three visits at the last
location, I was never asked to be the bank. They just had a little
sign that indicated that you must be the bank, but there was no one
there to tell me that you - that you were instructed you had to
right away. They just have a little sign that you've got to be the
bank at least once a night.
Q. Now, you're a sergeant with the OPP. When you went there,
did you identify yourself as a sergeant with the OPP?
A. No. I did not.
Q. Was there any outside indication that you were with the
OPP? Were you wearing uniform or anything?
A. No.
Q. Did you identify yourself in any way?
A. No.
Q. Okay, on subsequent visits, sir, did anyone at that
location treat you as though they recognized you from a prior
encounter?
A. I think, during the end of my visits, there could've been
a customer or two that may have noticed me, since I'm from Ottawa,
and I believe that the last few times there could have been some
customers that noticed my face and perhaps told Mr. Turmel, but for
the first few months, I don't believe anybody knew me.
Q. Did you notice if food or drink were being served at that
location?
A. Yes, as a matter of fact, food was served; I ordered some.
I was hungry.
Q. Was there any cost?
A. Well, there was hot dogs and there was sandwiches, chips.
No cost, no. You normally gave a tip to the person who gave you
the food and drink, but there was no cost.
Q. How about to the dealer? Was there any tipping of the
dealer?
A. Well, if you wanted to tip, you could tip. For example, in
playing "Texas hold' em," I made a point not to tip one time; I
wanted to see if I was forced to tip. And I was not forced to tip.
So it was voluntary.
Q. Okay.
A. In blackjack, normally, if you won, you would tip, because
same as you go into a restaurant, if you had good service, you tip;
if you get lucky, you tip. That's just a normal routine. A
living, I guess.
Q. Was there anything in the establishment to remind you of
that?
A. Well, the establishment reminded me of places I visited in
- you're talking about what the establishment reminded me of? The
place?
Q. Yes. I mean, was there anything in it to remind you about
the tipping?
A. Oh, no. No.
Q. Okay, so did you play blackjack when you were there?
A. Yes.
Q. All right, and can you tell us if you won any money?
A. Well, some nights I did, but in the overall scheme of
things, I did not win money; I lost money.
Q. Do you have any indication of how much you may have lost at
Baxter?
A. At Baxter? I lost over $1,500 over a period of eight or
nine times. My net losses, that is.
Q. Pardon me?
A. Net losses. Like, in other words, one night I won $500,
the next night I lost $300, but the total of all my visits, I was
down about $1,500.
Q. How much money had you started with?
A. Well, the first night I started with $200.
Q. Yes?
A. Lost it. Then you couldn't stay there any not play - it
didn't look right - so I cashed in some more money, because I
wanted to stay for the duration the first night, to see what time
it closed, what type of clientele it had, how many people were
there at four o'clock in the morning, and so usually the place
closed at six in the morning, a.m., in Baxter. So I usually stayed
till it closed a few times, just to see what the action was at that
time.
Q. Now, did you keep records of the number of people there,
the action, the money that was changing hands?
A. Well, I kept as many records as I could remember each time
I went in. I've got notes that affect - for example, the first
time I went in the Baxter place, 1141 Baxter, there was two
blackjacks in progress, so that would be about ten people playing.
There was a full table of poker, but that was maybe 20 feet away
from me, from the other game I was playing.
Q. Yes?
A. One thing I found interesting at the games of blackjack,
which I didn't find in my visits to Las Vegas and other casinos,
was that they would have side betting. Side betting, meaning that
the player, besides betting the initial bet, can bet on a
subsequent card coming to the player. For example, if you wanted
to bet that the next card you received would be a face, you would
indicate that by putting a bet which would have to betion, St. Laurent Boulevard in
the City of
Ottawa.
A. Yes, I was there three times...
Q. Okay.
A. ...in the last place.
Q. In terms of dates, if you can just tell us the first time
you went to Baxter and the last time you went to Baxter.
A. Okay, the first time I went to Baxter was the 3rd of June,
1992, and the last time I went to Baxter was July the 13th, 1992.
The first time I went to St. Laurent Boulevard, 2335 St. Laurent,
was 28th of January, 1993, and I was only there three times. The
last time was January the 30th, 1993.
Q. I missed that last date.
A. January the 30th, 1993.
Q. Okay. That location, in contrast to the first one, first
of all in terms of size: Can you give us any indication...
A. The last location was much bigger, much bigger, and...
Q. You mean St. Laurent or Baxter, when you say "last"?
A. St. Laurent was much bigger. I would say it was a full-
fledged casino, if I can use that term. It was - there were a lot
more employees. Many employees. I counted about 18 or 20. I saw
Mr. Turmel's brother there several times. And dealers that were
there at the Baxter Road location. But there were many more
employees there than there were at Baxter. They had runners at the
last location. "Runners" meaning people with chips on their person
so that you wouldn't have to go to the bank. There's special
locations you can cash in, give them cash, and they'll give you
chips. But it was a much larger place.
Q. Okay. Now, I presume that poker and blackjack were being
played there as well, right?
A. There was two games played at each location that I
attended: Blackjack...
Q. Yes?
A. ...and "Hold 'em." They called it
"Texas hold 'em," but the actual game is "hold 'em." The game of
"Hold 'em," poker game, you can have maybe 11 or 12 players at one
sitting.
Q. Now, in terms of the blackjack, I believe the term that's
used is "Turmel-style blackjack." Is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, can you tell us generally how that game is played?
A. Sure, the game is played basically like any other casino.
You have a shoe, you have a dealer, you have, in most cases, six
decks of cards. The bets are placed prior to receiving cards. The
deal goes clockwise. And again, at the last location, my last
three visits at that location, I was not asked by one of the
dealers or anyone in authority to be the dealer. All they had was
a little piece of - a notice on each table which indicated that you
must be the dealer once a day, or something to that effect. But no
one came up to me and said, "You have to be the dealer." They just
had a little card on the table indicating that "You must be the
dealer," but no one was enforcing that at that location.
Q. Okay, and the betting limit was a minimum of $5 and a
maximum of $200; is that right?
A. Yes, the tables where I was playing, yes.
Q. Now, again at that location, was there food and drink
dispensed?
A. Yes, there was, in that location. At the time I was
smoking, so I wanted to get some cigarettes, so I gave some money
to one of the persons working there, and they went to a machine and
it cost me $6.50 for a small package. Food was free. They made
sandwiches and brought them down to you. They made it comfortable
for you to stay there.
Q. Okay.
A. My primary function, when I went into these places, was to
make sure that there was games and that it was common and that the
people were betting. That was my...
Q. By "betting," how do you employ that word?
A. Making a bet, by betting between people. And in each case,
there was bets between the blackjack players and the house dealer.
There were bets in the games of poker between individuals. Or Mr.
Turmel's employee. Or Mr. Turmel sometimes would actually deal the
game. There were bets made between people.
Q. What about the tipping at the St. Laurent location?
A. Again, I noticed that each time a person would win a hand,
if it's a sizeable hand, you would tip the dealer. On a small pot,
you don't have to - well, you don't have to tip the dealer at any
time, what I saw, but most people did. I would say 99 percent of
the people, when they won a pot, they would tip the dealer because
he was working, I suppose, and you like to tip the worker.
Q. M'hm? On the last visit that you made on January 30th,
1993, how many people were on the premises when you were there?
A. I was there in the afternoon around two o'clock. There was
quite - if I had to guesstimate, I would say anywhere between 75
and 100 people.
Q. And did you win or lose any money while you were there?
A. I didn't play the last time. I just...
Q. Pardon me?
A. Last time I was there, I just made some observations and I
had a coffee and I didn't play the last time I was there. I just
made observations on how many people were there. The other times
I played, I lost a few dollars there, yes.
Q. You lost a few dollars?
A. Yes. It's very hard to win. It's very hard to beat the
house in any game. This is why Las Vegas is building shrines. Not
from winners; they build it from losers. It's very difficult to
win at a game of blackjack against the house. The percentage is
always with the house. You may have one lucky day, but overall, if
you go there many times, most times you will lose.
Q. Now, I'm showing a binder, and this was seized from the
shift supervisor's desk at the St. Laurent location. There's a
yellow page that says, "Casino Turmel at the Topaz Entertainment
Palace." It has "Blackjack rules" in the box right underneath.
A. Yes.
Q. I'd just like you to take a moment to look at those rules.
A. It's mostly like Vegas rules with a few variations. Like
a double stand, they don't have in Las Vegas. A double stand means
when you have a terrible hand, like 16 or less, you can double your
bet against the house.
Q. All right. Now, I'll just finish on that. Are those the
rules as you remember them being played when you went...
A. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Yes.
Q. I'd like to just file this as Exhibit One, Your Honour.
THE COURT: The binder or the rules?
MR. MARIN: Perhaps the binder, easier for reference.
MR. SAGLE: The rules? Sorry?
MR. MARIN: Yes, I'll leave it within the binder and I'll just
file the binder.
MR. SAGLE: I don't know what else is in that binder, of
course. It's the rules that are going to be the exhibit, but
they're going to stay in the binder; is that correct?
MR. MARIN: Yes, that's right.
THE COURT: Will the rest of the binder be identified at some
point?
MR. MARIN: No, Your Honour. I have no problems taking it out;
it's just that it was taken as it is now, but I can just file
the paper.
THE COURT: Perhaps that would be more appropriate then. The
rules will be Exhibit One.
EXHIBIT NUMBER ONE: Blackjack rules.
- Produced and marked.
MR. MARIN: Q. Now, Sergeant Fotia, what
is a "hand" at blackjack?
A. What is a good hand?
Q. Yes, what's a "hand"? Never mind a "good one," but what
does the word mean?
A. A "hand" means that you're given a minimum of two cards.
That constitutes a hand.
Q. Supposing, just to - I don't want to get into the
complexities of the game - but just to perhaps get some of the
elementary workings of the game, suppose there's a table there and
there's a dealer. You've indicated there's a shoe. What's a
"shoe"?
A. A shoe is usually an item made out of plastic where you can
put in up to 10 or 11 decks inside, so when the dealer deals, he
can take one card out at a time and it cannot be seen by anybody -
say if the cards were marked -you can't see them. Only one card
comes out at a time, and you deal them one at a time from the shoe,
clockwise, until you make a hand.
Q. Okay. So you have how many people sitting at a table?
A. Well, you can have up to seven spots. Seven plus the
dealer. Eight.
Q. Okay, and where are all these people seated?
A. On the stool, the chair, at their own position. Each
player is sitting in front of a little emblem, a little circle or
square to identify his or her position.
Q. Okay, the dealer's on one side and...
A. The dealer is behind the chip bank. He has the most
space...
Q. All right.
A. ...because he's dealing clockwise to everyone, to the seven
people. So he has to have a look at all of these people. It's
like I'm sitting in the box right here, similar to this, actually.
Here's the money, the chips, and the players are sitting around
here.
Q. All right.
A. All right, he makes change, he deals, he controls the game.
Q. So the game is starting, players are sitting down, the
table's there, the dealer's there.
A. Right.
Q. Okay.
A. The first thing that happens, everybody must make a bet
before receiving cards.
Q. Okay. So between $5 and...
A. And $200.
Q. ...and $200. So they make a bet with whom?
A. They make the bet against the house, this person here who
has all the chips.
Q. So everyone gets to make a bet, one after the other?
A. Yes. Well, you don't have to bet every time; you can just
pass a bet if you want.
Q. Okay.
A. You don't have to bet each time.
Q. So that's the first thing that happens.
A. Right.
Q. What's the second thing that happens?
A. The second thing that happens is the dealer will deal one
card each to everyone, including himself, and another card each to
everyone and not to himself. The last card, he doesn't deal to himself.
Q. Okay, now, the cards are facing up, or are they facing
down?
A. They're facing up.
Q. Facing up?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay, those cards to the players are facing up?
A. That's correct.
Q. How about the dealer's cards?
A. One's facing up, yes. He only has one card.
Q. Okay.
A. He's playing the English rules. There's different ways of
playing blackjack. At Turmel's, they have two cards each and one
card to the house person.
Q. Yes?
A. And then, after he plays everyone, he plays himself. He
gives himself the second card. In a lot of other places, everybody
takes two cards initially.
Q. Okay.
A. His is up. One's up, one's down of the dealer's, normally,
and the players' are both up.
Q. Okay now, what happens next?
A. The dealer goes to the first position and asks the person
if he'd like another card, and the player indicates if he wishes
another card by a hand signal.
Q. Now, what is the purpose of the game? What is each player
ultimately trying to do?
A. The purpose of the game is for each individual to make more
points than the house without busting. If the person busts, then
the house takes its money. Doesn't have to play himself.
Q. Okay, how does a person bust?
A. By getting over 21.
Q. Okay.
A. Anything over 21 is a bust; the money goes to the house.
Q. So a player who's got a card and is asked if he wants
another card, okay, what has to go through his mind? What's the
consideration?
A. The consideration is, well, the house must stay at 17 and
must hit at 16.
Q. Okay, what does that mean?
A. Well, that means if the player sees that the house has a
six, the player will always assume there's a face, because there's
more faces than anything else in the deck, and will assume there's
a 16. So at that point, the player makes a decision whether to
take another card and risk busting or stay at a low, or whatever
point he has, and hope that the dealer busts, if he has a bad hand,
or that the dealer has to stay at 17 and the player will have 18 or
more.
Q. Okay.
A. A "push," nobody wins. In other words, if it's 17-17,
nobody wins.
Q. Now, if there's a bust, what happens to the wager?
A. The money goes to the house. The money's picked up right
away and put - the chips are picked up and put into the slots. End
of the game.
Q. Okay, now...
A. For that person.
Q. Okay, now, each part - every parcel of the game is called
a "hand," right? You'd call that a hand?
A. Well, every time you get two cards, it's a hand, yes.
Q. Okay, were you able to make observations as to how many
hands were dealt per time - well, how fast did these happen, these
hands?
A. Well, pretty fast. It would take maybe a minute and a half
to two minutes for each hand.
Q. Okay.
A. Approximately. Depends on the dealers. Some dealers are
faster than others. Some dealers are slower. Now, I have here a
type of a spread sheet I understand was gathered from your
observations, the time of day you went to St. Laurent
establishment, the date, the hours that you observed, the game you
observed, the number of players, the positions, and so on. Would
you look your notes and confirm whether these in fact are your
observations?
A. I'd have to look at each page, but I think they look like
the ones, because I gave all my notes to the sergeant from the
Ottawa Police Department. I think he made a chart of all this. So
I think that's correct. It looks to be correct. I hadn't seen
this before, so.....
MR. MARIN: All right, if that could be made Exhibit Two,
please.
THE COURT: What would be the purpose of filing this as an
exhibit?
MR. MARIN: It's because, Your Honour, there's an expert
witness later on that will have some interpretation to make from
the observations of this officer, to build upon it. That's the
purpose of getting it as an exhibit; it's subject to further
testimony which will shed light on the exhibit.
THE COURT: All right, then. The document will be Exhibit Two.
EXHIBIT NUMBER TWO: Summary of observations made by Sergeant
Fotia.
- Produced and marked.
MR. MARIN: Those are my questions, Your Honour.
**********
--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-756-1325 USENET: can.politics
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
