Stones Gambling Hall Saga Continues as Defense Attorney Offers Shaky Rebuttal

October 14th, 2019 | by Greg Shaun

The Stones Gambling Hall saga has taken another twist as Mike Postle looks to defend himself against a $30 million lawsuit.

stones gambling hall

Stones Gambling Hall regular Mike Postle has provided a questionable line of defense via his attorney William Portanova. (Image: CSS Architecture)

Following news that Veronica Brill and others from the California poker club had filed a lawsuit, Postle has sought help. Employing the services of attorney William Portanova, the accused has started to offer some form of defense.

Postle Attorney Offers Defense of Sorts

Although Postle has remained silent since appearing on Mike Matusow’s podcast, Portanova has issued a statement. Sent to local news outlet The Sacramento Bee, the comment essentially said that winning streaks like the one Postle enjoyed are entirely possible.

“We don’t know what the facts are. I can just say this: when I play poker, I lose almost every hand, so I know such streaks are possible,” Portanova told the newspaper.

While it’s not beyond the realms of possibility for someone to hit an extended lucky streak, the consistency of Postle’s win rate has been called into question.

As well as those seeking damages, Doug Polk and Joe Ingram believe that, given what they’ve observed, it’s hard to believe Postle was successful for a long period of time.

Even though Portanova’s statement doesn’t say very much, his lack of familiarity with poker does call the defense into question. As noted, the legal expert doesn’t gamble because he loses too many hands.

What’s more, the contrast in legal representatives couldn’t be more different.

On the side of those suing Postle and Stones Gambling Hall is poker player and lawyer Maurice VerStandig. Also helping with the case are Julian K. Bach, William Pillsbury and poker player/attorney Kelly Minkin.

Stones Gambling Hall Hoping for Forensic Investigation

With a broad range of talents both on and off the felt, Brill et al certainly have the edge in terms of legal firepower.

However, Stones Gambling Hall and Postle both deny any wrongdoing. Moreover, there are concerns that a lack of knowledge could work in the accused’s favor.

Reacting to Portanova’s statement, some players have said that a non-poker playing jury may be swayed by this line of defense. However, according to Michael Lipman representing Stones Gambling Hall, forensic evidence will decide the case.

Talking to The Sacramento Bee, Lipman said definitive evidence will be found by examining the software used to broadcast the live streams. Naturally, Stones Gambling Hall believes this process will exonerate them of any wrongdoing.

However, it may also be what determines whether or not Postle is found guilty of cheating.


    Comments are closed.