You're viewing Docket Item 1 from the case United States of America v. $1,150,000.00 in United States Currency. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 1 of 18

*

@

() 1 k j ta l - 1-

IM-y qy ! .e'' '' 1

D AN IEL G . BO GD EN
U nited States Attorney
N evada State Bar N o. 2137
D A NIEL D , H OLLIN G SW ORTH
A ssistant U nited States Attom ey
N evada State Bar N o. 1925
Lloyd D . G eorge U nited States Courthouse
333 Las V egas Boulevard South, Suite 5000
Las V egas, N evada 89101
Telephone: (702) 388-6336
Facsim ile: (702) 388-6787
E-mail: D> [email protected] usdoj.gov
Counsel for the United States of A m erica

[email protected]
. p
g ' j
I I
9

U NITED STA TES D ISTR IC T CO UR T

10

D ISTR IC T O F NEV A D A

1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
12
13 .

)
)
ïy: 1O-cv-OO32-Rl- !-I-GW F
)
)
$1,150.00 IN LJNITED STATES CURRENCY, )
)
)

Plaintiff,

Defendant.

C O M PLA INT FO R FO R FEITUR E IN REM

Thc United States of Am erica, by and through Daniel G . Bogden, United States Attorney for

the D istrict ofN evada, and D aniel D . I-lollingsworth, Assistantu nited States Attorney, in a civil cause

for forfeiture, respectfully states as follows'.

SU BJEC T M A TTER JUR ISDICT IO N

1 . This Court hasjurisdiction under 19 U.S.C. jj 1603, 1608, and 1 6 10,, Supplcmental Rules

for Admiralty or M aritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions (1Ted. R. Civ. P. Supp. Rule''); 18

U.S.C. jj 981 and 983; 28 U.S.C. jj l 345, 1355, and 1395; and 31 U.S.C. j 5317(c)(2).

IN R EM JU RISD IC TIO N

2. This Coull will have in rem jklrisdiction over the $ l ,150.00 in United States Currency

(ttdefendanf') if this Court signs an Orderfor Summ ons and W anunt of Arrestin Rem forthc Property

7-

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 18

I
!

1 ; and the C lerk ofthe Court issues a Sum m ons and W arrant of Arrest in Rem for the Property, w hich

21 . w ill be executed upon the defendant and returned to the Court.

V ENU E

3. This Court has venue ofthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. jj 1355 and 1395 because the

above-named defendant is now and, during the pendency of this action, will be in thejurisdiction of

this Court and because the defendant was found in this judicial district.

PAR TICU LA R D ESC RIPTIO N

4. The defendant is m ore particularly described as follows: $1,150.00 in United States

Currency obtained from a w inning gam ing ticket from the Ram part Casino.

10
I
1 l '

PLA C E O F SEIZU RE

5. O n or about Septem ber 28, 2007, defcndant w as seized from the person of John A starita,

12 by duly authorized agents of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (tçICE''), Ivas

1 3 V egas, N evada. On or about O ctober 24, 2007, the N evada G am ing Control Board determ ined that

14 it was a winning gam ingticket and it was exchanged fora check atthe Rampart Hotel and Casino, 221

: .

15 ' N orth Ram part Boulevard, Las V egas, N evada.

16

l 7

C USTO DY O F A SSET

6, The defendant is in the care, custody, and control of the United States Depadment of the

1 8 Treasury's Seized A sset Forfeiture Fund.

19

20

TIM ELY FILIN G

7. The detkndant was subject to administrative summm'y forfeiture proceedings; however,

2 1 John A starita tiled a claim on or about D ecem ber l 7, 2007.
! !22
1.

V A LUE

8. The defendant's value is $ 1,l 50.00 in United States Currency,

2

23
i i

24 .

25

26

l

'

1

2

3 ,

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 3 of 18

FA CTS

The Jelinsky O rganization

9. ln or about 2005 to in or about 2007, M ichael Jelinsky and Jeffrey Jelinsky (ltlelinskys'')

4! l operated an illegal gam bling business involving unlicensed bookmaking in violation of Nevada State

5 law and federal law . Jeffrey Jelinsky, M ichael Jelinsky, Barbara Jelinsky, Leigh Jelinsky, Kristie

6 Gulia, David Datzkow, Nicholas Masesso, Jolm Decrosta, aka Jack Decrosta (i'DeCrosta''), Jolm

7 Astarita (çbAstarita''), Kevin Regan, Charles Pecchio, l-loward Rubinsky (ttRubinskf'), Knud

''

8' Christiansen ( Christiansen ), and Sanford Goldfarb ( Goldfarb ) were a1l members of the Jelinsky
9 Organization. The Jelinsky Organization took w agers by telephone and by internet from individuals

tt

,7



,,

10 in California, Colorado, Connecticut,N evada, N ew lersey,N ew Y ork, Florida, and Texasand illegally

1 1 used offshere race books, as well as casine race books in or about Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada

12 to layoff som e of its illegal betting business. The Jelinsky Organization used interstate w ire
' '
13
ications, among other ways, to take illegal bets, to lay off illegal bets, and to Iaunder the

com m un

14 illegal bookmaking proceeds. The Jelinsky Organization accepted wagers over the telephone and the

k

b

1 5 intem et w e sites, including w ww ,ss ,
16 and sporls books located in Costa Rica. 'I'he Jelinsky Organization used www.ssiz8vcom to set up on-
I :' line wagering accounts for its clients and www.bookmaker.com to lay off some of its illegal
1 7
' b

i28 com and w ww .bookm aker.com . Both intem et sitcs are race

1 8 bookm aking wagers. Jeffrey Jelinsky, M ichael Jelinsky, Barbara Jelinsky, Leigh Jelinsky, Kristie

l
r

.
(
ï
!
l
i
:

1 9 Gulia, David Datzkow, Nicholas M asesso, Decrosta, Astarita, Kevin Regan, Charles Pecchio,

20 Rubinsky, Christiansen, and Goldfarb were not licensed by the State of Nevada to operate a gambling

2 1 business.

l
22r

1 0 During the time peried m entioned above

.

, Jeffrey Jelinsky took wagers from clients by

23 ' telephone and through internet accounts w ith a race and sports book in Costa Rica. Jefliey Jelinsky

24 paid a fee to the Costa Rican race and sports book for providing him with a set of customer accounts.

25 W hen Jeffrey Jelinsky acquired a new betling custom er who wanted to w ager online, he w ould set up

261 the person's account with an identification number and a password that allowed the person to logon

l

3

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 4 of 18

to ww w.ssiz8.com and to place wagers. He also would set limits on the betting custom er's wagering

activity, The Costa Rican race book tracked al1 of the Jelinsky O rganization's clients' w agering

activity and m aintained w in/loss figures for the Jelinsky O rganization.

1 1 . During the aforem entioned tim e, M ichael Jelinsky assisted the Jelinsky Organization's

illegal bookm aking operationbyprovidingleffreylelinskywithhandicapping infonnation, tinancing,

and laundering the illegal bookm aking procecds. The Jelinsky O rganization through Jeffrey Jelinsky

and M ichael Jelinsky intentionally gave fraudulent, false, and m isleading handicapping inform ation

to its bet-tors to insure they w ould lose their bets to the Jelinsky Organization. Barbara Jelinsky

assisted the Jelinsky Organization's illegal bookm aking operation w ith tinancing and laundering the

illegal bookm aking proceeds. Leigh Jelinsky and K ristie G ulia assisted the Jelinsky O rganization's

illegal bookm aking operation by laundering the illegal bookm aking proceeds. G oldt-arb w as a client

bettor of the Jelinsky Organization and assisted the Jelinsky O rganization's illegal bookm aking

cperation by laundering the illegal baokmaking proceeds. The Jelinsky Organization included

1.

individuals and illegal bookmakers with access to large am ounts of cash and casino chips who assisted

the Jelinsky Organization by transferring cash and casino chips betw een the Jelinsky O rganization and

betttlrs and by ctlllecting and paying illegal bets won and lost.

12. ln or about 2005 to in or about 2007, Jam es Scott, Louis J. Tavano, and Richard Tavano

assisted the Jelinsky Organization's illegal bookm aking operation by establishing bettors' accounts

with lnternaticnal Racing Group (t'1RG''), an offshore race boek that claimed 1(7 be on the lsland ot-

C uracao, N etherland A ntilles, but also was m anaged and operated in part in N evada. IRG was a

subsidiary of Y oubet.com . IRG provided telephonic race book services by allow ing its custom ers to

call by telephone and place w agers on horse races, Rubinsky assisted the Jelinsky Organization's

illegal bookm aking operation by establishing an of-fshore account w ith ww w .bookm aker.com , an

24
I

offshore race and sports book located in Costa R ica, to layoffsom e of the betting accepted by the

25 Jelinsky Orgmzization's illegal bookm aking operation. By having the betting account at

26

I

4

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 5 of 18

w w w .bookm aker.com and laying off bets acceptedbythe Jelinsky Organization, itreducedthe payout

risk associated w ith booking som e of the large w agers.

The Poker Palace C asino. tlle Palm s C asino, and the Jelinsky O rganization

1 3. D uring various tim es in or about 2005 to in or about 2007, the Jelinsky Organization

conducted its illegal bookm aking inside the Poker Palace Casino and the Palm s Casino, in or about

Las Vegass Clark County, Nevada and North Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada. By conducting

business inside these casinos the Jelinsky Organization had up-to-date race and sports book

8 inform ation andthe abilityto layoffquicklyanyw agersthe Jelinsky Organizationconsideredtoo risky

:

9. I to keep within its illegal boolunaking. David Datzkow, Nicholas M asesso, Decrosta, Astarita, Kevin

10 Regan, and Charles Pecchio assisted the Jelinsky O rganization's illegal bookm aking operation as

1 1 runners w ho placed bets w ith the licensed casino race books on behalf of the Jelinsky Organization

12 and collectedm oney from w'inning bets with licensed casino race books and from bettors who betwith

1 3 the Jelinsky O rganization. The size of the Jelinsky Organization's illegal bookm aking is show n by

14 the increase of the Poker Palace Casino race book handle w hen the Jelinsky Organization operated

151 ' there. (The handle is the gross amount of money risked in pari-mutuel wagering. Pari-mutuel

wagering is a system of betting on horse races w hereby all wagers go into a pool. The w inners divide

the total am ount of al1 bets, after deducting m anagem ent expenses, in propollion to the sum s they have

wagered individually. Pari-mutuel watering provides no riskto the Poker Palace Casino.) In or about

April 2005, before one of the various tim es the Jelinsky O rganization laid off w agers at the Poker

Palace Casino in pari-m utuel w agering, the Poker Palace Casino race book's m onthly handle w as

approximately $ 1 00,000. By October 2005, afler the Jclinsky Organization began using the Poker

Palace Casino to Iay of'fwagers, the Poker Palace Casino race book's m onthly handle had risen to over

$1 0,000,000. Similarly, in or about Novem ber 2005, the m onthly pari-mutuel handle at the Palm s

Casino race book w'as approximately $200,000. By July 2006, after the Jelinsky Organization began

operating its illegal bookm aking at the Palm s Casino, its m onthly handle w as approxim ately

$7,100,000. Between the Poker Palace Casino, the Palm s Casino, and the offshore accounts, the

5

'

'

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 6 of 18

I

I
j

1 Jelinsky O rganization wagered m illions of dollars each m onth.

14. O n or about April 4, 2007, the Jelinsky O rganization m oved part of their operation from

3 the Palm s Casino back to the Poker Palace Casino. The Jelinsky O rganization operated its illegal

4 bookm aking at the Poker Palace C asino by laying off w agers and used the Poker Palace Casino to
-15
1 generate and to launder som e of the proceeds the Jelinsky Organization's activities generated. Tbe

6 Poker Palace Casino's m anagem ent and the Jelinsky Organization illegally agreed and conspired to

7 give the Jelinsky Organization approximately an eleven percent ( l l %) rebate of, or share in the

8 revenues of, the Jelinsky O rganization's pari-m utuel w agering. The Poker Palace Casino and the

9 Jelinsky O rganization agreed the Poker Palace Casino would rebate the Jelinsky O rganization 1 1%

2
h

r

I l
:
I .

!
I
1 !

1 0 j ifit bet $250,000 a week and would rebatethe Jelinsky Organization up to 12% if it bct over $500,000

1 1 I I a week. The Poker Palace Casino held contests that insured members of the Jelinsky Organization
12i ' would win the contest receiving the 1 1% rebate. The contest w as an artiticial m echanism designed

13i solely to rebate money to the Jelinsky Organization. The Poker Palace Casino and the Jelinsky

14 O rganization determ ined the am ount of each contest based upon what the Jelinsky Organization
I
15 w agered for the w eek. For example, if the Jelinsky Organization had a handle of $400,000 for the i
1
16 week, the Poker Palace Casino anunged to have two contests for $22,000 each, thereby rebating to !
i
17 the Jelinsky Organization $44,000, or 1 1% of their handle. This arrangement between the Poker
I

' i
:
;

1 8 I ' Palace Casino and the Jelinsky Organization allowed the Jelinsky Organization to receive an 1 1 % I
I

19; ' no-risk return on their w agering activity. A t least three key em ployees at the Poker Palace Casino

20 ! j conspired with the Jelinsky Organization to arrange and to facilitate the tixed contest. This rebate
2 l I i arrangem ent Iaundered illegal proceeds by givingthe appearmlce thatthesem onies w ere derived from

. !

22' legitim ate gam bling activity.

.

15 O n June 24

i
23!,
, 2007, Decrosta sent Astaritato give Jeffrey Jelinskythe $5,000.00 entry fee
:
24 j for the Poker Palace Casine rebate contest and his figures (the amount Decrosta wagered at the Poker
25 Palace Casino for the week) so Jeffrey Jelinsky could determ ine Decrosta's rebate. On July 2, 2007,

26 Jeffrey Jelinsky and Joe Bahel ('bBahel''), the Director of Operations at the Poker Palace Casino,

6

'

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 7 of 18

: '
1 arranged two rebate contests of $ 1 1,300.00 each for the next day and agreed to an 1 1 ,5 % rebate for

2 'j that week. Bahel also warned the percentage of the handle would go down if the Jelinsky
l3
l I Organization did not raise its handle. Jeffrey Jelinsky adm itted num erous tim es that the Poker Palace
I1 II
4 Casino contests w ere rigged and were very good for the Jelinsky Organization. M ichael Jelinsky
l admiued numerous times thatthe Poker Palace Casino contests were tictitious
5!
i
61
;

paid to the Jelinsky Organization. D ecrosta and A starita w ere involved in the Poker Palace Casino

, allowing rebates to be

7 rebating contests for the Jelinsky Organization and them selves. ()n July 30, 2007, M ichael Jelinsky

8 requested that Bahel change the date of the rebating contest because M ichael Jelinsky had problem s

9 getting enough people to go to the Poker Palace Casino. The Poker Palace Casino required the

1 0 Jelinsky O rganization to have at least four people at the rebate contest. Bahel agreed to tw o rebating

l 1 contests on another day for $33,600 each, The Jelinsky Organization won a11 the rcbating contests

12 because the Poker Palace Casino and the Jelinsky O rganization had the rebating contests tixed to

13 insure the Jelinsky Organization w on.

i
14 .

16 nrrectiveluneao,zoo7,x evadao am ingR egulation6x ,w hichprovidedx evadacasinos

.

15. with an exemption from the Bank Secrecy Act (ttBSA'') requirements, expired. Starting July 1, 2007,
l6. i N evada oasinos w ere required to com ply w ith a11 BSA regulations, w hich include fling Currency

: :

'

17. 1 Transaction Reports (:tCTR'') for any cash transaction over $10,000.00. As a result of the CTR
l 8 . regulations, Decrosta was concerned he could no longer wager over $1 0,000,00 a day. To avoid the

!
I
!

E CTR reporting requirem ents

1 9 .

, Decrosta wanted to lim it his wagering to $8,000.00 a day, Decrosta

20 . operated his ow n illegal bookm aking and m essenger betting business and used the rebate contest at

the Poker Palace Casino to Iay off som e of his action and collect the rebate. On June 30, 2007, to

22 avoid the CTR reporting requirem ents, Decrosta discussed an arrangem ent that A starita would bet

E

23i I al1 of Johtmy s money at the Poker Palace Casino. Johnny is one of Decrosta s clients in his illegal
24i i gambling business. D ecrosta decided to keep w agering for his client, Paul, because Paul did not bet
the $ l 0,000.00 per day at the Poker Palace Casino. Decrosta's actions w ere to avoid the CTR

25 over

! I
I jl
l '
! I

26' ! reporting requirem ents for any cash transaction over $10,000.00. Decrosta structured his illegal

I

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 8 of 18

:

: !

.

I
j :
'
l activities at the Poker Palace Casino, which violates federal law and state law. On or about June 30, 'i
1.

2 2007, the Pokerpalace Casino m anagem ent agreed to w orkwith D ecrostato avoid the CTR reporting

3 requirem ents. On or about June 30, 2007, the Poker Palace Casino Race and Sports Book m anager,

4 W illiam Reynolds, arranged lbr D ecrosta to bet under tw o separate players' num bers to structure his

5 illegal bookm aking w agers, allow ing Decrosta to avoid the CTR reporting requirem ents. On July 9,

6, ; 2007, Decrostahadwagered forhis illegal gambling clients atotal of $90,122.00 underthree separate

7E I players' num bers, provided by the Poker Palace Casino, so that he avoided the CTR reporting
8 requirements

. On or about July 9, 2007, Decrosta also bet $8,200.00 at the Poker Palace Casino for

i

9 M ichael Jelinsky under player number 72 and gave M ichacl the rebate for this wager.

1 7. Josepla Ioeycr ('-itreyer--) worked forthe Pokerpalacecasino inthe late 1990s as aticket

l l w riter in the Race and Sports Book. A t that tim e, the Poker Palace Casino ran a handicapping contest

1011

! 1
I

12 ' designed to offer rebates to high volum e players. K reyer leh Las V egas to w ork at the -lqonkow a .

1 3 lndian resen ation. Kreyer returned to Las Vegas in 2005, approached Brad Fetuish (LtFetuish''),

14 General M anager of the Poker Palace C asino, and requested that Fetuish start running the rebating

15 contests again. Kreyer negotiated the contest w ith Fetuish, and during the negotiations, K reyer asked

: I:

16 Fetuish if he wanted 17% on $10,000 or 4.5% on a couple million dollars. Kreyer recruited the
17. Jelinsky o rganization to play at the Poker Palace Casino. Kreyer negotiated the rebate w ith each

1 8 player. Kreyer negotiated the day and time of each contest withBahel, The contest rules required four

1 9 contestants. Kreyer paid other individuals to enter the contest. Kreyer put up the entrance fee of

20 $2,500 and paid each person $50 for entering. The entrance fee was set vel'y high so that no players

21 except the associates of the Jelinsky Organization would enter. M ichael Jelinsky's handle w as put

22 under Kreyer's player num ber 61 . Fctuish and Bahel knew M ichael Jelinsky's handle w as under

I 1-

23: ' player number 61 .

-

I

1
I

24.
25 Palace Casino as a result of the illegal rebating contest was approximately $7,900,000.00.

l 8. Between April 2005and September 2007,the increase inrevenues generatedbythe Poker i

26 ...

i ,

8

!

@
i
ë
:

'

t
!

'

j
i
;
r

:

'

I

i
;
!
:I
I

I
I
i
!
:
.

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 9 of 18

Jehn D ec rosta and the Jelinslky O rganization

-

I I
j
I I. I

1 ' I
!
2. '

l I

1 9 Betw een 2005 and 2007

'

, John D ecrosta illegally placed horse race bets for the Jelinsky .
'

3 . i Organization, assisting the Jelinsky Organization in their illegal bookmaking and illegal gambling

4 business. Decrostaoperated his ownillegal messengerbetting operation, includingplacinghorse race i

5 bets. D ecrosta placed interstate telephone calls in the State of N evada and outside the State of

6 N evada, providing inform ation on available w agers, placing horse race bets, and discussing balances

7 owed or paid on the bets, He placed bets for players, including M ichael Jelinsky, Paul M attise, and

8 John Egidio, am ong others, w ho used him as their agent. Decrosta participated and received rebates

9: , of m oney from pari-m utuel bets in the illegal rebating conspiracy w ith the Jelinsky Organization and
10 the Poker Palace Casino. Decrosta conspired w ith the Jelinsky O rganization and the Poker Palace

1 1 Casino to structure m oney, and did structure m oney, to avoid the banking reporting requirem ents.

12

H ow ard Rubinsky, K nud C hristiansen, and the Jelinsky O rganization

20. Betw een 2005 and 2007, Rubinsky engaged in the business of betting and w agering,
l 3
114 using w ire com m unications to transm it in interstate and foreign com m erce bets, w agers, and

15 . inform ation to assist the placing of bets and w agers on sporting events, contests, and horse racing.

16; Rubinsky assisted the Jelinsky Organization in its illegal bookm aking and illegal gam bling business,

j .

171 christiansen participated in the illegal bookmaking business in Nevada. Christiansen moved money
1 8 betw een Rubinsky andthe Jelinsky Organizm ion. Rubinskyestablished illegal w agering accounts for !
!

1 9 the Jelinsky O rganization w ith ww w.bookm asker,com in Costa Rica. Rubinsky assisted the Jelinsky
I
20 Organization by m oving m oney betw een the Jelinsky Organization and its wagering clients and .
1
21 associates. Rubinsky Iived in Florida and used the interstate telephone calls to com m unicate w ith the !

22 Jelinsky Organization.

23

21 , Betw een 2005 and 2007, R ubinsky participated in num erous financial transactions to

24 launder the proceeds of the illegal bookm aking operation of the Jelinsky Organization. On July 6,

25 2007, Jeffrey Jelinsky met with Goldfarb and collected $50,000 in W ynn Casino gam ing chips for
26l aym ent on an illegal gam bling debt. On July 1O, 2007, Jeffrey Jelinsky left Rubinsky a m essage,

! P
I

9

:
!

!

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 10 of 18

; iI

l stating he had $50,000 for him in W ylm gmning chips. On July 10, 2007, while Rubinsky was in

2 Florida and Jeffrey Jelinsky w as in N evada, they discussed that the Jelinsky O rganization ow cd

3 Rubinsky $50,000. On July l 1, 2007, Jeffrey Jelinsky met with Christiansen and gave him the

4 $50,000 in W ynn Casino gaming chips for Rubinsky. On July 24, 2007, Jeffrey Jelinsky arranged to

5 have Goldfarb wire $100,000 to HSBC Bank account in the nam e of Laurence Feingold Attorney

6 Trust Account, pursuant to the instructions of Rubinsky. These m onies w ere then w ired, in two

I l

7. separate transactions, from the H SBC accountto Rubinskyand an associate of Rubinsky in Las Vegas.

8 On A ugust 22, 2007, Jeffrey Jelinsky and Rubinsky engaged in a telephone call between N evada and

: I
9 Florida, during which Rubinsky instructed Jeffrey Jelinsky to have Goldfarb wire $65,000 into an

1 0 escrow account at City N ational Bank, held in a third party nam e. These m onies w ere subsequently

l 1 w ired to the escrow account and then a check from the third party was deposited into an account held

12 by Rubinsky. A 1l of these m onies represent the m oney laundered proceeds of illegal bookm aking and

13! ! illegal gam bling.

14l I

1 5

Sandy G oldfarb and the Jelinsky O rganization

22. Betw een 2005 and 2007, Goldfarb m ade num erous telephone calls to the Jelinsky

16 Organization. ln the majority of these calls, Goldfarb placed wagers with Jeffrey Jelinsky, discussed
1 7 w'agering activity, or discussed account balances. W hen Jeffrey Jelinsky received G oldfarb's w agers,
1 8l' Jeffrey Jelinsky eithcr booked the wagers himself or made telephone calls to www.bookmaker.com
1 9 race book to layoff G oldfarb's w agers, Jeffrey Jelinsky had Ooldfarb launder som e of the illegal

I

:

20 gam bling proceeds by w ire transferring m oney to bank accounts provided by Rubinsky. Then

21 Rubinsky had an associate deliver the m oney to the Jelinsky O rganization in Las Vegas. The Jelinsky

22 Organization used the m oney to pay other clients and to prom ote the illegal bookm aking and illegal

23 ! gam bling activities. Goldfarb assisted the Jelinsky Organization in laundering the proceeds of its

24I illegal bookmaking operation by facilitating the movement of money between the Jelinsky

25 Organization, its clients, and its associates. The Jelinsky Organization com pensated G oldfarb usually

in the form of a reduction in his gam bling debt for his assistance in laundering the illegal proceeds,

10

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 11 of 18

On June 20, 2007, Goldfarb wire transferred $30,000 to Blackthorn Estate Buyers, a

com pany ow ned by Craig Bagon, to pay a gam bling debt owed by the Jelinsky Organization. On July

6, 2007, Goldfarb obtained $50,000 in W ynn gambling chips and gave them to Jeffrey Jelinsky. The

Jelinsky Organization paid its gam bling debt to Rubinsky with the $50,000 in W ynn gambling chips.

On July 25, 2007, Goldfarb wired transferred $100,000 to H SBC Bank with part of that m oney being
laundered through additional accounts until Rubinsky received some of thc money. The Jelinsky

6 I i

I

7 O rganization paid its gmnbling debt to Rubinsky through G oldfarb. O n A ugust 23, 2007, Goldfarb

8 wire transferred $60,000 to an Escrow Account to pay a gmnbling debt owed to Rubinsky by the

9 Jelinsky Organization.

l 0

1 1

John A starita and the Jelinsky O rganization

24. Betw een 2005 and 2007, A staritaw as a m em berof the Jelinsky O rganization and ran his

12l I ow n illegal bookm aking busincss and m essenger betting senrice. A starita w as also a regular

13i ' participant in the Poker Palace Casino contest. A starita w agered large am ounts of m oney at the Poker

I

14 Palace Casino and received a rebate by m eans of the tictitious contest. Astarita was a messenger

l 5 bcttor for the Jelinsky Organization and John Egidio. Astarita placed illegal wagers through

16 bookm akers located outside the State of N evada and laid off w agers through offshore casinos,

17 including w w w .bookm aker.com . Astaritam ade num erous calls to CostaR icatoplace illegal betsw ith

18, I w ww .bookm aker.com . He also placed illegal bets w ith Euro O ff-track in the British lsles. A starita

!

had weekly sum m aries of his clients account balances, with daily logs of each client's detailed

w agering inform ation and activities for each day. A starita has no other source of incom e except his

illegal boolunaking business and m essenger betting service,

221 .

25. On June 24, 2007, Decrosta sent Astarita to give Jeffrey Jelinsky the $5,000,00 entl'y fee

23 for the Poker Palace Casino rebate contest and his figures (the amount Decrosta wagered at the Poker

24 Palace Casino for the week) so Jeffrey Jelinsky could determine Decrosta's rebate, On June 25, 2007,
25 Astarita provided $10,000 to the Jelinsky Organizatin through Jeffrey Jelinsky for the Poker Palace

26 Casino contest. On July 14 and 16, 2007, A starita adm itted operating his own illegal gam bling

l 1

Ii p
' ;
I

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 12 of 18

I

l business and not wagering his own money. On July l8, 2007, the Jelinsky Organization delivered '
! !
2 ' m oneyto Astarita from the Poker Palace Casino contest, and Astarita paid Robert Black $1 10,000 for

3 an illegal gam bling debt.

4

26. In A ugust 2007, the Poker Palace Casino conducted ten rigged rebate contests. A total

5 ': of $385,800.00 was paid out to the Jelinsky Organization, A11 contest payments were made in cash.
; I
I

61 ln Septem ber 2007, the Poker Palace Casino conducted seven rigged rebate contests, A total of

7 $214,300.00 was paid out to the Jelinsky Organization. A1l contest payments were made in cash. For 1

8 the m onths of A ugust and Septem ber 2007, A starita's total pari-m utuel handle at the Poker Palace .
9 Casino was at least $73 1,465.20. Astarita received at least $73, 146 in cmsh payments from the Poker i
1
1 0 Palace C asino contest over this period. A starita averaged approxim ately 12% of the total contest '

1 1 payout at Poker Palace Casino. The total cash payouts from the contest at the Poker Palace Casino,

12 between April 2007 and July 2007, were $1,1 85,200. Astarita collected approximately $142,000 in :

1 3 contest payouts between April 2007 and July 2007, for a total of $215,146 in cash paym ents from the

14 contest betw een A pril 2007 and Septem ber 2007, A starita stored his illegal bookm aking and

1 5 m essenger runner senzice at the Ram part Casino safe deposit box num ber 77. A starita accessed the
1 6jj box on a weekly basis, sometimes more than once a day. A11 ol Astarita s seized money represents
1 7 proceeds from his illegal gam bling activities. Astarita did not have any other source of legitim ate

w y

i

l

l 8 incom e over this period of tim e. A starita was involved in operating an illegal gam bling business, to

l 9 include m essenger betting, illegal bookmaking, and illegal wagering with offshore and out of state

20 bookm akers. A starita w as also involved in m oney laundering and stnzcturing.

21

22

FIR ST CA U SE O F A C TIO N

27. The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates all the allegations contained in

23 paragraphs 1 through 26 fully set forth herein.

24

28, The defendant is involved in a transaction or attem pted transaction in violation of 1 8

25 U.S.C. j l956(a)( 1 ), or is property traceable to such property, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to

26 1 8 U.S.C. j 98 1(a)(1)(A).

I

12

I
1

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 13 of 18

SE CO N D CA U SE O F A CT IO N

2

3

29. The United States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates all the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

30. The defendant is involved in a transaction or attem pted transaction in violation of 18

U.S.C. j 1956(a)(2), or is property traceable to such property, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to

1 8 U.S.C. j 98 1(a)(1)(A).

TH IR D CA U SE O F A CT IO N

31 . The United States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates all the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

32. The defendant is involved in a transaction or attem pted transaction in violation of 1 8

U.S.C. j 1 957, or is property traceable to such property, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 1 8

U.S.C. j 981(a)(l)(A),

FO U R TH CA U SE O F A CT IO N

33. The United States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates aIl the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 26 as thougb fully set forth herein.

34, The defendant constitutes, or is derived liom , proceeds traceable to violations of 1 8

U.S.C. j 1 084 and Nev. Rev. Stat. jj 1 99.480, 463.160, 463.430, 464.010, 465.092, and 465.093, a
specified unlawful aetivity as defined in 18 U.S.C. jj l 956(c)(7)(A) and l961(1)(B), or a conspiracy
to comm

it such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. j 98 l (a)(1)(C).

FIFT H C A USE O F A C TIO N

35. The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates a11 the allegations contained in

paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein,

36. The defendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 1 8

U.S.C. j 1 34 l , a specitied unlawful activity as defined in 1 8 U.S.C. jj l 956(c)(7)(A) and l 96 l (1)(B),

or a conspiracy to commit such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 1 8 U.S.C. j
98 1 (a)( 1)(C).

13

I
I
!

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 14 of 18

@

@

1 1.

2

SIX TH CA USE O F A CTIO N

37, 'I'he United States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates all the allegations contained in

3 paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

4

38, The defendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 18

5 U.S.C. 5 1343, a specified unlawful activityas det-ined in l 8 U.S.C. jj 1956(c)(7)(A) and l961(1)(B),

6 or a conspiracy to commit such offense, arld is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. j
;

7 98 l(a)(1)(C).

8

9

SEVEN TH c A tTsE O F AC TIO N

39. The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates all the allegations containcd in

10 paragraphs l through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

1
l 1

40. The defendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 18

l2' . U.S.C. j. 1952(a)(1) and Nev. Rev. Stat. jjh 199.480, 463.160, 463.430, 464.010, 465.092, and

1 3 465.093, a specified unlawful activity as defined in 18 U.S.C. jj 1956(c)(7)(A) and l 96 1(1)(B), or

14 a conspiracy to commit such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 1 8 U.S.C. j 98 l (a)(1)(C).

15 .

16
;

EIG H TH C AU SE O F A CT IO N

4 l . The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincom orates al1 the allegations contained in

1 7 paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

l 8

42. The defendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 1 8

1 9 U.S.C. j 1952(a)(3) and Nev. Rev. Stat. j.j 199,480, 463.160, 463.430, 464.010, 465.092, and

20 465.093, a speeiticd unlawful activity as defined in 18 U,S.C, jj 1956(c)(7)(A) and l961(1)(B), or

2 l a conspiracy to commit such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuantto 1 8 U.S.C. j, 981(a)(l)(C).

22.

23

N IN TH C AU SE O F A CTIO N

43. The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates al1 the allegations contained in

24 paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set fol'th herein.

25

44. The defendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 1 8

26 U.S.C. j' 1955 and Nev. Rev. Stat. jj 199.480, 463, 160, 463,430, 464.010, 465.092, and 465.093, a

14

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 15 of 18

l specified unlawful activity as defined in l 8 U.S.C. jj 1956(c)(7)(A) and 1961(1)(B), or a conspiracy '

2 to commit such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. j 98 1(a)(1)(C).

3

4ii

T EN TH C A U SE O F A CTIO N

45 The United States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates a1I the allegations contained in

5 paragraphs l through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

46. The defendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 18

6
! :
7. ' U.S.C. j 1956(a)(1), a specitied unlawful activity as defined in 18 U.S.C. j 1956(c)(7)(A) and
I8 l96l(l)(B), or a conspiracy to commit such offense, and is subjectto forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
9 j 981(a)(1)(C).

1 0
1 1

.
47. The United Statcs realleges, readopts, and reincorporates al1 the allegations contained in '1

E LEVEN TH CA U SE O F A CTIO N

l 2 paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

48. The defendant constitutes, or is derived fkom , proceeds traceable to violations of 18

14 U.S.C. j 1956(a)(2), a specitied unlanrful activity as defined in 1 8 U.S.C. j 1 956(c)(7)(A) and i
l 5' 1961(1)(B)
'

, or a conspiracy to commit such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to l 8 U.S.C.

16 j 981 (a)(1 )(C).
1 7

TW ELFTH C AU SE O F A CT IO N

1 8

49. The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates all the allegations contained in

l 9 paragraphs l through 26 as thougph fully set forth herein.

20

50. The dcfendant constitutes, or is derived from , proceeds traceable to violations of 1 8

2 1 ' U.S.C. j 1957, a specitied unlawful activity as detined in 18 U.S.C, 5 1956(c)(7)(A) and 1 961 (1)(B),
22: or a conspiracy to commit such offense, and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 1 8 U.S.C. j
23! 981(a)(1)(C).

I II

1i

i

l 3
i 1

j

24.

25

THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTIO N

51 . The U nited States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates al1 the allegations contained in '

26 ' ' paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein.

I

1

15

'
!
I

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 16 of 18

i .
1
52. The defendant is involved in violations of 3 1 U.S.C. j 5313, or a conspiracy to commit
E i
2 . i such violations, or is traceable to any such violations or conspiracy, and is subject to forfeiture
!
; i3
1 pursuant to 31 U.S.C. j 5317(c)(2).
! ;
4Ii
i I
5 j
! i6 paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set forth herein

53. The United States realleges, readopts, and reincorporates a1l the allcgations contained in

FOURTEENTH CA USE OF ACTIO N

.

.

'
i

I

i
!

54. The defendant is involved in violations of 31 U.S.C. j 5324, or a conspiracy to commit

71 I
.
; E
.
I j
8 such violations, or is traceable to any such violations or conspiracy, and is subject to forfeiture 1
j
9 pursuant to 3 1 U.S.C. j 53 1 7(c)(2).

10

CO NC LU SIO N

1 1
Because of the foregoing, the defendant is subject to seizure and to forfeiture and has become
12 and is forfeited to the United States ofAmerica, plaintiff, under 1 8 U.S.C. j 981(a)(1)(A) and (C) and

13 31 U.S.C. j 5317(c)(2).

14; .
15i ;

16.

W HEREFOR E, the U nited States of A m erica, Plaintiff, prays as follow s:
1 .

o ue process issue to entbrce the forfeiture of the defendant;

2,

Due notice be given to any interested party to appear and to show cause w hy the

l 7 forfeiture should not be decreed;
1 8

3.

The defendant be condem ned and be forfeited to the U nited Statcs; and

4. This Court enter other and further relief as it deemsjust and proper.

D A TED this

ay of January, 2010

Respectfully subm itted,

DANIEL G, BOG EN
U ' ed St t A
y

D AN I L . H OL IN G SW ORTII
Assistant United tates Attorney

16

19 '

20ë !
i I
2 1 i
I
i i
2211
I
23;

25
26

ii
; I' :

j
!
'

.

:
i
!

I
1
l

i
I
:

!

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 17 of 18

@

@

V ER IFICA TIO N

1, Laura H odgdon, am the Special Agent of the U nited States lm m igration & Custom s

Enlbrcem ent assigned to this case, l have read the contcnts of the foregoing Com plaint for Forfeiture

In Rem. l declare and verify under penalty of perjury that the tbregoing is true and correct pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. j 1746(2).
Executed on Janum'y S - , 2010.

-

'

w > =

.

'> ..- -=

.

Laura H odgdons Special A gent
U nited States Im m igration & Custom s Enforcem cnt

17

,. .

Case 2:10-cv-00032-RLH-GWF Document 1 Filed 01/08/10 Page 18 of 18
n 1
' k i k ' . ' ..

w.ls 44 (R... I 1/04)
The JS 44 çiv il covrr sheet and the lnformation containcd herein nelther r pc lace nor supplement the tillng and svrvice of pleadinxs or other papers as rcqpired by law' vxcepl as prpvlded
by local rtlles of court. This %rm approved by
' thc Judlclal Conferencc ol' the Unitt!d States ln Septcmbcr l 974, fs requlred for ht e use of the Clerk of Uourl tbr the p' urpose of Inltlating
the c'vil docktjt sheet. (SEE INSTDRtJCI'IONS 0N THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)
1. (a) PLAINTIFFS
United States of Am erica

C IV IL C O V ER SH EET

! ?. , ,' 2
ij
h k ;i
.( . j ;. .. ç

.
-7 X

(b) county ()f Resldence othlzlrst bisted plalntin' Clark
(ExcEla I Ix u.s I>LAIXTIF.EJ cAsus)

(C) Altorrlej' 's (Flnn Nalue. Addrcss. and Tcluphtqle Numbrr)

United States Attorney's Ofl-ice, Daniel D , Hollingsworth, A SA ,

.

. .-e
-
, rrh
uk$ v j) ï; 3!
- . 'k c .
ï-
. ) t , .
-....--

!----
t
t
t
h.
5$
( i, .

'
.

EFE' NDANTS
$ 1 , 1 50.00 in United States Currency
i >
- r'

- . '

.

.. . county of Rcsldence of Flrst Llstet Del-endant Clark
' (Ix uxs Bltalx'nFlr cAscs oxuy)

.

NOTEt IN LANDICONDEM NATION CASES. ESE THE LOCATION OF THE

L.,&N D Ixyol.v ED ,

Attorntys ( If Koown) '

.

. . ,
.

-

. . '

t(
.k .

3

15 I LI s (; avern na ent

Plalntifr

:1 3 Fc deral kluesllon

(LLS. () ov crnnlent N ot a PmJ')

t
-> '

. -.c::71' ( or Diverdity Casns Only)

(; 2 LI s ()o v ern nlenl

DtfTaatlt

C1 4 DTverslA'

(lndicatc Citiztmshlp of Partltls in ltem l II)

IV. NATURE O F SUIT place an ''x'' In one Box oru

CONTRACT

TORTS

p'r,- oEF
11 l S1 1 ln corporate d or Prin cip: Placu

In'y' o,:y
r1 1 :1 1

ar11 0ne Box for Dufendant)

o f Buslness En llnis Slale

S1 2 r; 2 ln corporate d Ja# Jbi nclp al Plact C1 j S7 5

of Business In Anotlxr State

D 3 O 3 Forelgrl Natlon

O 6 D 6

Cltize n o f llzls Statc

Clttze n at',4n oth er State

Citkzen or Sublect of a

Forei n Counu

F RFEITITRF/PENALTY

PERSONAL INJURY

D l l 0 Insurance
(-1 1 29 Manne
C1 l 30 Mlller Act
(H 1 40 Negouable Insrrunwm
D 1 50 Rccoxcry of Ovcrpaymen! D 320 Assaull. I.lbel &
D 1 j 1 Mtdicarc Ak:l
D l 52 Rccovt:ry of Defaulled

D 3 19 Airplane
D 3 1 5 Alrplane Prrxluct

& Ellforccmcnt (àfludgmenl

D 330 Frderal Employers'

Llabllity

Slander
Llablllty
.'D 340 Manne
'D 345 Manne Protiuct
Llability

Sludent Loans
(Exc1 Vcwrans)

D I 53 Recovury of Ovemayment

01' Vetrrarl's Benefits
O 350 Motcir Vchjcle
O 35.5 Molar Vcluclr
-7 l 60 stockholderu' Stllts
O 1 90 Othec Conrraç!
Protluct L1 ablllty
I-I 1 95 Conyac! Produçt Liablllp S'.1 360 Other I'ersonal
In u
O 1 96 Franchlse
cl'k'll. Rlclrrs

BANKRUPTCY

D 122 Appeal 28 USC ! 58
O 423 Wlthdrawal
28 USC 1j7

PR PER R 1 '

O 820 Copynghts
O 830 Palcnl
O 840 Trademark

PERSONAL INJURY (J'1 6 I 0 Agriculture

O 362 Personal Injury - O 620 Otllur Fxd & Dnlg
Med Malpractice O 625 Dnzg Related hleizlu'e
of lYtAperty 2 l USC 8s I

O 365 Personal Injtuy -
Product Liabillty
Inlu:y Prtxluct
Llabil ity

(!1 630 l.lquor I.aws
O 368 Astwstos Pcrsonal C1 640 R R & TnTck
(:1 650 Alrllne Regs
L'''1 660 Occupaîlonal
Safel/Yltaltb

'IF 11$.)9 Otber

PERSONAL I3ROPERTY
O :373 tklxr Fmuti
O 37 I Trul.h ln Lendmg
O 380 Other Pcrsonal
Propzrty Damage
Prodllct Llability

C1 3s5 Property Damage (7 721) Labor/Nlgml Relatlons O !63 DIWCOIWW (105(g))

L'.'J 7 l 0 Falr Labor Slandards O :6 1 l I!A ( 1 395 R)

BOR

SOCIA Ia SE > TRITY

Ac1

O s62 Black Lung (Q23)

D' 731) Labor/lblgml Rerzoclng O 361 SSID Tltlc XV1

& Disclouure Act

O 865 RS1 105

OTHER STATUH S

O 100 Slate Reapportlonmcn!
D 1 1 0 Antltrusf
D 130 Banks and I3anklng
O 150 Commerce
O 160 Deponatlon
C1 170 Racketeer lnfluençcd ançl
O 180 Consumcr Crcdit
C1 490 Cable/sat TV
D %19 Selective 3ervlts
O 250 Scculitlcs/colnnlodllies.'

Corrupt Ortranizations

Exchhanstt
1 2 t.1S(' 34 I 0

(D 875 Customer Challenge
(D ï9t) tlthzr Statutory Actlons
D 89 I Agnuultural Acts

REAL PROPER'I'Y
C.1 2 I 0 I.and Condemn:uion
O 220 Forccluuure
S.1 230 Renl Exase & Flectmtnt O 443 Housing''
O 240 Torts to I aand
O 245 Torl Prodllct Llabl 11t,y
O 290 AI1 Other Rtal Propcrty O 445 Amer w/rahsabllltles . D 540 Mandamtu & Other

PRISONER PETIA'IONS r7 740 Rn,lway Labor .&m
D 5 I 0 Monons to Vacate (:1 790 O:hcr Labor Lltlganon t'W :70 Taxes (U 5 Pljllllllff D 893 Envlrunmenlal Matturs
D 894 Encrij'y Allocalion Acl
D 119:5 Fruedom tàf infonnatlon
O gollAppeal of Fee Delemunatlon

FâDERAI- TAx stlrrs O 897 Fxmnonliç stabillzation Acl

g-1 79 I Empl Re1 llw
Scçunly Aut

D 530 Uex ral
D 535 Death Ptnalty

O 44 l Vollntr
O 442 Employmtn:

(7.1 87 I :RS- Th1rd Parly

Accommodations

Habeas Corlms:

O .444 B''cl l'arr

or Defendant)

26 USC 761)9

ScnLmloe

Afa

Und?r Equal Acctss
to Iustice

O 950 Conslltutionallty of

stat: Statults

Employlnent

'D 550 ('.lvlI Rights

D 446 Amer w/r.hsabïlities . 'D 555 Plisolz Condillon

Otlwr

D 410 Other (.'lvll Rlghts

(Iqavc an ''x'' ln one Box ()uy)

V. O RIG IN
K1 l orialnal
pro-cceclln

a z

Rvmoved frurn
state Coun

o 3

.

Rcmandcd trom
A ellate Court

o 4

Reinstated or
Reo ened

a 5 Transtkrred from

Appeal te Dlstrict
Judge from
another dlstrict ED 6 Multldistrict W 1 Magistrale
s ci
Jtld ment

C:!ï .- .
Hnc
Asset l'orfelture seeking the furfciture of the defendant property.

laltl atlon
jjejrlj. jyzj tute undcr whlch you are tiling (Do not cite jurisdictional slatute: unless diversity)
ylusrlyiqn ofcause.
CHFCK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $
UNDER F R C.P 23

.

CHECK YES only if demanded In complalnt
.IlJRv DENIANI):

ED Yes Z No

V1. C AUSE O F ACTIO N

V1ï. REQUESTED 15

CO M PLAINT:

VIII. RELATED CASEIS) (S

IF ANY

ee insp4kgtious)

' JUDGE

DOCKET NUMBER

AT

FO R O F F I ('. E E ' L 5'

51 TURE O A'

c

O QORD

L

RECEIP #

AMOUNT

APPI,YING 1FP

JUDGF

MAG JUDGE