Scratch card lottery winner Timothy Elliott scooped $1m (nearly £500,000), but it seems his winnings have been thrown into question as he is not
strictly supposed to gamble.
Elliott, of Massachusetts is a convicted bank robber and it is reported that under his probation rules he "may not gamble, purchase lottery tickets or visit an establishment where gaming is conducted, including restaurants where Keno may be played."
A court hearing has been put in place to determine whether Elliott violated his probation terms and the court will decide what will become of his winnings.
I heard a radio report about this.
Under the terms of the lottery, he was supposed to get $50,000 per year for 20 years. He posed for a picture as he was given his first check, and the picture was posted on the website. After someone recognized him as a convict on non-gambling probation, he got into trouble over it. I heard the picture has since been removed.
I will be interested in hearing the final outcome.
I would say no.
He knew the terms of his parole etc. Much the same as lottery workers can't play I think.
The terms of his probation say he should'nt even buy a ticket, by defying the court order he should forfeit his winnings and the monies be given to a
Regards the Bear
As one of my school teachers used to say; 'the answer is in the question'. If he is not allowed to buy a ticket, he should not be allowed to keep his winnings. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
He may end up losing more than his winnings. If not gambling was a condition of his parole, he may actually be convicted of breaching his parole conditions and lose his liberty too.
I've wondered if it might turn out like this: the lottery pays him the winnings (because they probably do not have anything in the rules that say
"we do not pay out to felons on parole who have as a condition of parole that they may not gamble"--who would have thought of it?). But, because he
violated probation, he can be put in prison to serve his sentence. If he has five years to serve, he might have something like $250,000 minus taxes
waiting for him when he gets out.
The rule of probation, as I understand it, is that he not BUY A LOTTERY TICKET--an offense he has irrevokably committed. It says nothing against collecting checks.
I wonder if he robbed the bank because of great debt due to gambling, or worsened by gambling. If the purpose of the prohibition was to keep him from gambling himself to desperate poverty, the act of winning (if he can get effective treatment to stop him from compulsive gambling) may have achieved the intended result.
I'd have thought it fairly obvious - he can't collect because one may not profit by the commission of a crime.
It was illegal for him to buy the ticket.
I'm with scholar on this one - he gets punished for breaking probation, but the winnings are waiting for him when he gets out. As was said, it was the buying of a ticket that was naughty, nothing about winning being a crime.
For purposes of discussion, consider this:
A man can make $100,000 if he can meet some people and sign a contract today--the last day he has the option to do so. It is minutes before the deadline, so he speeds to the meeting and signs just before time runs out, and makes the $100,000.
He broke the law to get the $100,000. The $100,000 was entirely contingent on his breaking the law. Now, does he pay a fine for speeding, and keep the $100,000, or does he forfeit the $100,000 because he committed a crime to get it?
What do you think?
Splitting hairs here, Scholar, slow day at the office?
A person cannot profit from the commission of a crime - Law
A crime that is committed that is unrelated to the act of making a profit does not make said profits the proceeds of the criminal act. If you try and argue that one in court, you would lose.
The winnings were the proceeds of a crime (breaking terms of probation) and in the UK all proceeds of crime are forfeit.
Is breaking the terms of probation a crime???
Isn't it just a condition to be allowed more freedom, and when the condition is broken the extra freedom is removed? If so, why add an extra punishement, when buying a lottery ticket (assuming he's an adult) is not in itself a crime.
I think breaking the rules of probation is a crime, tbh - and generally one that results in a return to prison...?