| On April Fools Day, 1984, two players in Las Vegas | | | | any of the prosecution's case. The only argument to |
| were arrested at the Marina Casino for using a | | | | be made was that the defendants never committed |
| concealed video camera to peek at the dealer's hole | | | | the crime of cheating according to the Nevada |
| card. This device was yet another of Keith Taft's | | | | cheating statutes. Why should Curtas and Minagil |
| inventions. One player, Keith's brother Ted, wore the | | | | argue with the gaming agents' descriptions of the |
| miniature camera in his belt buckle, while the other | | | | equipment and its usage? The defendants had the law |
| player, Rodney Weatherford, a Lockheed Engineer, | | | | on their side. Curtas had prepared a closing argument |
| sat in the casino parking lot in the cab of a dump truck | | | | in which he intended to acknowledge that the |
| that had been fitted with a satellite receiving dish. | | | | defendants had done exactly what the prosecution |
| Rodney's job was to watch the video images picked | | | | had said they had done. Then, he intended to read to |
| up by the table-top-Ievel camera, in order to | | | | the jury all of the Nevada cheating statutes, one at a |
| electronically signal Ted at the table with the value of | | | | time, and simply point out that what the defendants in |
| the dealer's hole card. | | | | this case had done did not violate a single statute on |
| Here's what happened on the court trial: For a few | | | | the books. He was right. Technically, no crime had |
| days, the prosecution paraded before the judge and | | | | been committed. |
| jury all of the electronics, the video tapes, and the | | | | However, before the closing arguments, the attorneys |
| communication devices. They even took everyone | | | | had to meet with the judge in his chambers. When |
| down to the courthouse garage to examine the old | | | | Curtas came back from the judge's chambers, he |
| truck with the satellite receiving dish in it. And this was | | | | was steaming mad. The district court judge, the |
| a 1984 satellite dish, nothing like your home model | | | | Honorable Donald Mosley, had asked both sides to |
| Direct-TV dish today. It was huge! It looked like a | | | | give him a briefing on their proposed closing arguments. |
| battleship radar scanner! | | | | When Curtas described his closing argument to the |
| Keith was undeniably brilliant. He was the classic mad | | | | judge, the judge told him that he would not allow it. |
| scientist, inventing in his basement laboratory high-tech | | | | Curtas pled with the judge; he simply wanted to read |
| devices the likes of which James Bond would be | | | | the law to the jury. The jury, he argued, were not legal |
| proud to own. He just wanted to take as much money | | | | experts, and they did not know the wording of the |
| out of the casinos as he possibly could by any legal | | | | Nevada laws against cheating. According to Curtas, |
| means. Remember, there were no anti-device laws at | | | | the judge said, "I used to be a blackjack dealer, and I |
| that time, and the Einbinderl Dalben decision that | | | | know what cheating is. Your client was cheating." |
| legitimized front-loading as a legal strategy in Nevada | | | | So now, as the defense had forgone their opportunity |
| had already been rendered. Also, Keith's concealable | | | | to present any witnesses, the case was closed. The |
| "David" blackjack computers were already legally | | | | only defense Curtas was allowed to present in his |
| selling in the stores. | | | | closing argument was to inform the jury that the |
| After the prosecution finished presenting the state's | | | | Nevada law books would be available to them in the |
| case-and they had all kinds of gambling experts and | | | | jury room, and that they had the right to read the law |
| gaming agents take the stand to describe the way the | | | | for themselves. The players, needless to say, were |
| whole thing worked the defence attorneys had | | | | convicted of felony cheating. |
| decided not to put either of the defendants on the | | | | And the state of Nevada, needless to say, realized |
| stand. They had decided to present no witnesses, but | | | | that it needed a law that would make the use of such |
| to simply present their closing arguments. The | | | | devices illegal in casinos, and it needed this law fast. |
| attorneys, John Curtas and Stephen Minagil, were the | | | | These players had been railroaded to prison without a |
| same attorneys who had just successfully | | | | fair trial, and the state knew it. There was always a |
| represented Einbinder and Dalben. | | | | possibility that some jury in a similar case in the future |
| John Curtas, Ted's attorney, explained his legal | | | | would actually read the law and realize that a |
| strategy. First of all, he did not see any reason to | | | | defendant accused of using a device to aid him in |
| refute the evidence as presented. In fact, the | | | | making decisions at a gaming table violated none of |
| defendants had done exactly what the prosecution | | | | the cheating statutes. |
| said they had done. So, there was no argument about | | | | |