DQed from regionals and BANNED two weeks later (I was set-up)

[deckmaster]

Pokemon TCG lost a great player. Gino was one of the top players in this game who's record made him one of the best, and Gino's goofy nature made him a heck of a nice guy to be around with. This whole fiasco escalated to this point because of the Laptop incident. The "proof" does not show much, and it is still undermined if the bag Gino was walking out with was either Mee's or Gino's bag. In order to prove if the bag was Mee's, we would need to see video footage or photos of Mee leaving the bags at the front desk. Possession is 9/10 of the law.

As for the "d.q", I can't say anything about it--I wasn't there. But playing Gino from my past games never demonstrated anything illegal.

Best of luck, Gino, and keep fighting this for as long as you can! My brother and I give you our support.

 

[losjackal]

Weather or not you think Gino deserves to get banned is probably based on your opinions on the laptop case in Canada. To say these two aren't connected is a joke. Gino got a pass on something he probably should have gotten a ban for and ban for something that probably should have been a slap on the wrist. Yea this whole thing feels like a set up to use as an excuse to get Gino banned. Looking at the bottom card of your deck gives such an irrelevant advantage I just don't see an "accomlished cheater" using something so irrelevant to the game state.

Jon's cards in Mee's bag means that Mee's also should have gotten a strongly worded letter from Nintendo as well...

Jay, I'm reading what you wrote above, and it doesn't seem like you're representing the facts.

1. Of course they are connected, because
2. Gino didn't get a pass, he revealed in this thread that he got probation for the laptop incident
3. If you believe there are shades of grey to cheating, if it's such an irrelevant advantage, would you be okay with letting every opponent you face do it from now on? Even if for some masochistic reason you would, this thread shows all of the players aghast at the earlier round victims of this cheating.
4. From what we know, there is a difference: Jon immediately returned the cards, Gino has only pleaded the fifth.
5. ​There is more to the investigation than has been publicly made available, like the reported eyewitness testimony.

Im being accused of looking under my deck after each shuffle.

ALL five of my opponents cut my deck after I shuffled. They weren't noobs to the game.

Say what? From your original post, emphasis mine:

...informed me that I had been watched throughout the event by his judges when a certain judge informed him I was looking under my deck after my opponent cut it. I was told by Pokepop two of his judges had claimed to see me look under the bottom of my deck throughout the tournament all through Swiss rounds. I was dumbfounded by these accusations and asked his judges to explain and demonstrate how I did this. The judges told me after I shuffled my deck I would hand my deck for my opponent to cut and upon my opponent handing me back my deck I would tilt it and look at the bottom of it.

Seems like you are twisting the facts now, to confuse what people think, or just not telling the whole truth.

 

[GinoLombardi21]

Jay, I'm reading what you wrote above, and it doesn't seem like you're representing the facts.

1. Of course they are connected, because
2. Gino didn't get a pass, he revealed in this thread that he got probation for the laptop incident
3. If you believe there are shades of grey to cheating, if it's such an irrelevant advantage, would you be okay with letting every opponent you face do it from now on? Even if for some masochistic reason you would, this thread shows all of the players aghast at the earlier round victims of this cheating.
4. From what we know, there is a difference: Jon immediately returned the cards, Gino has only pleaded the fifth.
5. ​There is more to the investigation than has been publicly made available, like the reported eyewitness testimony.

Say what? From your original post, emphasis mine:



Seems like you are twisting the facts now, to confuse what people think, or just not telling the whole truth.

I got probation because of a bunch of reports that were sent to TPCi. None of the reports was ever proven about the Laptop incident. Mees Lied since day 1 with about over half of his information with proof saying I stole his laptop when I did not. There is no proof, there is no video, and it is all anonymous sources and he said, she said typical haters spreading a rumor. He had a photo of me with a bag from the pokemon store, put a story together, and greatly exaggerated the story. TPCi acknowledged the information at hand and decided "well he's being accused of all this, and without sufficient evidence it isn't fair to ban him, lets give him a warning and the benefit of the doubt and with this warning hell realize to be on his best behavior for the upcoming season". Me being the fearless person I am, I decided not to argue my probation and get it thrown out or reduced. I felt because I play CLEAN and getting accused of any bad behavior in the upcoming season would just never happen. Boy was I wrong! *facepalm* TPCi kept getting reports and hate mail about me after August and just piled the information up. At regionals two judges took matters into their own hands and used their power to the fullest. I was given a non-negotiable DQ from the event for something I didn't even do.

Im not twisting facts around you banana head. Each time I would hand my opponent my deck he would cut it. 5/5 of my opponents NOT ONCE seen me look under my deck like i'm being accused of doing. Saying just because they didn't see it doesn't mean I didn't do it, insults their intelligence as a player to determine if their being cheated against. If their cutting my deck their not 'noobs' and obviously know what stacking is. With that being said if I was lifting or tilting my deck they would say something. Kyle morris's statement saying I should have only received a warning just goes to show you he doesn't even understand the penalty guidelines of the game and that anybody could become a judge. For all I know him and Bobs actions against me were malicious and BIAS. There is no other further explanation. I didn't look under my deck at philly regionals nor have I ever done that before in my life.

As for pleading the fifth amendment about the Canada incident, I refuse to incriminate myself. The thing to understand is that "self-incrimination" is not tantamount to "admitting guilt." Self-incrimination can mean providing any information that might be used against you, fairly or unfairly. Im protecting myself and thats that! I don't owe you or anyone else an explanation.

 

[losjackal]

Thanks for replying, Gino. I'll round up some more facts.

I have never cheated or taught someone to cheat in my life. People say I taught Rahul to palm cards in the LCQ 2013. He got caught for cheating at nationals 2013 before I even knew him by isiah middleton.

Not just people, Rahul himself said you taught him.

Mees Lied since day 1 with about over half of his information with proof saying I stole his laptop when I did not.

This is the first statement I've seen from you denying you stole the laptop.

As for pleading the fifth amendment about the Canada incident, I refuse to incriminate myself. The thing to understand is that "self-incrimination" is not tantamount to "admitting guilt." Self-incrimination can mean providing any information that might be used against you, fairly or unfairly. Im protecting myself and thats that! I don't owe you or anyone else an explanation.

Respectfully, why did you start this topic if you're not willing to explain your side?

I suppose it's to illustrate that TPCi was out to get you, or persuade people to believe you. So people can make up their own minds, these are the claims you make in your post above:

• Mees is lying
• There is no video evidence of you rifling through his suitcase
• The reported eyewitness must be lying
• Two Judges (Kyle and Bob) lied about what they saw at Philly Regionals

 

[GinoLombardi21]

Not just people, Rahul himself said you taught him.

First and foremost Rahul was a cheater at Nationals 2013 before I even knew him. The allegation that I taught a CHEATER how to cheat is so juvenile. On top of that he's 16/17 years old. His credibility is already shattered. Rahul is an example of just another player hopping on a bandwagon filled with starting rumors.

This is the first statement I've seen from you denying you stole the laptop.

Your research about me or what you've read is poorly executed. I denied taking Mees's laptop long ago. The only thing I plead the fifth about was giving an explanation that could incriminate myself and others. Watching Mees and his friends walk scott free from all this when they were the ones who STOLE JONS BACKPACK the night before I don't regret that decision at all. I believe in karma and this is a perfect example.


Respectfully, why did you start this topic if you're not willing to explain your side?

I have statements from five of my opponents that claim to not once see me look under my deck. Kyle Morris a judge who accused me of looking under the bottom of my deck to his judging knowledge my action was only worth a warning not a DQ. He doesn't even know the penalty guidelines yet because he's a judge his word is valued more then mine, even in my innocence. An email was sent to the entire judging staff from a POKE PARENT wanting me banned from regionals the night before. The fact that a judge claimed to see me look under my deck and did not step in to give me the benefit of the doubt or say something like "don't lift your deck that high or could you please shuffle the opposite direction because you could see your cards" just implies they were setting me up. I was treated unfairly and I couldn't even plead my case. It was non-negiotable. Someone earlier in this thread even posted that a judge stepped in to tell him to shuffle in the other direction because he could see his cards but I don't get that sort of treatment. Im treated unfairly and i'm discriminated against. I explained my side of the story you need to re-read my thread buddy.

I suppose it's to illustrate that TPCi was out to get you, or persuade people to believe you. So people can make up their own minds, these are the claims you make in your post above:

• Mees is lying
• There is no video evidence of you rifling through his suitcase
• The reported eyewitness must be lying
• Two Judges (Kyle and Bob) lied about what they saw at Philly Regionals
  
  1-3 that you listed is all irrelevant subjects. Those three things shouldn't determine a judges actions against me. Just because someone said something doesn't make it true.
  

Don't let your ears witness what your eyes didn't see.

 

[r3skyline]

This is what I, an outsider who has nevet met Gino before and views changed.

Gino from his Facebook is most definitely a joker. A lot of the time in inappropriate ways. He seems friendly but is definitely not role model material from his Facebook. However, perhaps he is different in person.

Ill think to be as professional as possible with the following

I have followed the entire Mees and laptop incident. I have taken all the information from all the posts since world's. I forwarded it a few days ago to an intelligence officer friend of mine who works with CID in the military/JAG. Both he and I agree on some things.

*determination of the bag is unclear as several sources state both parties had similar bags, however one thing was noticed that Mees never stated what bag it was until he was questioned after seeing the video/still images.

*Ginos stories have all been consistent across the board. Nothing has ever been withdrawn or re imaged.

*although the case is an international incident, the need for these "eyewitnesses" to not come forth is pretty concerning. All we here are stories of people supposedly seeing it all unfold.

*people keep talking about there being more to the investigation than is what posted. Standard at least on the military side is to immediately get in contact with the accused/suspect. Has gino ever mentioned anything about being questioned.? Its not hard to get in touch with him. His fb is public and he uses his real name. Questionable.

*gino does have a bad reputation to his name and character, but to use this to make a judgment call is not appropriate nor professional. Only use facts. There have been little submitted from the public info just lots and lots of stories.

Tbe judging incident

*the judges needing to be certain was indeed the correct route. Recon is something that needed to take place. So everyone arguing (including myself earlier) that he should have been approached much earlier than he were, is incorrect. Evidence was needed to present an accurate case to the head judge.

Since there is lots of heresay from both parties, one thing would need to present itself, otherwise outside people can not point fingers. There needs to be hard video evidence of the laptop/bag incident. There needs to be a definitive confirmation on who's bag Gino has for sure. Statements from the person handling the bags, statements from the police report and hotel report need to surface. Especially the detailed report from who Mees spoke with. This is the only person that can indeed have the final say. If its as detailed as it should be for a report, his words will play a major role.

So Mees, if you see this, do you have the hotels statement/report from the initial investigation?

 

[Jaeger]

Jay, I'm reading what you wrote above, and it doesn't seem like you're representing the facts.

1. Of course they are connected, because Hey we agree on something!
2. Gino didn't get a pass, he revealed in this thread that he got probation for the laptop incident aka a pass...Carlos what would happen to the crime rate if all the police could do is hand out strongly worded letters? He got a pass...call it a slap on the wrist if you like
3. If you believe there are shades of grey to cheating, if it's such an irrelevant advantage, would you be okay with letting every opponent you face do it from now on? Even if for some masochistic reason you would, this thread shows all of the players aghast at the earlier round victims of this cheating. Your missing the point...if you consider Gino to be such an amazing cheater and accomplished for doing it for so many year than why would he cheat in a way that gives him no advantage. I just don't see this happening intinianlly especially when none of his opponents noticed. Do you think it's possible that the judges were looking so hard for something to find that they let themselves see something that wasn't there?
4. From what we know, there is a difference: Jon immediately returned the cards, Gino has only pleaded the fifth. which were not arguing about...they should have delt with the orginal issue and not something like this.
5. ​There is more to the investigation than has been publicly made available, like the reported eyewitness testimony. Are we talking the laptop or cheating?

Say what? From your original post, emphasis mine:



Seems like you are twisting the facts now, to confuse what people think, or just not telling the whole truth.

...........................

 

[Pikabruce]

...There is no proof, there is no video, and it is all anonymous sources and he said, she said typical haters spreading a rumor. He had a photo of me with a bag from the pokemon store, put a story together, and greatly exaggerated the story...

Mees had previously posted elsewhere

In the security footage (which the Pan Pacific permitted me to view in its entirety), Jon spends at least 15 minutes rummaging through my luggage. Gino joined him for about only a few minutes, then left with a bag belonging to me.

So you are now asserting that Mees did not watch a 15+ minute video, and no such security video exists?

 

[r3skyline]

Found the little snippet the hotel calls a report. Forgot about that.

Anyway, whats not reported is a bag being taken or Gino having a bag on hand before be approached the baggage area.

I still wonder if Mees can provide a police report.

 

[GinoLombardi21]

Found the little snippet the hotel calls a report. Forgot about that.

Anyway, whats not reported is a bag being taken or Gino having a bag on hand before be approached the baggage area.

I still wonder if Mees can provide a police report.

A police report is not evidence and cannot be used at trial on its own against a defendant. However, a report may be used at trial to assist the police officer when he testifies as to his recollection of the incident. As I said before a police report is whatever you tell the POLICE OFFICER. He puts down what you tell him!

- - - Updated - - -

Mees had previously posted elsewhere

So you are now asserting that Mees did not watch a 15+ minute video, and no such security video exists?

Why wouldn't he post the video than!? He posted a picture of me with a grocery bag for all you know! Show me going through his luggage! Please I will give you my car! He's a liar and his anonymous sources are all liars backing him up!

 

[r3skyline]

The police report should contain the statements from the hotelstaff and not just Mees.

 

[losjackal]

Why wouldn't he post the video than!? He posted a picture of me with a grocery bag for all you know! Show me going through his luggage! Please I will give you my car! He's a liar and his anonymous sources are all liars backing him up!

As stated by the hotel, Canadian privacy laws prevented the release of the full video. But here is the attachment from Mees' original post, with a detailed report of what hotel security saw:

http://i.imgur.com/Tq1vAUB.jpg

 

[r3skyline]

Ok. I dont want to do this but I just got off the phone with pan pacific I spoke with a Chris G who was involved with the incident and remembered quite a bit about it all.

Mees, you lied. I believe that image of the email was fabricated. Chris G had told me you COULD obtain a copy of the video. That all you had to do was follow the proper procedure since the VPD was involved. It is open to you and was ONLY made more difficult becauae of the privacy law protecting GINO.

However, they do NOT have a copy anymore as security only holds on to those for 3 months time. They do however still have all the still images they had shown you.

Why lie to everyone and state it was not allowed?

Oh and to everyone including you Gino. Yes, there was a video where you and another were identified as rummaging through belongings.

I have no relation to either party other than seeing Mees post from another site and Gino from facebook.

 

[Abudoggie]

Ok. I dont want to do this but I just got off the phone with pan pacific I spoke with a Chris G who was involved with the incident and remembered quite a bit about it all.

Mees, you lied. I believe that image of the email was fabricated. Chris G had told me you COULD obtain a copy of the video. That all you had to do was follow the proper procedure since the VPD was involved. It is open to you and was ONLY made more difficult becauae of the privacy law protecting GINO.

I too just looked at the Hotel email and it appears to be from a Gordon Cook at the hotel. This Gordon fellow is the one that stated the video could not be release due to privacy. You spoke to a Chris G at the hotel. Is is possible that Gordon Cook misinformed Mees? (as opposed to Mees lying). If you are doing detective work, I would try to get a hold of Gordon and see if he exists and confirms that he sent that email (which indeed may have incorrect info). Happens all the time at my work. Call one extension and someone says company policy is "X", talk to someone else and they tell you everyone knows that company policy is "Y". At least you found someone to confirm there was an incident and the people involved. Forget UAVs... you on your way to MP or JAG.

 

[r3skyline]

That was my fault. I should have made myself more clear. I believe that either Mees fabricated thr part where he is told he cannot receive a copy, or misinterpreted it.

It was told to me that a copy could not be given to him by the hotel, HOWEVER, this was only because it became an investigation once VPD became involved. When VPD became involved, Mees would then need to follow the proper channels to request a copy of the cd to be made.

Gordon Cook exists I can say with 100% accuracy.

UAVs are the way of the future.

 

[Abudoggie]

That was my fault. I should have made myself more clear. I believe that either Mees fabricated thr part where he is told he cannot receive a copy, or misinterpreted it.

I'm not completely tracking: are you saying Mees fabricated or altered the email from the Hotel? I'm not sure how it could be misinterpreted. The statement below is from the first section of the email from the Hotel in the pic Losjackal linked above.

".......We are not able to release any video coverage to you due to Canadian privacy laws.

Sincerely,
Gordon Cook"

That looks like a statement from Gordon Cook not Mees. So if Mees repeated it, isn't he just quoting what Cook told him? Or are you saying that Mees altered the email to fabricate that part?

It seems you have independently confirmed with the hotel staff the identify of the parties involved and that those parties were rummaging inside Mees belongings at the time the laptop went missing (ie, you have placed them at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime). The only part I'm not tracking is the Mees lying about restricted access to the video. That statement looks to be from Gordon Cook?

 

[r3skyline]

The email says one thing. What was told to me was different, and what was told to me was also told to Mees as well.

 

[SD PokeMom]

with all due respect: why would the hotel's staff talk to some unknown person via phone in detail about a theft that occurred on their property when said person is neither the victim nor the accused?

 

[r3skyline]

Questioning if what I am saying is true. Hmm, well I cant prove by a recording of the conversation but I can tell you and any other person what I am saying is true.

What I do for a living I do with pride. I try to live by true values and moral code.

This is the best I can provide.

http://imgur.com/Cts61dO

Also, if you dont believe me, then by all means, request to speak with Chris Geisberger (I forget how to spell his name) and verify with him if he spoke with a man named Leo

 

[SD PokeMom]

my apologies: i'm not questioning your integrity, i'm questioning the hotel staff's apparent willingness to discuss an incident on their property with someone who isn't even one of the individuals involved in it...