Sort of a moot point, the forfeiture of the jackpot.  Guy's 55, with 24 years in prison ahead without possibility of parole.  That puts him 79 years old before he'll see daylight again.

Of course, he won't be alive to see the end of his sentence.

So the State keeps his 2.75 million.

Seems a bit troublesome that he got a far stiffer sentence for two counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine than he'd have gotten for homicide one.  He could have gotten off a lot easier by killing half a dozen people, raping a few babies, robbing a bank, and spitting on the sidewalk.

Strange priorities we have these days.  Similar to the weirdness that has us making it a Federal offense with mandatory sentencing for killing a cop, but a killer standing a middling chance of doing two-to-five with good behavior for strangling some 3 year old kid.

Jack

Careful, amigo.

Those are the kinds of words that can having them knocking on your door next.  These are the post 9/11 days.  Department of Homeland Security.  Ruby Ridge.  Waco.  Drug Enforcement Administration.  And the guy this story is about. 

Words are cheap, but the price is going up.

Likely you spoke in haste and regret your post.  You might be well served to call your mistake to Todd's attention and request that he delete your post and this one.

Jack

The lost winnings should be used to add to a future Lotto Texas jackpot.

I see where the BTK (Bind Torture Kill) serial killer who terrorized Kansas for a couple of decades just got a sentence not too different from this one, except he's probably eligible for parole at approximately the same time this Mexican winner/loser gets out of the slammer.    But BTK only killed a dozen or so people, whereas the Mexican did something really bad.

Jack

trial court judge's ruling that Betancourt bought his share of the ticket with drug proceeds because that was his only apparent source of income.

And the next thing you know the Gov'ts going to take any lottery proceeds that were not bought with earned dollars.

Hey I bought my winnig ticket with past due payments money. It was not my money it belonged to my creditors.

in the book 1984 was it much different

the govenment makes the rules, sometimes after the fact. it is easy for me to believe this person involved in criminal activities loses his right to the ticket pretty much the same as the governments right to take property that was used in criminal activity.

Great position - be afraid of your own government. Not terroists. Not criminals. Not Mexican Cartel. The U.S. Government. Sheeesh. The day I'm afraid to speak my mind is the day they can have my American borth certificate.

amen chewie

We each speak from our own body of experience, chewie.  There's a difference between being 'afraid', and merely being realistic.

I've got a lot of respect for the ability of this government to decide a person needs special attention.  Such as they did at Ruby Ridge.  Such as they did at Waco.

By all means speak your mind. 

 I gather from your attitude what's in your mind won't offend them, in any case.  You can speak with total confidence they won't do anything.  That's the cool thing about having attitudes unlike the one JPorter has.  You can speak your mind, wave your flag, and bluster about not being afraid to speak your mind.

However, having said that, I agree with you completely.  Nobody should be afraid of this government.  Everyone should feel completely comfortable about posting seditious, statements online.  Shouting them from the rooftops.  Do it with impunity, without fear.

Namely I can say that because I also don't hold those views.  It's none of my business what they do, nor what the government does to them in any acts of reprisal.  I strongly suggest anyone with views the government mightn't like go public with them.

Fortunately, I don't happen to have any of those kinds of views.

Jack

You're confusing fact with fiction Jack.

I am not talking about blantantly violating the lawful direction of law enforcement officers, shooting at law enforcement officers, or spending my spare hours converting my rifles to automatic weapons in violation of Federal Law.

I lost a friend at Waco; he was a decent person, trying to raise a family, and live the American dream. He lost his life following the lawful direction of a Federal Judge. He was killed by some slime balls who NEVER did any thing to improve life in this country, by people who spent their evenings screwing children and beating women.

Both the clowns at Ruby Ridge, and those at Waco, had the ability to end their unlawful way of life and follow the same process as the other millions of Americans who drive between the white lines every day of their lifes. America became America because of those who do drive between the lines, not because of those who have no respect for anything but themselves. They wanted to make a point, and that is what they got - the point of a bullet.

Don't confuse the freedom of speech right with the stupidity of people who willing shoot Americans trying to enforce the law.  Those slime balls at Waco and Ruby Ridge were no different than the D.C. Snipers.

I spent twenty-two years wearing a uniform, and some of that time fighting a war, to enable people to speak their mind. I did not do that so some slime ball could shoot my neighbor in the back and claim they did it for God!

Whew.  One of us has his facts entirely reversed as to what actually happened at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

I won't change your view, have no reason to try.  And my own facts are so accurate I'd never allow you to change them.

Plus, neither of us has any reason to give another thought to what the other believes.

We'll agree to disagree, Chewie.

However, if it helps, I'm willing to believe you spent 22 years in a uniform of one sort or another.  On the other hand, whatever war you might have fought in, you aren't old enough for it to have had anything much to do with protecting my freedom, nor anyone elses.

Jack

Do not "bet-on-court" Mr. betancourt cause you will lose basically everything! 

Timing is everything, weshar.  This guy had purely lousy timing.

If he'd had that money where he could get to it, say, and they'd come down on him with indictments from something he did pre-win, he could have upchucked enough money into the right places to walk.  In fact, probably never would have been arrested enough to reach the newspapers.

As it was, the guy evidently didn't have the good sense to clean up his life.... he was arrested for something he did AFTER he had a winning ticket and knew it.  Maybe he had some inseverable ties with the Mexican Mafia chewie believes he knows something about.

There's a high price to be paid for a certain type of idiocy.  Sometimes, anyway. 

Fortunately for most of us, a lot of forms of idiocy allow us to just keep on, no penalties involved.

Jack

Seems the forfeiture has been based upon the lottery winner not being a US citizen and committing a felony on US soil. 

Also since he had no previous verifiable job history, it was illegal funds received through drug trade which purchased the ticket  .... therefore he didn't legally own the ticket in the first place.

My question is WHY would someone who just won 5.5 mil be still selling drugs???

Likely he already had commitments he couldn't free himself from easily.

The people who carry drugs across the national boundaries have to live with a constant readjustment process.  Where they come from there's not a large body of opinion assigning the 'wrong-right' judgements to the drug issues.  It's all a matter of legal-illegal, with the legality up for grabs depending on the connections.

But once they come into this country they have to rearrange their thinking to keep in mind that the legal/illegal part of the equation is structured and the payoffs a lot more subtle, there's also a mindset among middle class citizens that it's both illegal and immoral, worthy of long-term prison sentences and confiscation of property.  Even the portions of each layer of society involved in addictive or recreational drug use pay lip service to this condemnation, when they're outside their immediate circles.

This guy had a timing problem, a maladjustment problem, a culture shock of sorts. He was out of step with US legality and morality.  Now he's taken care of  at taxpayer expense for the next quarter-century.  Serves him right, I suppose.

Jack

He WON the jackpot fair and square, if I found a dollar on the street bought a ticket and WON or bought a ticket after cashing my pay-check and WON your still winning it shouldn't matter where the money came from.(just my opinion) now if he killed someone for the money too play then he definitely doesn't deserve it.

It would be a similar rule of law applied on the Federal level is he had robbed a a bank, getting the money in an illegal manner .... making the money he got through possession with intent is not lawfully earned by him.  Whatever is gained by using illegally obtained money is considered not the property of the person who got it and subject to seizure.

Similar ruling applied to this Lottery Post article .....

  https://www.lotterypost.com/news/118343.htm 

Finding a dollar on the street is a different matter especially if no one is looking around trying to find what they'd lost saying they lost it.  You wouldn't be stealing anything.

Have to disagree with you Pick 4 Master. There is nothing illegal about finding a dollar on the street and using that money to buy a lottery ticket. But using money from ill-gotten gains (drug money) to buy a lottery ticket and any winnings from that ticket or buying anything else (houses, cars, boats, etc.) gives the gov't the power to seize anything you own. I am not an advocate for an over-empowering gov't but but I do agree with this decision.

I would think the Feds are checking the income status of any one who wwins over $5K, which is the amount the states start notifyiing the Feds of winnings. I hit for $5K and less than amonth later received notice the IRS was auditing all my taxable records. If you hit a BIG one, you have to know the IRS is going to check you out. No tax record has to be a red flag. Yoou either previously died of starvation or haven't been totally honest some where down the line.

If legality and honesty are synonyms then all's well here. 

The guy was convicted.  Therefore he was illegal and dishonest by virtue of his illegality, for which he was convicted and will serve a quarter-century.

The court, which by definition is honest, determned his ownership of all that jackpot money was illegal and therefore dishonest.

The Feds behaved honestly and legally in confiscating the money because the court so ruled.

I'd really never considered that facet of things.  New Mexico, Texas, Arizona and California have an enormous number of dishonest (illegal) aliens in the workforce moving freely around among the general population.

But in this instance, we can relax.  This dishonest guy has been sent where dishonest folks ought to be, and the honest judges and cops have protected us from him, while enriching the coffers of their agencies.

Jack

drug dealer - he needs to rot in jail - period.

I disagree with the basic concept of state or federal property seizures of lottery winnings, if the ticket was legitimately purchased by the claimant, that is, not stolen from someone else.  That is additional, excessive punishment for a crime that he has already been punished for.  He paid his dollar and took his chance like everyone else.  If a slimy drug dealing criminal wins, so be it, but that is what happens in games of chance. If the government doesn't like that idea, let them cancel the lottery.

In this case, he was not arrested or convicted when he bought the ticket and was issued the check, so taking the money afterwards is an even more despicable government act.  This sets up the possibility that any winner could be set up and arrested after winning the lottery with the intent of seizing winnings.  I don't like that idea, do you?

>But using money from ill-gotten gains (drug money) to buy a lottery ticket and any winnings from that ticket or buying anything else (houses, cars, boats, etc.) gives the gov't the power to seize anything you own.

If you spent $90,000 of drug money on a boat, then you had and spent $90,000. In this case, he spent $1 on a $1 lottery ticket.  The winnings are not what he spent.  If the government does have a case to seize, they should only be entitled to seize the dollar he spent on the ticket.

It's part of the War on Drugs and money laundering legislation that was passed during the 80s and early nineties.  It's been going on a while.

The only rights you have are those the government allows you.  This isn't an issue involving ideals, or 'rights'.  It's an issue of what the government is allowed to do (allows itself to do) to any citizen it sees fit.

If the court says what they did is legal, by definition it's legal.

Nobody's been asked to vote for, nor against it in a referendum.  It is reality.

As Chewie says, if you don't like it, burn your borth certificate.

Jack

I'd a whole lot rather they just killed Americans than send them to prison for doing things you don't like.  That way the taxpayers don't have to feed and water them for the rest of their lives.

This send-them-to-prison to rot mindset is one of the things that's running this nation into bankruptcy.  It's not doing a lot for the prisoners, either.  The whole system is a revolving door retirement system for lawyers, judges, cops and prison establishments.  I think it's time people demanded the costs be cut.  If it's an offense that people consider serious enough to send a man to prison for a quarter century, kill him and get it over with. 

If it's not that serious, tie him to a rail and give him 20 lashes and turn him loose.  If he does it again, 30 lashes.  If he does it again, kill him.  Prison isn't working.

On the other hand, I totally disagree that possession of anything short of a hydrogen bomb is a criminal act, except in the minds of people who favor punishing victimless crimes and a government willing to pander to the desires of those people to steal their rights and gain more power.

Jack

He's a 52 year-old drug dealer. It's costing the US a lot of money to capture, try, and incarcerate these career criminals.  If they're making a profit off of their business while the public foots the bill for the societal costs, I see no problem with the government recovering these costs in some manner. 

finally - a sane voice.