N.J. Assembly panel clears one-year anonymity for lottery winners

Sep 25, 2012, 8:30 am (39 comments)

New Jersey Lottery

TRENTON, N.J. — Twenty-five years ago, Evelyn Adams had the unimaginable luck of winning the lottery twice in two years.

But opportunity morphed into misfortune for Adams, who ended up broke and living in a trailer after giving away and gambling away $5.4 million.

"Everybody wanted my money," the Ocean County woman told the website Bankrate.com in 2004. "Everybody had their hand out. I never learned one simple word in the English language — 'no.'"

Monday, a state Assembly panel sought to close the barn door.

The Assembly Regulatory Oversight and Gaming Committee approved a bill (A2982) by a vote of 5-0 that would give lottery winners like Adams the option of remaining anonymous for a year after winning the jackpot. A companion bill has not been introduced in the Senate.

Under current law, winners' identities are public information, and the state Lottery Commission can publicize their names, hometowns, prize winnings and photographs.

A spokeswoman for the lottery did not respond to questions about the bill or describe the commission's policy on releasing information about the winners, although its website sometimes omits their names and photographs.

Still, Assemblyman John Burzichelli (D-Gloucester), who sponsored the measure, said the information is all available through the Open Public Records Act. And he noted the game has changed from the small jackpots the state lottery awarded when it began in the early 1970s.

"If you look at our history when our lottery ... you didn't have these mega ball things, these multiple state lottery $300 million pots," Burzichelli said. "After some reading, there's a story here and there that surfaces about how this newfound wealth becomes a game changer for people."

He said he thought his proposal would also apply to such multistate lotteries as Powerball and Mega Millions, though he conceded he wasn't certain.

The lawmaker said he was led to introduce the bill from stories of misfortune among winners across the country:

  • Jeffrey Dampier, a $20 million winner in Illinois, was kidnapped and killed by his sister-in-law and her boyfriend when they tried to get his money.
  • William Post III of Pennsylvania, who won more than $16 million in 1988, was sued for a third of his winnings by a former landlord, found out his brother hired a contract killer to murder him and his wife, and fired a gun at a man who showed up at his home to collect a debt.
  • Abraham Shakespeare of Florida, who won a $31 million jackpot in 2006, was found dead four years later. His girlfriend, Dee Dee Moore, was charged with the killing.
  • Jack Whittaker of West Virginia, who won a $315 million Mega Millions jackpot 10 years ago, claims to have given away $50 million and then ran into several personal problems and family deaths. "I think if you have something, there's always someone else that wants it," he said on the ABC program "20/20." "I wish I'd torn that ticket up."

But Burzichelli's bill has at least five critics.

In March, a jury in Elizabeth awarded five laborers in Elizabeth $20 million after ruling that their coworker, Americo Lopes, cheated them out a jackpot they had won together.

The lawyer for the five, Eric Kahn, said Lopes kept his jackpot a secret from his co-workers, who learned of their bounty after Lopes told a supervisor and confirmed it on the Mega Millions website.

"If they had a provision for him to remain anonymous, my clients would not have known," Kahn said. "It would have been speculation. When there's a pool involved and there's a dispute and they're allowed to remain anonymous, it could cause a major problem. It would be much harder to prove what has been proven."

Burzichelli said other laws protect co-workers from being duped, but "he's correct in the fact that it may have taken them a little bit longer."

NJ.com

Comments

jackpotismine's avatarjackpotismine

Bravo! I think this is a good start.

jamella724

I feel so sad about what happened to Ms. Adams.  She have all the money that time, but due to unavoidable situtions...everything disappeared.  If she were just so cautious how to spend her millions, or where to invest it, maybe the money is triple in amount right now.

Cletu$2's avatarCletu$2

Quote: Originally posted by jackpotismine on Sep 25, 2012

Bravo! I think this is a good start.

I Agree!

RedStang's avatarRedStang

When you fill a bird feeder, they all come. When it's empty, they are no where around. Winning some money has the same effect. i hope all states do this.

haymaker's avatarhaymaker

".......bill has at least five critics"


And big suprise, one is a lawyer.

Of course, they see a gravytrain about to dry up.

golfer1960's avatargolfer1960

I love the fact that they are going to remain anonymous but why just a year? Won't people hound you after a year is over? Aren't you still putting the winners in danger after a year?

Also, if the critics of this plan say that the lottery has to go public because of "office pools", then I say outlaw office pools. We all criticize the office pools anyway. All they do is create lawsuits.

So in addition to allowing the winner to "stay anonymous", I urge the NJ lawmakers to outlaw office pools so that the winners could remain anonymous even after one year. Forever!

There is real hope here but more change is needed to truly protect the identity of the winner.

hope and change

Nikkicute's avatarNikkicute

OK, if they are going to wait a year, how are they going to annouce who won?

Are they just going to put up the name on the website or is it going to be all

over the news?

 

If they just put it up on the website without any big announcements after a year

no one will be paying attention and have forgotten by then.

Ronnie316

What she never learned her whole life was.... How to take responsibilty for her own actions....

Ronnie316

Quote: Originally posted by golfer1960 on Sep 25, 2012

I love the fact that they are going to remain anonymous but why just a year? Won't people hound you after a year is over? Aren't you still putting the winners in danger after a year?

Also, if the critics of this plan say that the lottery has to go public because of "office pools", then I say outlaw office pools. We all criticize the office pools anyway. All they do is create lawsuits.

So in addition to allowing the winner to "stay anonymous", I urge the NJ lawmakers to outlaw office pools so that the winners could remain anonymous even after one year. Forever!

There is real hope here but more change is needed to truly protect the identity of the winner.

hope and change

Perhaps a detail of armed security guards for every lottery winner???

Now there is...... CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN!!!!!

onlymoney

I have no problem saying NO.

mrylndw's avatarmrylndw

I like the years' grace period...strategic planning would allow me to drop out of sight 1 hour after the "reveal".Embarassed

gocart1's avatargocart1

Hope new york state follews this

Coin Toss's avatarCoin Toss

I agree with golfer1960 in their post above. Why one year?

People will be waiting like vultures if they have any suspicion they know who the winner was.

Anonymous should mean anonymous with no time restriction.

If lawyers have to get involved may I once again suggest the JWPP - Jackpot Winners Protection Program - a parallel to the Witness Protection Program format, but the lawyers handle all attempted correspondence and contacts. Everything goes through 'the program' and the winners are 'in defilade'.

Wink

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on Sep 25, 2012

I agree with golfer1960 in their post above. Why one year?

People will be waiting like vultures if they have any suspicion they know who the winner was.

Anonymous should mean anonymous with no time restriction.

If lawyers have to get involved may I once again suggest the JWPP - Jackpot Winners Protection Program - a parallel to the Witness Protection Program format, but the lawyers handle all attempted correspondence and contacts. Everything goes through 'the program' and the winners are 'in defilade'.

Wink

"Still, Assemblyman John Burzichelli (D-Gloucester), who sponsored the measure, said the information is all available through the Open Public Records Act."

Depends on the state laws and this state has Open Public Records statutes. This bill simply closes this public record for one year. I'll bet if you look closely at the fine print on this bill you'll see the anonymity doesn't apply to owing back Federal and state taxes, warrants, court fines, and/or child support.

I've noticed that states allowing anonymity like Ohio still publish the name of the store selling the ticket. If you knew the winning ticket was sold at a store near you and noticed your younger neighbor quit their job and bought expensive cars and toys, wouldn't you think that maybe they were the anonymous winner?

Subscribe to this news story