ShareThis Page
Two accused of slots casino scam waive hearings |

Two accused of slots casino scam waive hearings

| Thursday, October 15, 2009 12:00 p.m

The attorney for one of three men accused of rigging a poker machine at The Meadows Racetrack & Casino said that taking advantage of a glitch in a machine isn’t a crime.

“If someone is smart enough to outwit a machine, is that a crime?” defense attorney Patrick Thomassey said. “I don’t think it is. It might be cheating, but is it a crime?”

Thomassey’s client Kerry Laverde, 49, and Andre Nestor, 37, both of Swissvale waived their rights to preliminary hearings this afternoon before District Judge Jay Weller in North Strabane. Both entered pleas of not guilty. A preliminary hearing for Patrick Loushil, 42, of Brookline was postponed.

The men are charged with manipulating a poker machine at the casino to collect $429,945 in fraudulent payouts. Authorities said the men started the scam in June and were arrested last week.

Casino officials began to suspect the men when Nestor, posing as a “high roller,” began frequenting the casino in late June, officials said. Laverde, a former Swissvale police officer, acted as Nestor’s bodyguard, officials said.

Washington County District Attorney Steven Toprani disagreed with Thomassey’s assessment.

“There was money made out to the three defendants that they weren’t entitled to,” Toprani said. “It sounds like good, old-fashioned theft to me.”

From late June through August, Nestor, Laverde and Loushil visited the casino 15 times, authorities said.

The investigation showed Nestor repeatedly used “a complex series of button presses and screen changes to cause the slot machine to have an error in its programming. This resulted in the machine displaying a false jackpot,” according to the grand jury presentment.

Nestor always manipulated the poker machine alone, but all three men cashed out the winning checks, authorities said.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.