It ain't complicated
"Should I assume that's what BobL said? There is not much to be gained arguing the law with him."
No, it was more to the point. My main point doesn't rest on any one case. Casinos make law. Period. There is no serious debate about that.
"Is 'stutter-cutting' a proper term? I don't recall hearing that term before but it's been a while. I thought the term was 'twisting.'"
I've heard both terms.
"Carrying on however, to the best of my knowledge it was the NJ CCC that put an end to whatever DM was doing .. not the casino."
You mean you think if the casino had raised no objection, the CCC would still have been in there punting? I'm struggling to see your point, I really am.
The court put an end to DM's advantage play -- based on law the casino invented, and to which the CCC acquiesced. The courts would agree that card counting is illegal too, except they have a little problem with the freedom of thought issue -- which is considered a more fundamental right than freedom of speech. But they strike down unconstitutional law from the legislature as well.
"If you read some of the DM transcripts it is clear he just wasn't cutting in to a 'loose shoe.' I don't see it any different as spooking the hole card, which is illegal... "
How nice for you that you're so well adapted to living under tyranny.
JMO,
ETF