Sex offender wins $10 million in the lottery

[Young Drachma]

Story

A man listed as one of the state's most dangerous sex offenders has won $10 million in the Massachusetts lottery, but the attention may have landed him in new trouble.

Daniel Snay had been living and working in Massachusetts since 2004. In January, he paid $20 for a "Billion Dollar Blockbuster" scratch ticket at a suburban convenience store and hit the jackpot.

He picked up the first of 20 annual checks for $500,000 on Jan. 30. And the Massachusetts Lottery Commission said he gambled legally. But his story caught the attention of police in neighboring Connecticut, where Snay had lived for several years and where, officials said, he never informed authorities he was moving out of state.

Connecticut Trooper William Tate said Snay could face up to five years in prison if convicted of failing to notify authorities of his change of address, a felony. He said Snay hadn't confirmed his address for the Connecticut sex offender registry since May 2004, though that state requires address verification every 90 days.

"We're trying to determine when he moved, why he didn't register with us and whether any charges are warranted," Tate said.

Snay, 56, a divorced father of five, was convicted several times of indecent assault and battery from 1974 to 1987. Two of the assaults were on a child under the age of 14.

Snay's lawyer, Joseph Fabbricotti, said that when Snay moved from Connecticut, he believed he had to register only in the state where he was moving.

"If that is incorrect, we'll have to fix it," Fabbricotti said. "He wasn't running. He's been living here for four years."

He is classified in Massachusetts as a Level 3 offender, people deemed most dangerous or most likely to re-offend.

Uxbridge Police Chief Scott Freitas said Snay's lottery winnings have caused some "conversations" in town, but not an uproar. "In this particular case, he isn't forbidden from gambling," Freitas said.

Snay is a truck driver for Certified Sales Inc., a boat dealership in Mendon. There was no immediate response Monday to a message left for him there seeking comment.

One of the company's owners, Brian Bethel, said Snay has been employed there on and off for 40 years.

He said Snay plans to use the money to pay for his children's education. "He could have taken the money and left, but he's still working," Bethel said.

It is the second time in recent months that a convicted felon has won the Massachusetts lottery. Last month, a judge approved an agreement allowing a convicted bank robber to keep a $1 million lottery prize even though his probation terms prohibited him from gambling.

[cthomer5000]

Good for him.

[Shepp]

I bet thats what his victims are saying too. Now they can sue him and his 10million can be their 10million.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Shepp

I bet thats what his victims are saying too. Now they can sue him and his 10million can be their 10million.

That's what I heard on Headline News today that people are pushing for.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

That's what I heard on Headline News today that people are pushing for.

Heh. He's already been punished. Why keep piling on?

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

That's what I heard on Headline News today that people are pushing for.

It sounds like he was convicted last in 1987? If so, I don't think they can.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

It sounds like he was convicted last in 1987? If so, I don't think they can.

Yeah and he's moved from Connecticut where he was convicted to Massachusetts four years ago. Apparently, they want to convict him again for leaving without telling CT officials, but he surely has enough money to pay a good lawyer now.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Heh. He's already been punished. Why keep piling on?

It does seem that they're being a bit hardon the guy.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

It does seem that they're being a bit hardon the guy.

IIRC< gambling violates his parole, but I think all this talk about taking away his money is ridiculous

[BishopMVP]

From the sounds of it, it doesn't seem he's on parole given the last conviction was over 20 years ago. And while it's hard to feel sympathy for a sex offender, if he did register with Massachusetts about his address it would seem to be an honest mistake - and if Connecticut is so pissed, maybe they should've tried to find him for the 3.5 years he was violating the address reporting.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Synovia

IIRC< gambling violates his parole, but I think all this talk about taking away his money is ridiculous

I do think its a bit silly calling a state lottery "gambling". While some crazies do consider it such, most people don't.

[Raiders Army]

It's more "donating" than gambling, IMHO.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

It's more "donating" than gambling, IMHO.

True. I don't remember the exact figures, but it's something like 60% return on state lotteries vs. like 95-97% on slots at a casino.

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by Synovia

IIRC< gambling violates his parole, but I think all this talk about taking away his money is ridiculous

Originally Posted by Article

He picked up the first of 20 annual checks for $500,000 on Jan. 30. And the Massachusetts Lottery Commission said he gambled legally. But his story caught the attention of police in neighboring Connecticut, where Snay had lived for several years and where, officials said, he never informed authorities he was moving out of state.

Doesn't sound like he did anything wrong regarding gambling...

[DaddyTorgo]

I have zero problem with this.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

It does seem that they're being a bit hardon the guy.

Well played.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

No problem. Last I checked I am guessing his sentence was incarceration, not incarceration plus $10 million or give up all your income for the rest of your life. For all we know, it also sounds like the guy rehabilitated himself, which is the whole point of parole in the first place, no?

With that said, I am also on board with victims suing him, however it does sound like the statute of limitations has long passed. Which is why they should have sued him when it first happened, even if he had no money. You can keep your judgment alive for 10, 20 years or even more. Then if the guy ever comes into money, bang you just literally serve papers on the lottery corporation and the check comes straight to you.

[molson]

I'm thinking he's going to buy a nice place in The Philippines

[Lorena]

Someone needs to check his closet for Pedialyte.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

With that said, I am also on board with victims suing him, however it does sound like the statute of limitations has long passed. Which is why they should have sued him when it first happened, even if he had no money. You can keep your judgment alive for 10, 20 years or even more. Then if the guy ever comes into money, bang you just literally serve papers on the lottery corporation and the check comes straight to you.

I don't think it works that way with civil suits. I think you can still sue him. Not positive, but I'm sure one of the lawyers on the board can clarify that.

The worst part of this is, the last thing a repeat sex offender needs is a lot of free time and expanded funds. It's not going to be long before he quits that truck driving job. Then as he sits around and thinks, hmm what am I going to do today.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

I don't think it works that way with civil suits. I think you can still sue him. Not positive, but I'm sure one of the lawyers on the board can clarify that.

The worst part of this is, the last thing a repeat sex offender needs is a lot of free time and expanded funds. It's not going to be long before he quits that truck driving job. Then as he sits around and thinks, hmm what am I going to do today.

According to the article, he's using the money to fund his kids' education and is still planning on working. Evidently he's one of those people that no matter how much money they get, they'll keep working rather than be one of the leisure class.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Evidently he's one of those people that no matter how much money they get, they'll keep working rather than be one of the leisure class.

I have a word for people like that; suckers.

Seriously though, people like that need to discover some hobbies.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

I don't think it works that way with civil suits. I think you can still sue him. Not positive, but I'm sure one of the lawyers on the board can clarify that.

Yes, it does work that way. I can guarantee you that. There is a statute of limitations on civil actions, and it's usually quite short for things like this (2-3 years after you learn of your injury, which is long gone). You're only hope would be some sort of special statutory exemption for sex offender acts, although I am not aware of any of those.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Yes, it does work that way. I can guarantee you that. There is a statute of limitations on civil actions, and it's usually quite short for things like this (2-3 years after you learn of your injury, which is long gone). You're only hope would be some sort of special statutory exemption for sex offender acts, although I am not aware of any of those.

Although, isn't there some discovery clause for things like injuries and such? I'd think a lawyer might just bring a suit up along the lines of - "My client was fine until he made the news and everything came back and they are now in therapy"

Weak, but.. hey.. who knows what someone might try.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Although, isn't there some discovery clause for things like injuries and such? I'd think a lawyer might just bring a suit up along the lines of - "My client was fine until he made the news and everything came back and they are now in therapy"

Weak, but.. hey.. who knows what someone might try.

There is a discovery rule, but that would have occurred when the sexual misconduct occurred. Unless you are sleeping, you're quite aware of it. However, I'd imagine for kids, it would be when the abuse was brought to the attention of parents/guardian which is when the guy got arrested and convicted for that same abuse. Nice to see you being creative, but I don't think that would make it.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I have a word for people like that; suckers.

Seriously though, people like that need to discover some hobbies.

Saying you are going to keep working and actually doing it are two different things.

Also, he already has a hobby and that is his problem.

As for the law suit thing, I guess the next kid he touches will now have a shot at suing for money.

[mrsimperless]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Saying you are going to keep working and actually doing it are two different things.

Also, he already has a hobby and that is his problem.

As for the law suit thing, I guess the next kid he touches will now have a shot at suing for money.

So should we incarcerate all sex offenders for life then? Hell, why not just incarcerate all criminals for life regardless of the crimes they've committed. Until of course we run out of space and money to house them all. And then we can just start executing them.

Our system is crap, don't get me wrong. But we do still have the goal of reform however poorly designed and implemented the system driving that goal may be.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Although, isn't there some discovery clause for things like injuries and such? I'd think a lawyer might just bring a suit up along the lines of - "My client was fine until he made the news and everything came back and they are now in therapy"

Weak, but.. hey.. who knows what someone might try.

If that happen, we have people suing each other left and right. You need the tight limits when it comes to civil suits.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by mrsimperless

So should we incarcerate all sex offenders for life then? Hell, why not just incarcerate all criminals for life regardless of the crimes they've committed. Until of course we run out of space and money to house them all. And then we can just start executing them.

Our system is crap, don't get me wrong. But we do still have the goal of reform however poorly designed and implemented the system driving that goal may be.

How does that saying go? Something like the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?

Maybe someday one will get rehabilitated. If we are lucky it will be one like this guy who actually is a pedophile comitting multiple sex offenses against kids who have yet to reach puberty.

Better yet, maybe Obama will fix this problem.

[Groundhog]

What are you saying, that locking a criminal in a confined space with a whole bunch of other criminals, some of whom have comitted the same crimes, doesn't rehabilitate people?!

[molson]

I think like 5 criminals in the history of the world have ever been "rehabilitated". Not saying we should lock them ALL up, but sex offenders, most definitely.

[Scoobz0202]

Forever?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by molson

I think like 5 criminals in the history of the world have ever been "rehabilitated".

An intriguing notion.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

That's what I heard on Headline News today that people are pushing for.

Something similar happened here: a man on day release from prison bought a lottery ticket, won a few million pounds (£7m I think), and there has been a furore ever since.

The latest is that one of the victims who has been pursuing the guy through the courts has been given the go-ahead by judges to sue the guy.