The Tyrant Billionaire

The movie Once a Thief officially premiered.

During this period, the "Super Idol" talent show had Ava Gardner and Cary Grant as judges. Both of them had high exposure, and their popularity had significantly increased. Already top tier stars, they had now reached even greater heights.

Coupled with the intensive promotion before the release, the movie had full houses after its release, with even the midnight screenings fully booked.

Needless to say, the production quality of Once a Thief was very high. The story line was captivating, especially a few scenes involving treasure thefts and escapes that kept the audience on the edge of their seats. The critics were also generous with their praise, giving the movie very high ratings.
Find exclusive content at M-V-L

After a week of packed screenings, the movie still maintained an 80% attendance rate. The head of MGM, Mayer, excitedly called Hardy, "Hardy, this movie is very likely to surpass $30 million in revenue. The last time a film was this successful was Gone with the Wind."

Thirty million dollars.

An absolutely thrilling number.

But compared to "Gone with the Wind," it's still far behind.

Back in the day, "Gone with the Wind" grossed $390 million worldwide, including revenues from re-releases a few years later, a figure that drove everyone crazy.

Just as the movie was hitting the screens, Hardy Group received another subpoena from the Federal Supreme Court, with a trial set to commence three days later. Hardy was also among those under scrutiny.

...

Three days later.

Hardy, accompanied by his legal team and all Hardy Group employees required for questioning, arrived in Washington at the United States Supreme Court on East Capitol Street. This was Hardy's first time here.

The Supreme Court is an off white building resembling a Roman temple, with two exquisitely crafted stone sculptures flanking the entrance steps. The left one represents the "Contemplation of Justice," while the right symbolizes the "Power of Law."

Standing at the foot of the steps, Hardy glanced up at the statues. Is this place fair, just, moral, or compassionate? Perhaps only God knows.

Anyway, Hardy did not believe it.

In the courtroom, the Justices questioned Hardy and the relevant personnel. Hardy responded concisely, stating that all operations of the casino were legal and that the casino's lottery activities were open to every customer who entered.

As for the televised broadcasts, they were simply entertainment programs by the Las Vegas television station.

Hardy distanced himself from any implications, ensuring that no matter the outcome, this matter would not be directly linked to him.

The person in charge of the proxy betting company was a steward of the Los Angeles gang and one of Hardy's staunch subordinates. He fully admitted to placing bets on behalf of customers and submitted the operational procedures, explaining that they received customer betting calls and then placed bets at the casino, a process entirely unrelated to the casino itself.

The only focus now was whether customers calling from other states to have a proxy company place bets constituted a lottery activity and whether this violated any laws.

At this point, it was Hardy's legal team's turn to take the stage. The entire legal team comprised 16 lawyers, and the legal provisions and evidence materials they presented were over a person's height.

Hardy thought to himself, this case does not seem so complicated; is there a need for so much documentation?

However, Hardy was a laymen in matters concerning the law and he believed professionals know their business more than him. He did not care how they handled it, he just wanted results.

Faced with such a lavish legal team from Hardy Group, the three prosecutors seemed rather outmatched. Both sides presented their evidence and viewpoints. The prosecution's argument was that Hardy Casino's behavior was a disguised form of lottery, a borderline activity that should be stopped immediately, penalized, and prohibited from engaging in such activities in the future.

Hardy's defense team was more professional. Rose beck stood up first to state, "Your Honors, we find the prosecution's charges utterly absurd. American law never accepts evidence based on unfounded 'speculations' or 'subjective inferences.'

"Did any illegal activity occur when customers called and had the proxy company place bets for them? No, Las Vegas gambling is legal, this is indisputable. Is the process of the proxy company placing bets illegal? Definitely not. So why does this suddenly become illegal in the prosecution's narrative?"

"These documents on the table contain the legal regulations on prohibited lottery activities from all 51 states in the U.S. Among these legal provisions, none indicate that the actions of a proxy company constitute a lottery activity."

Rose beck continued eloquently for over an hour, not even pausing for a sip of water. Hardy truly admired this guy.

Hardy had seen this kind of scene countless times on TV and in movies, but this was his first time experiencing it firsthand. It felt quite interesting.

A lawyer, In such a setting, can indeed turn things around with nothing but a silver tongue.

The law.

It also requires money.

Without money, how can you hire a good lawyer? Without a good lawyer, there's no way to win a lawsuit, so true fairness means you need to have a lot of money.

Afternoon.

The hearing concluded.

Today was just the beginning; there would be plenty more time for verbal battles. However, Hardy would no longer need to come in the future, he would leave the rest to his lawyers, whose job was to safeguard this business.

If the Supreme Court rules that telephone proxy betting constitutes a lottery activity, Hardy would lose a substantial amount of money and a major business. If it rules that it's not illegal, then Hardy's business would become a legitimate enterprise from then on.

How will the court rule?

Some say it will be based on principles of fairness and justice.

If that's really the case,

Then how could the old godfather have a group of friends in the judiciary?

In fact, the Hardy Casino case isn't particularly significant, but astute people know this matter involves Hardy. It was triggered by President Johnson and New York Governor Dewey, tied to the U.S. election, thus drawing considerable attention.