Should the lottery award jackpot prizes based on video evidence?

Reply #15

rdgrnr — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 10:09:35 GMT

Well, thank ya kindly, Jim.

Pap all the time told folks I wadn't quite as dumb as I look.

Reply #14

KY Floyd — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 09:36:32 GMT

NY has a specific law allowing people to present a claim if they don't have the ticket. I don't recall the amount, but there's a fee of at least $100, and perhaps $150 or so to submit the claim. That will cover a basic investigation that will easily weed out the majority of false or weak claims, and probably most claims for less than $1000 or so. I'm pretty sure the law requires that any prize will not be paid until after the claim period expires, to make sure that nobody else comes forward with... [ More ]

Reply #13

realtorjim — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 02:07:55 GMT

Ridge, with this kind of grammer, you may have just blown your cover! Yale? Havard? Julliard school of acting? Next I expect you to cover the laws of probability, or non-probability in the case of the new MegaMillions matrix.

Reply #12

JAP69 — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 16:56:14 GMT

Video evidence is used to convict you of a crime and put you in jail.

Video of a purchase with a time stamp could be evidence. Most register receipts have time stamps and what purchased too to go along with the vid.

Reply #11

Stack47 — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 16:20:57 GMT

I read where the majority of unclaimed tickets are scratch-offs $5 or less and probably true because the scratch-off sales is over 60% of all ticket sales. For those jackpot game unclaimed tickets, not all stores have video cameras and some that do, have inaccurate time stamps. I believe most of us are for using any method to determine ownership of a unclaimed tickets as opposed to the prize going back to the state general fund, but I think it's only fair when they find the actual player buying... [ More ]

Reply #10

NightStalker — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:58:12 GMT

I think the lottery should try to seek out winners of large jackpots. If posting a video on their website helps identify a winner, I'm for it. That winner could be me or you.

I can see the potential problems with it, unless that person can produce the ticket.

Reply #9

Stack47 — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:38:39 GMT

It was in Canada where the lottery rules and regulations are probably much different than in the U.S. And I really doubt in the future, that lottery will seek out the winners of every unclaimed prize. It might be good publicity to find the winner and payout a large jackpot, but don't expect the Ohio Lottery to send you a notice saying you forgot to cash that $1 Rolling Cash 5 winning ticket or that matching three number Classic Lotto ticket.

Reply #8

rdgrnr — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 12:10:25 GMT

Good question.

Valid points can be made on both sides.

It's a choice between the perennial arbiters of fate: Human Compassion and Rule of Law.

Though I naturally incline towards Human Compassion, I would probably opt for the Rule of Law in this case.

I believe that certain established structures of principle must be enforced in order to maintain confidence in the integrity of the system as a whole.

So in my book, ya gotta have a ticket.

Reply #7

Slick Nick — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 11:01:52 GMT

She's a lucky woman.. I strongly doubt it would happen here in New York.. Good luck to her....

Reply #6

Jon D — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 00:19:18 GMT

The world is going electronic/digital already.

So they had a timestamp and her picture on video, maybe that could be how you buy tickets in the future:

- go to a store, take a timestamp, take a picture for facial recognition, or fingerprint or iris scan

- that's your lottery entry

We have an electronic version here in CA already, the second chance program.

You enter codes online from tickets, and that is your entry. You do not need to have the actual paper ticket to claim the priz... [ More ]

Reply #5

billionaire2bee — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 00:05:21 GMT

Yeah i agree you should have physical documentation as well as the digital....

Reply #4

BuyLow — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 23:04:16 GMT

Kinda sets a precidence I don't care for. You should have the ticket to claim, otherwise the potential for funny business increases exponentially......especially in this digital age. Maybe she was added to the video???? I don't know........

Reply #3

RJOh — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:38:55 GMT

She was lucky and must had friends in the right places since the lottery tracked her down to give her the money. There were over 400 other people actively trying to claim that $50M and she wasn't one of them.

Reply #2

NightStalker — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:26:28 GMT

IF she is readily identifiable on the video as the one who purchased the ticket, I don't have a problem with it. Cameras are everywhere. It's only logical to think that eventually this scenario would occur.

Reply #1

haymaker — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:26:26 GMT

Not sure I understand the ?

If the Jp would have been taken by the state/province, it's progress,

If it's added to the next JP, then no

Should the lottery award jackpot prizes based on video evidence?

mypiemaster — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:14:17 GMT

Canada just agreed to award a bunch of millions to a woman, based on video evidence, who won the jackpot but couldn't find her ticket. She said she looked everywhere, but just couldn't figure out what she did with the ticket. Is this real progress, or is this taking millions out of the greedy hands of the lotteries? Is this opening up the proverbial Pandora's box?.