Quote from: Hatchy on June 20, 2024, 08:08:27 AM

Quote from: Kavelj22 on June 19, 2024, 10:30:11 PM

But couldn't he have bet using another identity? I mean, he should ask his wife or someone close to him that he trusts to put the bet in his place so that his name is not involved in the matter. This possibility confirms the stupidity of his doing so, no matter how tempting the amount he might have won.

At the same time, this makes me wonder whether the bodyguard is authorized to see any sensitive state information. Is there a law that prevents people who hold duties in the British administration from placing bets in general? If the accusation is proven, the bodyguard will be accused of using sensitive data obtained as part of his assigned work, and placing a bet is evidence of that and not an accusation in itself.

That way, he would've dragging his family members all into trouble. They would still face same consequences as it will still be obvious that he gave his wife or family the right omes to bet on. So I guess there's no two way around it. My question is how they got to know about his bet. Did he show it to them or his data was leaked by the betting company or they monitor his every move since he works for the prime Minister. If this is true and he knew of such matters that could have resulted, he wouldn't have made such bets. I really don't see anything wrong in his betting. He just like every other gambler made a bet but his position gave him a condition.

This means it does not have to be one of his relatives who might later be suspected. It could be a close friend or someone else he trusts. At least he could sell the information to any unknown person on the Internet without revealing his identity.
I am now counting the possibilities that this bodyguard could have adopted without harming himself in this way. This means that it is unfortunate for a person to be corrupt and stupid at the same time, and the administration that employed him must review its standards and evaluations regarding human resources because what is more regrettable than employing corrupt people is employing fools.

Now he is accused of betraying his country and revealing secrets related to his job, and I expect that he will be pressured during interrogation, which may expose others to more accountability. We do not forget that the information was shared with the casino in which he registered which knows that he is the bodyguard of a prominent figure. This means that we do not know whether the casino in turn exploited the information in one way or another.