Treasure Wild

What is Treasure Wild?

According to the FBI, which raided his Las Vegas house on human trafficking warrants in 2014, Rashid “persuaded, induced, enticed and caused hundreds of victims to prostitute themselves for his benefit” beginning in 2002.

“Rashid operated a high-end prostitution business that transported victims across the United States, using various paid websites … to advertise the victims for prostitution purposes,” read a press release from the US attorney’s office, District of Nevada.

Prosecutors said Rashid imposed strict rules, manipulated the women, and used threats to maintain control. Some victims were encouraged to tattoo his name or image as a sign of loyalty, and many were led to believe he could advance their entertainment careers.

What is Treasure Wild?

The video shows a vault filled with cash, followed by a scene where Davies’ father is released after police allegedly determine the money came from legitimate gambling, the ad claims.

The AI-generated image of Davies’ father then urges viewers to visit the same online casino he used. Users who click the ad are redirected to Oxibet, an offshore gambling platform based in Comoros.

The Sun quoted Davies’ agent, who called the advertisement “lies” and confirmed that the soccer star has no ties to any gambling sites.

What is Treasure Wild?

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”