Man under Home Confinement for Illegal Gambling Conviction Is the Driver in a Fatal Accident

Paul Borelli was ordered to pay $4.2 million in forfeitures and fines.

Paul Borelli was ordered to pay $4.2 million in forfeitures and fines.

Paul Borelli, who previously had been involved in an illegal gambling story, was the driver in a fatal accident on Lake Avenue in Rochester last weekend. Borelli was cleared of any wrongdoing, because the man killed in the accident walked into oncoming traffic.

Though he was not ruled at fault in the pedestrian’s death, local residents have questioned whether the 70-year old Paul Borelli should have been on the road on a Saturday night at all. After his conviction in an illegal gambling ring, Borelli was fitted with an electronic monitoring device and given 8 months of home confinement.

8-Month Home Confinement Sentence

That 8-month sentence began in September 2015, so there appears to be several weeks left in his sentence. WHEC TV out of Rochester followed up that line of questioning with the nearest U.S. Attorney’s Office. They directed the WHEC reporter to the probation office.

The reporter made an inquiry with the head of probation to the Western Section of New York, but so far, no one has returned the news station’s call. The reporter also attempted to contact Paul Borelli himself, but no one answered his front door when the reporter knocked.

Astrid Aramberry Discusses the Deceased

With no other avenues of inquiry left, the WHAC reporter focused on the man killed in the accident. His name has not been released, until his family has been notified. But the media was able to contact his best friend, Astrid Aramberry.

Astrid Aramberry said of the deceased man, “He was good. Never hurt nobody, wasn’t fresh, loved children. Loved my grandchildren; loved my son.

Witnesses say that man had been drinking alcohol prior to the accident, and he appeared to be inebriated when he walked into traffic. He was in the center of Lake Avenue around 7 pm on Saturday night, when Paul Borelli drove past and struck the man with his vehicle. It was just after dark and police determined Borelli had little chance to avoid the collision.

Small-Time 2003 Bookie Business

Paul Borelli’s illegal gambling operations were active in the Rochester area for over 10 years at least. In 2003, he and Joseph Ruff started a small-time operation. It continued for 3 years, until it was busted.

Because they were small-time bookies, the two men were fined small amount for their illegal activities: Paul Borelli received a $3,268 fine and Joseph Ruff a $2,115 fine. The activity was marked as felony convictions on their criminal records, though.

$76 Million Illegal Gambling Ring

When the two men were arrested for operating an illegal online sports betting ring in late May 2014, the use of the Internet made their operation a big-time score. From January 2012 to May 2014, their operation handled an estimated $76 million in wagers. Borelli and Ruff were big time players.

Illegal gambling operators don’t keep all the money staked on games. Where legal sportsbooks pocket around 10% due to the juice, illegal bookies tend to have juice in the 15% to 20% range. That would translate to $11 million to $15 million held for an operation which last less than 2 & 1/2 years. Assuming their paid collectors and other workers a certain amount, either man was likely to have pocketed $5 million — and maybe a great deal more.

September 2015 Illegal Gambling Conviction

When Borelli was convicted of his crimes on September 8, 2015, Chief U.S. District Judge Frank P. Geraci, Jr. ordered that Borelli receive 3 years of probation and 8 months of home confinement. He also was ordered to “pay a $1,200,000 money judgment and forfeit approximately $3,000,000 in properties, cash and bank accounts.

Given legal fees and expenses, much of the estimated $5 million likely would have been spent or confiscated.

If Paul Borelli is found to have been violating the terms of his probation, then he could face prison time. Judges give probation and home confinement in cases where they believe incarceration would be either counter-productive or cruel. When the convicted prove they cannot be trusted to fulfill the terms of such leniency, then judges tend to get angry.