The winner of$ 560 MILLION in US wants anonymity

Antoine Lacroix

Wednesday, February 7, 2018 01:00

UPDATE
Wednesday, February 7, 2018 01:00

Look at this article

A woman in New Hampshire who won$ 560 MILLION US Powerball continues the lottery of the State in order that his identity remains secret.

In her lawsuit under the pseudonym ” Jane Doe “, the lady believes that it ” constitutes an invasion significant of his private life “, according to the USA Today.

The law in New Hampshire states, however, that the winner’s name, municipality, and the amount of the batch are in the public domain.

The woman claims to have made a “huge mistake” by signing his real name on the back of the ticket. A lawyer told her later that she could have remained anonymous if she had demanded his money via a trust.

“She wishes to continue [his work in the community] and have the freedom to walk into a grocery store or attend public events without being known or identified as the winner of a half-billion dollars “, one can read in the complaint.

The woman has not yet claimed the prize but sent a copy of her ticket to prove that she had won the jackpot. The prosecution indicates that the fight for his anonymity, cost him a fortune.

According to a lawyer consulted by the Boston Herald, the chances of the woman winning in court are ” probably zero “, but the case could go as high as the supreme Court of New Hampshire.

Same rules in Québec

Photo courtesy

Patrice Lavoie, a spokesperson for Loto-Quebec

If a similar situation occurs in the province, a winner who would not reveal his identity would also have to bend to the same rules, says Patrice Lavoie, director of corporate public affairs, Loto-Québec.

“When one calls for a lot more than $ 600, you must sign the ticket, he argues. By signing, you agree that your name, your region and your photo are public. “

According to him, it is very rare that people demand to preserve anonymity.

“The vast majority of the time, they are all smiles. We can organize a big press conference where they answer the questions only once and finally return to their intimacy, ” explains Patrice Lavoie.

“It would require a situation considered very serious and well-founded, for as we accept that we keep the people anonymous. This has only happened three or four times, after analysis, ” he concludes.