In People v. Turner (165 Misc 2d 222 [Crim Ct, NY County 1995]), the defendant was also charged with promoting gambling in the second degree and possession of a gambling device; the information alleged that the deponent police officer saw the defendant "manipulating three bottle caps on top of a cardboard box with his hands and encouraging pedestrians to place bets by calling out in substance 'five bucks a bet' on a game commonly known as 'the shell game' " (id. at 223). The defendant in Turner relied on People v. Hunt (162 Misc 2d 70) to contend that the information was facially insufficient because the shell game was a game of skill, not chance. The court disagreed, expressing its view that "the essential character of the contest ... is a game of chance. The essence of the shell game is to stake a bet on the player's selection of the one shell, out of three, that contains an object" (Turner, 165 Misc 2d at 224). Noting that a player need not be skilled in order to make such a choice, and that the game could be played without the shells being manipulated at all, the court said, "the dealer's purpose in initially disclosing the location of the object and in then manipulating the shells is hardly to give the player a fair chance. Rather ... the purpose is ... to create an illusion designed to convince the player that the object is within one of the empty shells" (id.)