If person A steals something, say a bicycle, and sells it to me (I have no knowledge that the bicycle was stolen) the law says I must return the bike to its rightful owner without any compensation - except that I can pursue legal action against the person that sold me the bike.
If this is true, why is not a casino forced to return gambling losses (winnings from the casino's perspective) from a person that used embezzled funds to gamble with? (for instance, see this recent article)
Question 1: Is my assumption correct? Question 2: What is the difference between these two scenarios?