Ohokaman 5,841 Report post Posted December 16, 2011 Decision of Judicial Committee on http://www.hrnz.co.nz/ 1. Fine $3500 2. RIU Costs $16,425 3. JCA Costs $16,104 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furlong 0 Report post Posted December 16, 2011 Why does Lance Justice have to pay $36.000 when the enquiry proceedings found him not to have administered any substances and not to have any knowledge of anyone else administering a substance to the horse? Why should he have to pay costs when the RIU and the JCA failed to find any wrongdoing? They should have to pay his costs for a failed case against him. It is fair enough to disqualify the horse for an elevated reading, although there appears to be concerns about security, and a trainer is responsible for his horse, but in this case the enquiry found he had had done nothing wrong. In my opinion this is not "justice" and I hope he appeals. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stables 577 Report post Posted December 16, 2011 It is a trainers responsibilty to present a horse for racing free of performance enhancing substances. The horse produced a positive swab in Australasias major harness race. The fact that he was fined only $3500 is a farce. He should have been disqualified for a considerable period of time. It seems that all you need to do these days is squeal loudly that you are innocent and you can get away with giving your horse anything. Its no wonder that the use of performance enhancing substances is rife in racing across New Zealand and Australia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 17, 2011 And if you read the case and ruling the horse tested positve to the same substance after the heats but fortunately below the levels that result in a prosecution. Fine/penalty way too light. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdt 293 Report post Posted December 17, 2011 I may be wrong but I thought I just heard Lance Justice saying on Trackside that they were going to appeal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
moema 0 Report post Posted December 18, 2011 It is a trainers responsibilty to present a horse for racing free of performance enhancing substances. The horse produced a positive swab in Australasias major harness race. The fact that he was fined only $3500 is a farce. He should have been disqualified for a considerable period of time. It seems that all you need to do these days is squeal loudly that you are innocent and you can get away with giving your horse anything. Its no wonder that the use of performance enhancing substances is rife in racing across New Zealand and Australia I agree it is a farce. How the horse wasn't given 12 months after being found positive in the biggest race event in Australasia is unbelievable. He should not have been allowed to race in the Miracle Mile. For all the ordinary trainers and owners racing horses on their own merits it makes me wonder why we stay in the game. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idolmite 2,559 Report post Posted December 18, 2011 I agree it is a farce. How the horse wasn't given 12 months after being found positive in the biggest race event in Australasia is unbelievable. He should not have been allowed to race in the Miracle Mile. For all the ordinary trainers and owners racing horses on their own merits it makes me wonder why we stay in the game. You can't blame the horse. He didn't dope himself. Or did he? The plot thickens.......... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stables 577 Report post Posted December 18, 2011 Phil Coulsen was disqualified for life under similar circumstances. Why was Lance Justice not given a long holiday? I agree why are we staying in the game, I for one am reducing my involvement and will shortly cease racing any horses Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idolmite 2,559 Report post Posted December 18, 2011 Phil Coulsen was disqualified for life under similar circumstances. Why was Lance Justice not given a long holiday? I'm assuming because there was no evidence he actually did anything wrong? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightymo 0 Report post Posted December 18, 2011 I agree it is a farce. How the horse wasn't given 12 months after being found positive in the biggest race event in Australasia is unbelievable. He should not have been allowed to race in the Miracle Mile. For all the ordinary trainers and owners racing horses on their own merits it makes me wonder why we stay in the game. 12 months for the horse?? By all means fine and ban the trainer, but dont impose any more penalties on the owners, especially after having just lost 1st place prizemoney... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Is the loss of the prize money a PENALTY. If you steal money and the Judge says "pay it back, thats your penalty ,off you go and be a good boy" is that enough. Smoken Up had no right to the 1st Prize money, the only PENALTY is $3500, the rest are recovery of costs incurred because he tested positive and the Racing Integrity Unit had to prosecute. Not enough to be a deterent and a bad look for Harness Racing for sure. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Is the loss of the prize money a PENALTY ? If you steal money and the Judge says"pay it back, thats your penalty, off you go and be a good boy" is that enough ? Smoken Up had no right to the 1at prize money. The costs were a recovery of expenses incurred by RIU etc to prosecute for a positive test, so they were costs , not penalties. The only penalty was the $3500 and thats not enough and a bad look for harness racing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idolmite 2,559 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Still a penalty for the person having to pay it Benjamin, which ever way you choose to word it. And remember, he was not actually found guilty of administering anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eljay 1,720 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 I recommend some of you read the report as released by HRNZ/JCA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Sorry, but I cannot see how you are penalised in giving back to the rightful owner what is not yours. Sure puts a new meaning on the word justice if you consider that is a penalty Idolmite. No one is accusing the trainer of administering anything, not even the RIU but the charge that was laid against the trainer was proven. And the PENALTY in one of Australasias biggest races is $3500. Gee... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stables 577 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 I agree Benjamin, if a person burgles a house and steals a flat screen tv and is subsequently caught, is it a penalty if the tv is confiscated and should the person then be released without any further penalty? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idolmite 2,559 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Sorry, but I cannot see how you are penalised in giving back to the rightful owner what is not yours. Sure puts a new meaning on the word justice if you consider that is a penalty Idolmite. No one is accusing the trainer of administering anything, not even the RIU but the charge that was laid against the trainer was proven. And the PENALTY in one of Australasias biggest races is $3500. Gee... I'm not referring to the prize money you fool. I'm referring to the tens of thousands of dollars in costs that you say are not a penalty. I'm saying they sure ARE a penalty to the person that has to pay for them. And once again, there was NO evidence to suggest Lance Justice administered anything. Had there have been we wouldn't be having this conversation, because the findings and penaty would have been different, but there isn't so they weren't. Effectively he was only found guilty on a more minor charge, which pisses some people, who can't get over themselves, off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stables 577 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Lance Justice took the horse to the races and won the biggest race in Australasia with a horse that had a prohibited substance in its system. It didn't get into the horse without someone administering it and it is his responsibilty to ensure that doesn't happen. The most likely person to have administered the substance is the trainer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spike 0 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Justice should have been outed - simple as that - the consistency of decisions in NZ is a joke ..... I'm glad I'm now out of the game! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Idolmite The nice thing about Racecafe is that even a FOOL like me can get support from some quarters. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idolmite 2,559 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 Lance Justice took the horse to the races and won the biggest race in Australasia with a horse that had a prohibited substance in its system. It didn't get into the horse without someone administering it and it is his responsibilty to ensure that doesn't happen. The most likely person to have administered the substance is the trainer While that is certainly true hypothetically, that is not how people are charged and convicted in our society, is it? The "most likely" to kill somebody? To defraud someone? To administer a prohibited something? That is not how we find people guilty...... Was in the system? Yes, proven, undisputed. Was his responsibility? Yes, proven, undisputed. That's what he's been convicted of. The most likely? Arguably so, probably so, even, but this is disputed and it is certainly not proven. You cannot be convicted of something that is unproven, end of story. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 I'm not referring to the prize money you fool. I'm referring to the tens of thousands of dollars in costs that you say are not a penalty. I'm saying they sure ARE a penalty to the person that has to pay for them. And once again, there was NO evidence to suggest Lance Justice administered anything. Had there have been we wouldn't be having this conversation, because the findings and penaty would have been different, but there isn't so they weren't. Effectively he was only found guilty on a more minor charge, which pisses some people, who can't get over themselves, off. The only thing that"pisses" me Idolmite is that everyone who attended the Interdoms at Alexandra Park is a suspect. The horse had DMSO in its system(9.3mg/l on 1 April and the higher reading 8 April). Now it wasn't Lance because he has stated he hates the smell of the stuff and has never used it ! So everyone else who was at both meetings is a suspect including me I guess as I go to every meeting at the Park.. I spent the full night in the main stand both nights though my wifes diary does record that I sneezed on both nights. Now her diary can be unreliable( some of the times she has clocked me in have been hours later than my real arrival home time) but is this fair ................. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idolmite 2,559 Report post Posted December 19, 2011 But surely you're not suggesting they convict any old Aussie, guilty or not, just to remove doubt from everybody else that was there? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin 19 Report post Posted December 20, 2011 Look, it will possibly /probably end where it sits right now (even after appeal) and we move on. The question in my mind remains, does the penalty act as an adequate warning to others Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stables 577 Report post Posted December 20, 2011 Idolmite, the rules of racing do not require the same standard of proof as the court system. The rules require trainers to ensure that their horse is presentred to the races wiithout performance enhancing substances in their system . If any are found then it is the trainers responsibilty and he must pay the penalty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
