iteruka

Dead baiting NSW

197 posts in this topic

8 minutes ago, GOM said:

Thank God for that comment Scoobs.

What about sub judice people. This is ridiculous with people on here quoting each other as matter of fact when it is still speculation. The media is disgusting having judged and condemned Coles without trial. In any other realm of the law in NZ this would have been enough for the case not to go ahead as how are Coles to get a FAIR trial.

     What say you Em?

your a crack up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scooby3051 said:

Lets wait for the outcome of the case first otherwise I will shut it down...thanks...innocent until proven otherwise... end of story.

im not disagreeing with your comments but i think its in the public domain now and everyone is commenting on it as its in mainstream media 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gary1 said:

im not disagreeing with your comments but i think its in the public domain now and everyone is commenting on it as its in mainstream media 

I said enough...I don't care about the public domain the people concerned deserve a fair crack as nothing is proven yet... so l won't allow them to be tried by a bunch of no name internet wannabes before they get that chance... end of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, aquaman said:

Nothing to forgive whata post, more's the shame. Are you suggesting that L P's  should be put out without charges, and scant little evidence?.

 I'm saying this crosses the line.  Three different former employees saying live baiting took place is more than scant little evidence. They have no doubt come forward  with the best interests of your industry at heart. Being critical of those that have come forward is not the proper way to  look at it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After watching the news item yesterday I have to say I'm disappointed in The Cole's if it is all true. After seeing the photos for the first time on the news I can say for myself they are a bit hard to see but I'm no photo expert. I will be joining Scooby & a few other posters on this 1 & just sit on the fence to see what comes out at the end of it all (that is if there ever will be an end to the investigation) before I pass judgement on it.

I still think this whole investigation is taking to long to sort out though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, scooby3051 said:

I said enough...I don't care about the public domain the people concerned deserve a fair crack as nothing is proven yet... so l won't allow them to be tried by a bunch of no name internet wannabes before they get that chance... end of story.

gees scooby you call everyone no name internet wannabes you call this site an open forum  so you wont let anyone  to be tried  really you allow leo and everyone to call everyone else out remember when they bagged gerald ryan terry bailey  john allen etc ffs its a forum  not a dictatorship its mainstream news people should be able to express their views  why have a forum  if you dont like whats being said  just shut it down   mean while if it wasnt for leo this site would be gone 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, gary1 said:

gees scooby you call everyone no name internet wannabes you call this site an open forum  so you wont let anyone  to be tried  really you allow leo and everyone to call everyone else out remember when they bagged gerald ryan terry bailey  john allen etc ffs its a forum  not a dictatorship its mainstream news people should be able to express their views  why have a forum  if you dont like whats being said  just shut it down   mean while if it wasnt for leo this site would be gone 

You are free to go... shut the door behind you...cheers.

If you think Leo keeps it alive you are sadly mistaken... you get this for free and you still want to have a go at me.. well please leave...I do not do this for you to have the pleasure of taking potshots... if this was a debate i would have no problem but its more of a lynch mob...cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, GOM said:

Thank God for that comment Scoobs.

What about sub judice people. This is ridiculous with people on here quoting each other as matter of fact when it is still speculation. The media is disgusting having judged and condemned Coles without trial. In any other realm of the law in NZ this would have been enough for the case not to go ahead as how are Coles to get a FAIR trial.

     What say you Em?

I do not agree with Scooby as many other cases have been discussed on this site, the comments sometimes more disgusting than the crime. But Scooby holds the power. I never brought this subject to the table, I never posted the media clips, but once the info was out in the open, like most cases, people have opinions and the right to question what has been presented. God knows the questions are being asked all over the country. My last comment is this: If this was not sport connected, would you and those who support your view be flying the fair trial banner? Nothing anyone has said here is going to have any influence on the outcome. That will happen behind closed doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Emotive said:

I do not agree with Scooby as many other cases have been discussed on this site, the comments sometimes more disgusting than the crime. But Scooby holds the power. I never brought this subject to the table, I never posted the media clips, but once the info was out in the open, like most cases, people have opinions and the right to question what has been presented. God knows the questions are being asked all over the country. My last comment is this: If this was not sport connected, would you and those who support your view be flying the fair trial banner? Nothing anyone has said here is going to have any influence on the outcome. That will happen behind closed doors.

As I said I am happy after the case has been heard for a full and robust debate however it is all still to be decided... so please lets just hold our tongues shall we.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, aquaman said:

Nothing more than a witch hunt here Hedley. Lets look at the evidence thus far. Some blurry poor quality photos of what appears to be B Cole and another person tying something on the end of a line. It could be an untanned skin from a shot or dead rabbit,  or for that matter, a road kill. Then again it could be Grannies old fur coat chopped up, it could also be artificial fur, or an old rag. We have two employees giving evidence, one a former worker whom has his voice disguised and face hidden claiming Cole live baited whilst he worked there with chickens on a weekly basis. The other employee defends Cole and says he never ever saw any evidence of this practice, who do you believe.

Now I am not defending Cole for one minute,  what I am defending is the facts in this matter, and from what I know of the case, they seem to be few and far between. It appears Cole is guilty of winning to many races, and dominating the CD, and the roots of this investigation is born out of jealousy. It has become a lynch mob mentality. Again I say, regardless whether Cole is guilty or not, this whole fiasco, and the lack of real evidence shows just how dangerous this has become to all and sundry connected to the sport. The NZGRA need to put up, or shut up. They have had months to wind this up, instead they have allowed rumour and lie's to take over.

John it’s just as illegal to dead bait as it is to live baiting just as big penalty using road kill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MiniJax said:

Newshub reports there was allegations made in 2015 but nothing happened

Interesting story that.  Does anyone have any faith in the RIU to properly investigate cases like that anyway?  This case just proves that point.

Its actually easier to now understand why some of the greyhound participants have conflict with each other.  It must be frustrating when you tell authorities of illegal practices but they are incapable,or unwilling  of doing anything about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, what a post said:

Interesting story that.  Does anyone have any faith in the RIU to properly investigate cases like that anyway?  This case just proves that point.

Its actually easier to now understand why some of the greyhound participants have conflict with each other.  It must be frustrating when you tell authorities of illegal practices but they are incapable,or unwilling  of doing anything about it

Could also say that about the SPCA as the first documented complaint came in the early 2000's and was reported in the media by pro racing reporter BARRY LICHTER 05:00, February 22, 2015. That early investigation lead to the banning of cellphones on track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Zero Tolerance said:

John it’s just as illegal to dead bait as it is to live baiting just as big penalty using road kill

I am aware of that now, and i find that troubling. It was not gazetted according to the NZGRA's own rule book. Putting that aside, to include untanned skins, or road kills, or rabbits you have shot is a nonsense, and needs to be overturned. There is a huge difference between live baiting, and using the skin of a dead animal. The use of the word dead baiting is emotive and wrong, and is clearly an over reaction to animal right activists, and will only empower them towards their real agenda of shutting down Greyhound racing altogether. One must beer in mind, it does not matter how much you cave in to these activists, it will never be enough, because the end game is the destruction of Greyhound racing full stop. At some point you need to stop retreating, and stand and fight for your beliefs. That time has come. Expunge dead baiting from the rule book, it only weakens the rule on live baiting which should be the focus of the Industry. 

The 16 yrs given to the poor bloke in Australia for using an untanned skin is outrageous, and hopefully when it gets before a real judge will be overturned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, aquaman said:

I am aware of that now, and i find that troubling. It was not gazetted according to the NZGRA's own rule book. Putting that aside, to include untanned skins, or road kills, or rabbits you have shot is a nonsense, and needs to be overturned. There is a huge difference between live baiting, and using the skin of a dead animal. The use of the word dead baiting is emotive and wrong, and is clearly an over reaction to animal right activists, and will only empower them towards their real agenda of shutting down Greyhound racing altogether. One must beer in mind, it does not matter how much you cave in to these activists, it will never be enough, because the end game is the destruction of Greyhound racing full stop. At some point you need to stop retreating, and stand and fight for your beliefs. That time has come. Expunge dead baiting from the rule book, it only weakens the rule on live baiting which should be the focus of the Industry. 

The 16 yrs given to the poor bloke in Australia for using an untanned skin is outrageous, and hopefully when it gets before a real judge will be overturned.

How can you be so deliberately obtuse? The rule has nothing to do with activists, they will never shut down the sport. This is about public opinion and also takes into account the opinion of the sports own members. The rule which states "dead or alive" is also called blooding which is a more accurate term. And it is the blood and guts of a dead animal that you seem sadly hell-bent on holding on to. If you remove the word "Dead" form the rule you leave the cheating door wide open. Why because you are giving permission for those who wish, to kill animals for the purpose of blooding their dogs. "Dead?", is that killed yesterday, this morning, 2 minutes before the poor animal was tied to the lure? Was the live animal acquired for the express purpose of baiting a dog and did you kill it in front of the dog? But your honour it was dead when the dog chased it! Get a grip people, you are living in fantasy land if you believe changing the rule would be to the advantage of the industry.

A tanned skin is a by-product of the food industry, a product sold and used for several purposes. If you cannot train a dog using legal means like plenty of trainers do, then you need to hand in your license. If you do not possess the skill to train your dogs without the use of blood, you need to hand in your license. If you cannot change your methodology to produce chasers, you need to go! And what about the opinion of potential adoptees? Those wonderful people who give our dogs a forever home after racing? Do you really believe that group supports your outdated belief? If blooding increases pray drive, then does that prey drive switch off once adopted? A percentage of dogs will fail the temperament test due to genetics and natural prey drive levels. Why would you want to increase that level of failure by blooding a dog? Have you read the comments from adoptee groups? Do you fully understand the harm that this particular investigation has brought upon the sport? NO, no you don't! You are a selfish little man who can't see past his own immediate needs, and you need to go as do the others that support you. The dogs no longer compete using live pray, outlawed many years ago, and guess what the sport survived.

The world changes, you change with it or you die. The rule exists, there is no room for interpretation which eliminates the will to cheat. That puts everyone on a level playing field. People reading your comments will now be wondering if the money they wagered was just a donation? Was the outcome dictated by more than punting homework and racing luck? Was it? To be considering any of the above questions is to the detriment of all. And before you come back with some pathetic excuse to bring back fresh skins, along with your usual tirade of abuse, plenty of good trainers are saying F#CK U!.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Emotive said:

How can you be so deliberately obtuse? The rule has nothing to do with activists, they will never shut down the sport. This is about public opinion and also takes into account the opinion of the sports own members. The rule which states "dead or alive" is also called blooding which is a more accurate term. And it is the blood and guts of a dead animal that you seem sadly hell-bent on holding on to. If you remove the word "Dead" form the rule you leave the cheating door wide open. Why because you are giving permission for those who wish, to kill animals for the purpose of blooding their dogs. "Dead?", is that killed yesterday, this morning, 2 minutes before the poor animal was tied to the lure? Was the live animal acquired for the express purpose of baiting a dog and did you kill it in front of the dog? But your honour it was dead when the dog chased it! Get a grip people, you are living in fantasy land if you believe changing the rule would be to the advantage of the industry.

A tanned skin is a by-product of the food industry, a product sold and used for several purposes. If you cannot train a dog using legal means like plenty of trainers do, then you need to hand in your license. If you do not possess the skill to train your dogs without the use of blood, you need to hand in your license. If you cannot change your methodology to produce chasers, you need to go! And what about the opinion of potential adoptees? Those wonderful people who give our dogs a forever home after racing? Do you really believe that group supports your outdated belief? If blooding increases pray drive, then does that prey drive switch off once adopted? A percentage of dogs will fail the temperament test due to genetics and natural prey drive levels. Why would you want to increase that level of failure by blooding a dog? Have you read the comments from adoptee groups? Do you fully understand the harm that this particular investigation has brought upon the sport? NO, no you don't! You are a selfish little man who can't see past his own immediate needs, and you need to go as do the others that support you. The dogs no longer compete using live pray, outlawed many years ago, and guess what the sport survived.

The world changes, you change with it or you die. The rule exists, there is no room for interpretation which eliminates the will to cheat. That puts everyone on a level playing field. People reading your comments will now be wondering if the money they wagered was just a donation? Was the outcome dictated by more than punting homework and racing luck? Was it? To be considering any of the above questions is to the detriment of all. And before you come back with some pathetic excuse to bring back fresh skins, along with your usual tirade of abuse, plenty of good trainers are saying F#CK U!.

There couldn’t be a truer word spoken, good people within this sport are sickened to the core as to what this kennel has been getting up to..  The really sad thing about this whole affair is the complaints fell on deaf ears and there were many complaints..

Im sure that the extent of how deep this protection of certain trainers goes will come out in the wash..

To cleanse the sport of this type of behaviour would be an absolute blessing 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% agree with previous 2 posts. Old school attitudes will kill this game off, not this current 'scandal'. The liers, the deniers, the people who say "we've been live baiting for years" they are the problem here. Times have changed, rules have changed! The silence, the cover ups, that is the problem! I understand this Journo Mike Morrah was on course yesterday, very breifly before being tossed out by security! Why!? That can't be a good look! Why doesn't Cole make a statement, why doesn't another trainer go to camera and say "this isn't us, we don't do this shit!" Bet they'll be story on news tonight about the silence, the cover ups etc!! :angry:

I appluade those brave enough to come forward and beleive they did it for the right reasons, it's now up to the rest of the industry participants to take this as your final warning! To stand behind those who have spoken up and denounce this conduct. A united front from LPs that this is unacceptable and we all want to move on without it and race your dogs and love our dogs. Not bury head in sand and cry witch hunt!!

PS. Greyhounds are sighthounds not bloodhounds!! Live baiting is unnecessary not to mention ugly and cruel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 9:41 AM, aquaman said:

I am aware of that now, and i find that troubling. It was not gazetted according to the NZGRA's own rule book. Putting that aside, to include untanned skins, or road kills, or rabbits you have shot is a nonsense, and needs to be overturned. There is a huge difference between live baiting, and using the skin of a dead animal. The use of the word dead baiting is emotive and wrong, and is clearly an over reaction to animal right activists, and will only empower them towards their real agenda of shutting down Greyhound racing altogether. One must beer in mind, it does not matter how much you cave in to these activists, it will never be enough, because the end game is the destruction of Greyhound racing full stop. At some point you need to stop retreating, and stand and fight for your beliefs. That time has come. Expunge dead baiting from the rule book, it only weakens the rule on live baiting which should be the focus of the Industry. 

The 16 yrs given to the poor bloke in Australia for using an untanned skin is outrageous, and hopefully when it gets before a real judge will be overturned.

you got a few likes there aquaman which is a bit of a worry ,and if your views are shared by many then its troubling times ahead for your industry. In times of trouble it is those who stand with a united front that ultimately prosper. I personally don't think your views are too extreme,i can understand them,however as others have pointed out that is not the world we live in today.  Ive always thought you come across as a lover of your dogs and ive never seen any mention of where you have suggested live baiting is acceptable . However,like it or not, you need to accept,albeit grudgingly,that those who push for action against those who live bait,use skins of dead animals,whateveri,do so with the best interests of the industry at heart and they recognize the damage  that follows if those within the industry do not speak as one on this issue.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, POPA GAS said:

Just To let you all know, I do not believe in live baiting and we do not do it.I do believe we should be able to have skins at home to play with our dogs.

The rule could be changed that only skins, no body or flesh.

Bev

Why do you need a fresh skin as opposed to a tanned skin to train your dogs, when others don't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, POPA GAS said:

The best skin we had was 5yrs ago and a Hunter said would you like a goat skin it lasted for 3yrs, and it was all about smell and how tough it was.

 

 

So why is the smell important when race lures don't have a scent?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.