Robbie Byrnes warned off

[Dmoore]

Byrnes is guilty of an offense is he
VOR?? What would that be champ? I.e what was he charged with, when did he have a hearing and what was the result of that hearing?
Second, what direction did he fail to comply with? Not handing over his wife's phone records? Hmmmmnnnn..... How much compensation is Gordon Wood looking at?? Maybe Sarinas could join him I the same class action.....

[tiny]

Firstly Robbie Byrnes was warned off by the board of HRNSW, not the stewards for failing to comply with a direction of the board so most certainly he is guilty of an offence.

Racing Authorities or Stewards for that do not have the right to arrest people when they fail to appear or provide information for an investigation their only recourse is to be able to take action against the persons involved licence.

In relation to the Sarina's they have already been charged with an offence and the case is part heard but was adjourned by the judge acting as a steward in this case to allow further evidence to be gathered at no stage has it been said there is insufficient evidence to obtain a conviction, other than by you.

In relation to your comparison to the Indonesian Judicial System, I think the Australian system has something very similar have you heard the term " remanded in custody" they are not proven guilty of any offence either only charged.

Not a lot of difference from my perspective.

That's fine VOR but gee they want to get it right. Sam Nati came out at the beginning of the swab scandal and said "this is going to cost people there houses". They will be eating humble pie if it is his or some of his mates at hrnsw.

I like everyone want to see some justice. I just get this feeling it is beyond anyone at hrnsw. Thus far the police investigation has also been a big disappointment.

[Chariots]

Simple solution provide the requested information if you have nothing to hide and prove your innocence.

[Thevoiceofreason]

The irony here is I asked how his appeal went and it seems it is not finalised so it may well be he is found to be not guilty of any offence.

No doubt we will know soon enough.

Having said that Robbie Byrnes knew the rules when he decided to not hand over the phone records.

[Airds]

He knew the rules did he ? Been asked to supply records that are not his to supply ?

[Airds]

Double standards the colonel has, VOR says they have hard evidence and you only get stood down, don't supply records that are not your to supply = warned off, get stood down you can still train go to race tracks etc, warned off you cannot do anything what a joke

[Dmoore]

In post no*20 VOR you stated, "most certainly he is guilty of an offense".....why the backtracking, now you say he may not be guilty of an offence???
Please....stop trying to stir things up in an industry already crippled by the corruption scandal....now you are dragging potentially innocent people into it as well!

[Airds]

Ray, think about your post, how can you supply something that is not yours to supply ? Why should you have to prove your innocent, Jeeese if the police worked like that three quarters of Australia would be in jail. Justice Haylen said "it's not up to them to prove them selves innocent it's up to you to prove them guilty" Mr Sanders, pity the colonel did not do this in the first place may have saved a lot of issues that have arisen out of the scandal and not unesscessarily dragged people's names through the mud. I hear those people are in the process of taking legal action about that issue in the supreme court.

[Thevoiceofreason]

In post no*20 VOR you stated, "most certainly he is guilty of an offense".....why the backtracking, now you say he may not be guilty of an offence???
Please....stop trying to stir things up in an industry already crippled by the corruption scandal....now you are dragging potentially innocent people into it as well!

No what I mean by that is.... as the appeal has not been finalised he may be found not guilty of an offence at that level, most certainly as it stands he is deemed to be guilty of an offence now.

No attempt to stir things up simply stating facts as they are .. not even offering an opinion as to his guilt or otherwise.

[Airds]

As it stands he is guilty of an offence, pleeeeeease, WHAT OFFENCE is that ? Please explain