More stood down

[Greg Hando]

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=101050

[Thevoiceofreason]

It is not so long ago this forum was screaming for justice for the Harness racing industry and many were complaining the HRNSW were acting too slowly on the corruption front.

I from day one called for calm and begged that we please let the powers that be trawl slowly through the evidence and have them eventually take action with less chance of their actions then being overturned by some form of appeal.

Congratulations to HRNSW, whilst no charges have been laid in some cases the licensed people stood down from the industry so far and the people warned off already have clearly shown this investigation is a long way from being over.

The job is being well done.

[jimmy777]

posted on Trots TV Media Releases today

Harness Racing NSW has been advised by the Australian Racing Forensic Laboratory (ARFL) that Ketorolac has been detected in the post race urine sample taken from OUR EL NINO NZ after it had won Race 7 the Cordina Chicken Farms Pace (1,609 metres) at Tabcorp Menangle Park on Monday 13 August 2012.
This finding had been confirmed by Racing Analytical Services Ltd (RASL) in Melbourne.
HRNSW will inquire into these reports at a time and date to be fixed. Mr Mitchell Reese, trainer of OUR EL NINO NZ will be required to attend this inquiry.
Acting under the provisions of AHRR 183A, OUR EL NINO NZ will not be permitted to be nominated or compete in any race until the completion of this inquiry.

[Greg Hando]

Yes Bill and probably more still to come.

[matrightyeh]

wow thats crazy https://imageshackau.com/sports/131/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/133/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/138/b/happy.gif
https://imageshackau.com/sports/123/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/52/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/134/b/happy.gif

[broncobrad]

As one of those who subscribed for patience in the stewards efforts to get the job done properly, have to say I thought the whole inquiry had died a slow death until this announcement. The public was not being advised of any updates in recent months and my confidence in the stewards had waned. It was probably no co-incidence that these four were stood down in light of the criminal matters that were going through the courts and the stewards may or may not have acted until the police matters had been dealt with. I think we are entitled to a bit more information from the authoritys and not just a statement that they have all been stood down under Rule 183(d). Stood down for what? How are they related? For how long? What action is pending?

Seeing as its a Bathurst trainer and I have been critical of the inaction of stewards at that track for some questionable drives or incidents there (none directly related to Russo I might add), a little bit of substance in the charges would not go astray.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Brad

Here is the rule in its entirety. What other information do you want, it is clear from the release they are stood down pending the outcome of the inquiry which clearly has stalled due to police action.

That is why these people have not yet been questioned at any length.

The stewards should not and in fact can not say what action is pending, other than the stand down order which the rule allows, if they did this would be a clear breach of natural justice and procedural fairness.

The process is all important.

Action pending outcome

183. Pending the outcome of an inquiry, investigation or objection, or where a person has been charged with an offence, the Stewards may direct one or more of the following -

(a) that a horse shall not be nominated for or compete in a race;

(b) that a driver shall not drive or otherwise take part in a race;

(c) that the horses of certain connections shall not be nominated for or start in a race;

(d) that a licence or any other type of authority or permission be suspended.

[broncobrad]

Bill,

Are we to just accept that stewards are not going to stand persons down until criminal proceedings are under way? Were the stewards aware of criminal behaviour but unwilling to address same for fear of jeopardising any criminal proceedings underway and were they tolerating these licenced persons still actively participating in the industry KNOWING of it? Does this not underline that the stewards are toothless tigers with limited powers to remove those in the industry who bring it into constant disrepute, because they are too frightened they will lose on appeal, or the charges are just too difficult to prove? Doesn't inspire much confidence does it?

That to me just says "alright you guys, we can put up with so much Tommy Rot in the sport but if you get caught doing anything illegal which we can prove in court, well bugger, now we have to do something as well to make it look like we are doing something to stamp out that kind of element. This is 'horse has already bolted sort of stuff, now we have to put it back in the box'.

I can wear what you say about due process and procedural fairness and not prejudicing the case and all that...I think if they are going to release a statement about 4 more people being stood down, being denied an opportunity to make a living from the sport, they could have given us more info about the charges facing them and what brought the charges about and how they are implicated in the on-going inquiry. If as you say Bill, they cannot say anymore for the reasons you have stated I will shut my trap.

[Thevoiceofreason]

Brad

The stewards have not held any significant investigations since the hearing involving the Sarinas which to my understanding was adjourned because to produce the evidence they had on phone calls may have hampered the police investigation.

I am tipping albeit without any knowledge that a similar set of circumstances has been in play here and now the case against M Russo has been finalised the stewards can start to move forward.

I would consider it likely they will be trying to get some of the police evidence used in the M Russo if it is available to them.

In a case like this that requires investigation the stewards should not consider any charges until they have heard all the evidence, for that reason they cannot declare what charges if any they may lay.

It is all about the process nothing more and given the importance of this investigation it is very important they get it right.

[Greg Hando]

If a trainer is stood down can a family member or partner continue training the horse's ?

[p plater]

It appears they can, next Tuesday at Menangle, last race.

Another question along the same lines, who drove the horses involved with the recent steward actions?

[mango]

It appears they can, next Tuesday at Menangle, last race.

Another question along the same lines, who drove the horses involved with the recent steward actions?

As there not together no more i can't see there being a problem with the horse racing.

[p plater]

As there not together no more i can't see there being a problem with the horse racing.

Sorry to here that but both appear to train from the same property

[Thevoiceofreason]

The rules is relation to close associates not being able to participate, or being approved to participate will only come into play if the people stood down are either disqualified or warned off.

[p plater]

Thanks for that information, gets a bit confusing with events over the last 12 months

[Triple V]

There is, as far as I'm aware, also nothing in the rules which precludes someone who has been stood down from continuing with their usual stable duties such as feeding/taking care of their horses, driving trackwork, educating yearlings etc. To my knowledge they have only been stood down from competing...i.e. Training/Race Driving.

[p plater]

Jamie, now you have pointed out the confusion. They can feed,care and drive trackwork but they can't train?

[Triple V]

...just so long as they're wearing their Vest when driving said trackwork...lest someone from officialdom spring Pather-like from the bushes along in the back straight (on a track like Riverstone for example) & ask them if they're wearing one...then, should they not be wearing one, add further burden by way of handing them a fine as well. :p
They're in cost recovery mode as you know. Heard recently they've only just managed to clear a quite sizeable back-log of Dry Cleaning invoices for former Chief Steward Roger Nebauer's much loved black winter trenchcoat.
http://resources.shopstyle.co.uk/sim/f7/24/f724afb970516a314e8beda23da95f7d/la-redoute-overcoats-trenchcoats-mens-single-breasted-wool-mix-overcoat.jpg

[p plater]

That's the solution. Bring in a rule that any offence carrys a "Ban on wearing a vest".

[Greg Hando]

Thanks Jamie a friend asked me and as i didnt know thought i would find out.

[Greg Hando]

Just read the rule, Rule 183 (d) that a licence or any other type of authority or permission be suspended. I thought this means all license types would be suspended , meaning you couldn't work in a registered stable.
What does everyone think it mean's ?

[Thevoiceofreason]

Just read the rule, Rule 183 (d) that a licence or any other type of authority or permission be suspended. I thought this means all license types would be suspended , meaning you couldn't work in a registered stable.
What does everyone think it mean's ?

Greg

You are 100% right the licence is suspended and as such they can not do anything that should be done by a licensed person..... If they do the licensed person in charge of the horse has also committed an offence.

It does however not preclude them from living with other licensed persons.