The hearing of Charges laid against L Justice following detection of a prohibited substance in Smoken Up after ID 11 final to be heard 23 / 24 August 2011
Printable View
The hearing of Charges laid against L Justice following detection of a prohibited substance in Smoken Up after ID 11 final to be heard 23 / 24 August 2011
A hearing into the result of Australasia's premier harness race , four and a half months after the race is run. What a joke!
This should have been sorted out months ago. It's not helping our sports image. If found guilty it will be dissapointing for the horse, I thought he really deserved to win it.
me too i wish it was over
I heard that smoken up was the cause of the earthquakes in nz .......and LJ had some thing to do with the kennedy assasination and john wesley huffman is a rampent ##### which one of these statements is true........rumors and rumblings are not always true .........all the facts will be released and yes john i have all your posts on file please be sure you check liable laws before you post, and admin you have a responsability to uphold them as well ..........signed the real LANCE JUSTICE
i think the saddest thing is that imthemightyquinn should have and would have been horse of the year if this was sorted out, the sort of priceless accolade that happens less then once in a life time for the owners, breeders, trainer and driver
Good Call Lance
When SMOKEN up is disqualified in 10 days time.I'm Themightyquinn will become Australian harness horse of the year
Horses disqualified are not eligible. Judging begins at the end of the season.
He will also become the inter dominion champion.
Tears will be shed, but that's life .
Step aside from all the hype.
Fact is, the horse returned a positive swab in the biggest race in the harness racing calendar.
The only thing that remains, is how big a penalty the trainer will get.
wait till you get all the facts before you pass judgement.................and then you can cast the first stone ...................
My comments were the facts
SMOKEN UP raced and returned a positive swab
How it happened is irrelevant, refer hrnz rule book.
Every licensed trainer abides by those rules, Bleating they are unfair after one is broken
will not change the result, no matter what colorful story that is created in defense.
SMOKEN UP will be disqualified.
It's only the trainers penalty left for Judgement
This is not a c.o race at bendigo it's the Inter Dominion final .
The integrity of harness racing, is at stake.
The matter will not be treated lightly by hrnz.nor should it be.
unless trigger is referring to the swab 'pot' or bottles or testing facility contaminating the swab -
i'd have to agree with aquilq; SU has to lose race - but should be interesting to see what trigger is reffering to a few days time
surely nobody is suggesting that lance would gear his horses up ,its been going on for years in harness racing so why stop now the penalties in the south of Australia are very leanient
Anyone heard any news?
Found this re yesterday but nothing re todays part of it.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/racing/...s-drug-testing
why didn't nz prosecutor simply find out how long it takes for dmso to enter the skin, enter the blood stream, be taken out by the kidneys and enter urine
now compare that to the time between the horse running the race and being swabbed
and thus you have ruled out contamination and justice is served
by the sounds of it that would have been worked out easily if the pre-race had not been thrown away according to one artical from this morning?
Sounds like the horse and trainer were clean to me and some one has stuffed up.
G'day TST,Quote:
Originally Posted by thesushitrain
Mate, I'm here to tell you that it absorbs so quickly it would take about 1- 2 seconds & I think that's the basis of the contamination defence and because it needs to be proven beyond reasonable doubt it is a very plausible one given the nature & properties of the chemical.
If you're keen to try an experiment & you're fond of a combination of rotten egg/garlic & a touch of past their use by date oysters... then stick your finger in the stuff & you'll almost instantaneously taste it in your mouth. I kid you not. It is lightning in a bottle in that respect and that is also why it is such an excellent substance for carrying various theraputics deep into a horse's tissue, sinew & bone. I reckon it's a fair chance to go through lead.
One very highly significant point that was raised by HRNZ's Chief Vet, Andrew Grierson, seems to have been skipped over in the post match analysis here. The actual quantity/level present in any such test is very significant. 'but he believed DMSO would need to be directly applied for it to return such high levels'.
Andrew is absolutely, 100% correct there. For mine, common sense dictates that an overtly large amount/high level detected would be very inconsistent with trace levels produced by contamination (see Opium Poppy seeds in Lucern Hay periodically being found responsible for the production of very low level Morphine positives down in TAS)
i understand it enters the blood quickly..but this was a urine sample, and the kidneys are not going to instantly get the DMSO into the urine
ie, i understand its about an hour for alcohol
True, it might take a little while, how much is open to speculation, however it's not just the blood that it rolls into. DMSO is rapidly and very extensively spread throughout the entire body. Excretion of un-metabolised DMSO in the urine can account for anywhere between 20% and as much as 70% of the original dose, the balance having been reduced to its metabolite, which I think is dimethylsulfide.
That being the case, based on whatever the specific level detected was, you'd think it would not be a great chore for much, much shaper minds than mine to back-track from there and work out an approximate range of what the orginal dose was...a large amount indicating an intentional administration....or a small amount suggesting it was contamination based.
which is why the 'it was only just over the threshold' statement is ridiculous, the swab is only what is detected in the urine, not in the entire body
[VVV] Depends entirely on what the threshold is. I don't happen to know what it is. Do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by thesushitrain
15mg
SU was 25mg
Anyone know the outcome?
surely it should be over by now?
I believe the enquiry is still continuing , no resolution at this stage.
I'm really impressed with how the defence are running their case, it appears they are a fighting chance (as they should be IMHO). Good luck Lance, I'm cheering you on. :)
http://b.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=...&rn=1480239852http://tags.bluekai.com/site/4318 Squire and Hall became involved in the Gardner cross-examination, which drew the revelation there was potential for contamination due to "instrumental carry-over".
Squire: "Are you suggesting that the trace levels (of DMSO) may have got there as a result of the testing process?"
Gardner: "That's a possibility."
Grierson, who has 25 years experience as a racecourse vet, came under intense questioning from Thomas. She noted he made two errors in the swabbing process, one in which he omitted a digit on the swab card identification number, and another when he signed his name on the line marked: steward. "I was technically a steward," he replied.
Common sense (law) prevails?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thesushitrain
[VVV] That doesn't make any sense to me at all TST. In fact it is completely wrong.
Last time I checked...which wasn't too long ago btw given the amount of Coffee I've banged down today, urine is in fact a liquid...therefore the presence of any substance would not be measured in mg's. It would be measured in ppm's...just as TC02's are measured in mmol's & not mg's. I think you're just making mischief.
Just found this...
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226121404170
think sushi may be right VVV, read the story on harness link.
it is wrong, its something like mcg/ mml or something, i cant really think straight atmQuote:
Originally Posted by triplev123
Rule 1004(8) provides for the mandatory disqualification of a horse presented to race when a prohibited substance has been detected.
SU HAS to the lose the race
wonder why they couldnt find an expert witness in nz to support their case? does anyone know the guy from kentucky?
The hearing is adjourned till next Tuesday when more evidence will be taken. After that there is talk of a lengthy deliberation.
I feel sorry for the horse, he is a good race horse that is getting his name tarnished because of someone's wrong doing(whom ever that may be).
Quote:
Originally Posted by thesushitrain
Sushi... Obviously it is not as black and white as you expect.
I don't know what would be worse, being branded a cheat and loosing all respect and integrity over someone else's mistake, or actually being a cheat and getting caught.
I hope what ever verdict is made, for all parties I hope it's the right one..
nom d g,
past case in nz, winning horse tests positive, 100% proven that the horse was given the substance through contamination by being put in another trainers stabling by the club while on course
horse still loses race
cannot see how LJ can do any better then that in his defence
Possibly if he can prove that contamination occurred when the post race sample was being taken or being tested and therefore that the horse did not race with DMSO when it won the Grand Final.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesushitrain
can we have a vote,
who thinks it was contamination before the race
who thinks it was a contamination after the race
The silence is deafening :cool:
Possibly if he can prove that contamination occurred when the post race sample was being taken or being tested and therefore that the horse did not race with DMSO when it won the Grand Final.
Shakamaker
I don't think he can prove that. He can prove it is a possibility, but that's about all. Will be in interesting to see the outcome. I think he will lose the race.
I think you are right pukpuk. If it being a possibility is enough then all swabs are invalid. Below only from a newspaper report on inquiry but what exactly does it mean when it says "omitted a digit" ? Could mean the swabs from another horse?
.Quote:
Grierson, who has 25 years experience as a racecourse vet, came under
intense questioning from Thomas. She noted he made two errors in the swabbing
process, one in which he omitted a digit on the swab card identification number,
and another when he signed his name on the line marked: steward
If mistakes were made and procedures not followed then surely the swab result is not valid?