Originally Posted by
teecee
I think it is very clear even to the uninitiated that there is a clear and equivocal link by inference between people charged with breaches of the prohibited substance rules and the label of a Cheat on this forum.
Trish this is not directly related to you or your views. It is for all to consider what has been widesweeping generalised posts across the forum about Cheats and cheating.
While there may well be as you say 60 cases in NSW, I see nothing within those 60 cases to say how many are actually cheating or some other circumstance. a guilty plea is often the easiest way out when you cant prove or don't have the resources to prove circumstances. How many of these 60 show no consideration of the rules and are deserving of the heaviest sanctions applicable. How many actually are small time or hard working trainers who have the same sentiments as yourself and others on here who yearn for a level playing field,(whatever that means) but have been caught out by giving their horse too much of a prepared formula raising for example their TCO2 level.
There may be 60 positives in NSW and I agree there is most unlikely 60 or possibly even 30 (for the sake of numbers) accidents.
What is more likely is that neither you nor I anyone else contributing to this debate from either angle know how many are cheats and how many are not.
What is clear is that the majority of people contributing to this debate are of the view that the majority of people caught up in drugs charges are cheats and that is without any basis in fact. I say there is no basis in fact because the authorities have no need to prove an act of cheating even to get a conviction under the rules.
If they don't need the evidence and thus don't produce it, I ask where our contributors get their evidence of cheating from?