Roll With Joe
+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 17 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 182

Thread: Goodbye Lance

  1. #61
    aussiebreno
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by teecee View Post
    Let's clear up the confusion for you...
    The article you refer to was written by a journalist who IMO struggles for factual content when looking for a scoop.
    When reading articles which are at odds with the official published version make sure you have a large bag of salt handy.
    Articles from STUFF treat similarly.
    If you really want the true story of any story they are usually published somewhere. In this case www.jca.org.nz and www.hrnz.co.nz
    To help ease your confusion below is what was said Oct 31 2011 by the hearing panel.....


    7. Result:

    7.1 For those reasons we are satisfied the charge brought against Mr Justice under R.1004 (2) has been proved and "Smoken Up" was connected with a breach of R.1004 (1) and (2) when it ran in and won the Pacers Grand Final at the Inter Dominion Championships on 8 April 2011, for the purposes of R.1004 (8).

    7.2 We think it appropriate to make it clear the finding the charge brought against Mr Justice has been proved does not carry with it any finding he personally was responsible for "Smoken Up's" elevated DMSO level when it was presented to race in the Pacers Grand Final on the evening of 8 April 2011. In opening the Informant's case on 23 August 2011 Mr Lange expressly conceded there was no evidence Mr Justice was "complicit",as he put it, in the sense he personally, or any person with his knowledge, was responsible for the horse's elevated DMSO level and there has been no evidence put before us which suggests otherwise.

    7.3 We now require submissions from Counsel as to penalty and costs which will include the costs of the Judicial Control Authority which Mr Lange will have responsibility for. To that end the following timetable is to apply:
    (i) Mr Lange is to file and serve on Ms Thomas his submissions on penalty and costs within one week of the date of this Decision;
    (ii) Ms Thomas will have a further week from the date of receipt of Mr Lange's submissions to file her submissions in reply;
    (iii) Leave is reserved to apply if for any valid reason there is difficulty with that timetable.

    DATED at Wellington this 31st day of October 2011


    _________________________
    Bruce Squire QC (Chairman)

    _________________________
    Professor Geoffrey Hall

    I cant see anything there about Smoken Up being disqualified.
    Can you.
    I do wear specs so I may have missed it but having read it so many times I doubt it.

    ou will find the determinant statement re Smoken Up's position in the race on the front page link at www.hrnz.co.nz
    That statement was released 16 December 2011.
    He may not have been officially disqualified but everybody knew the race was being taken off him as a result.

  2. #62
    Super Moderator Horse Of The Year teecee has a spectacular aura about teecee's Avatar
    Real Name
    Tony Cahill
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    869
    Quote Originally Posted by triplev123 View Post
    [VVV] There's the hook Teecee. Nobody has had a day in Court.
    They've had their day before the JCA. The JCA is NOT a Court although it appears the precedent obsessed boffins who apparently inhabit its halls may periodically kid themselves into thinking otherwise.
    The difference lies in the respective burdens of proof required.
    The JCA's and for that matter the Australian regulatory system is roughly equivalent to that of a Civil Court...ie. the balance of probabilities....whereas a Criminal Court requires much more i.e. it requires beyond reasonable doubt. Given the judgement that I've read and attempted to understand and if the NZ Court system is basically equivalent to that of our own, I think there's a very good chance Lance & Co. will get this decision thrown out.
    Beers on me when next you're in Oz if I am wrong. Flashing would have a better grip on the respective burdens of proof required. Does that sound about right Tahn?
    Sorry Jaimie.. The day in court remark was not meant to be a literal description.
    The JCA is not a court, true but it is a properly constituted tribunal to hear issues concerning the integrity of racing in NZ as is the Sports arbitration tribunals.
    I'm not sure you are being entirely fair to the JCA or for that matter it's members and especially the two people on this panel.
    As this case was such a high profile case the chair of the JCA 9 a very approachable lady) selected her two most senior and experienced panellists to hear the case.
    The JCA have created resources to assist Licence holders perform to their best before judicial panels and have been very helpful to many in this aspect.
    Indeed I believe that Lance could have done much worse than select either or both of these gentlemen to represent him if they were not otherwise engaged.
    They deal with the ins and outs of NZ racing rules more than most. This is no indictment at all on MJT. She is extremely able. I know her. Her Family and mine are quite close friends.
    The JCA and the counsel in this case are only dealing with a rule created by others.
    these "others" are the real boffins IMO as you so elegantly put it are those who have taken the Harness Racing industry in the country from the highs of a $1.2 million NZ Cup 3 years ago to virtually bankruptcy or an industry of paupers at best.

    Anyway I look forward to sharing a beer with you at anytime on either side of the ditch.

  3. #63
    Senior Member Horse Of The Year Maorisidol has a spectacular aura about Maorisidol's Avatar
    Real Name
    Ash Singh
    Posts
    692
    Tony,

    "these "others" are the real boffins IMO as you so elegantly put it are those who have taken the Harness Racing industry in the country from the highs of a $1.2 million NZ Cup 3 years ago to virtually bankruptcy or an industry of paupers at best."

    So who are the "others"?

    Is it possible to change any of these "you didnt do it, but you are guilty" rules?

    To me it is simply not common sense...

    lets say a strapper has a grief with his trainer boss and secretly slaps some DMSO on a horse, the trainer is innocent, its a nasty setup, its proven to be a setup as in the strapper confesses BUT the rules states...trainer guilty cos he "presented the horse"!

    Stupid "others"!!!

  4. #64
    aussiebreno
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Maorisidol View Post
    Tony,

    "these "others" are the real boffins IMO as you so elegantly put it are those who have taken the Harness Racing industry in the country from the highs of a $1.2 million NZ Cup 3 years ago to virtually bankruptcy or an industry of paupers at best."

    So who are the "others"?

    Is it possible to change any of these "you didnt do it, but you are guilty" rules?

    To me it is simply not common sense...

    lets say a strapper has a grief with his trainer boss and secretly slaps some DMSO on a horse, the trainer is innocent, its a nasty setup, its proven to be a setup as in the strapper confesses BUT the rules states...trainer guilty cos he "presented the horse"!

    Stupid "others"!!!
    Civil and criminal law would then apply.

  5. #65
    Super Moderator Horse Of The Year teecee has a spectacular aura about teecee's Avatar
    Real Name
    Tony Cahill
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    869
    [QUOTE=Maorisidol;14377]Tony,

    "these "others" are the real boffins IMO as you so elegantly put it are those who have taken the Harness Racing industry in the country from the highs of a $1.2 million NZ Cup 3 years ago to virtually bankruptcy or an industry of paupers at best."

    So who are the "others"?
    The others are the lawmakers. The legal eagles employed by HZ to write the rules.
    The Board of HRNZ who sanction these rules and the delegates from each club and kindred body who go to the Annual conference and vote for these rules.
    Kindred bodies include trainers and drivers assn, breeders assn and owners assn.
    Yes that's right even the Harness Racing Trainers and Drivers Assn are party to this.

    Is it possible to change any of these "you didnt do it, but you are guilty" rules?

    Rules are made at Conference or by the Board of HRNZ.
    Lobbying the Board, changing the Board (Easier option!!!!!).
    You can guess when these rules are made by the industry itself. The JCA is totally independent to interpret and use what the industry give it to judge a case.

    To me it is simply not common sense...

    lets say a strapper has a grief with his trainer boss and secretly slaps some DMSO on a horse, the trainer is innocent, its a nasty setup, its proven to be a setup as in the strapper confesses BUT the rules states...trainer guilty cos he "presented the horse"!

    Well Taking out the grief part,I guess this is why Mark Purdon closed his Auckland Satellite stable and canned his Aussie operations after the "Fly Like an Eagle" case.
    You can't be everywhere at once with an eye on all........

  6. #66
    Senior Member Horse Of The Year Maorisidol has a spectacular aura about Maorisidol's Avatar
    Real Name
    Ash Singh
    Posts
    692
    Great last point TC,
    A Trainer can't see every horse all day every day especially if a trainer is a trainer/driver (Lance) too...
    How logically can that person watch what is happening with his horse while getting changed etc!!!
    Illogical thinking in my opinion, get the culprit of an offence don't just pass the buck, that's weak I reckon.
    So if a rugby/footy player king hits another player, under these rules the Captain or Coach who didn't do it, and the tribunal agrees there is no evidence to prove the Captain or Coach did do it, that person gets charged fined reprimanded suspended not the hitter!
    Illogical
    Not common sense

  7. #67
    aussiebreno
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Maorisidol View Post
    Great last point TC,
    A Trainer can't see every horse all day every day especially if a trainer is a trainer/driver (Lance) too...
    How logically can that person watch what is happening with his horse while getting changed etc!!!
    Illogical thinking in my opinion, get the culprit of an offence don't just pass the buck, that's weak I reckon.
    So if a rugby/footy player king hits another player, under these rules the Captain or Coach who didn't do it, and the tribunal agrees there is no evidence to prove the Captain or Coach did do it, that person gets charged fined reprimanded suspended not the hitter!
    Illogical
    Not common sense
    Analogy does not make sense. They are humans. A coach getting fined because of one of is players would be a trainer getting fined because of the driver doing something wrong. And surprise surprise if the horse wins who most trainers pay the drivers fine anyway!

  8. #68
    Senior Member Horse Of The Year Mighty Atom will become famous soon enough Mighty Atom's Avatar
    Real Name
    Rod Reeves
    Location
    Fremantle
    Occupation
    retired
    Posts
    519
    The horse had DMSO in its system(9.3mg/l on 1 April and the higher reading 8 April). Who did it? Maybe it was Tinkerbell waving her magic wand around and spreading fairy dust in the guise of DMSO. Lance has stated he never uses the stuff - hates it. So an explanation is required regarding the April 1 reading even if it is in the legal range. Very incriminating in my mind.

  9. #69
    Banned Colt A BIT DUSTY will become famous soon enough
    Real Name
    Denny McGrorey
    Posts
    149
    lets say a strapper has a grief with his trainer boss and secretly slaps some DMSO on a horse, the trainer is innocent, its a nasty setup, its proven to be a setup as in the strapper confesses BUT the rules states...trainer guilty cos he "presented the horse"!

    Just a little extra on this subject and how inconsistent this law is . Denis Wilson was in Queensland with Attitagain when one of his horses in sydney goes positive because of a stable employee giving the wrong horse medication , Wilson get's suspended . D. Thomas goes positive for bute his mother say's she gave the wrong horse the bute ,mother gets fined D. Thomas no suspension.
    Gai Waterhouse horse goes positive to coke , stable hand says he does coke must have touched horse Gai fined no suspension , D Smith goes positive for bute his father say's he gave wrong horse the bute D Smith suspended. WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT IF WE HAD SOME FORM OF CONSISTENCY REGARDING FINDINGS AND PENALTIES.
    Last edited by A BIT DUSTY; 12-20-2011 at 11:22 PM.

  10. #70
    Banned Colt A BIT DUSTY will become famous soon enough
    Real Name
    Denny McGrorey
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by Mighty Atom View Post
    The horse had DMSO in its system(9.3mg/l on 1 April and the higher reading 8 April). Who did it? Maybe it was Tinkerbell waving her magic wand around and spreading fairy dust in the guise of DMSO. Lance has stated he never uses the stuff - hates it. So an explanation is required regarding the April 1 reading even if it is in the legal range. Very incriminating in my mind.
    Hi Rod Good question and I hope I can shed some light on it for you .The reason there is a threshold for D.M.S.O is because it is a by product from trees, therefore
    it is a naturally occuring product ,ie a horse chews on a bit of bark while in the paddock or chews the railing of his yard can give a reading. So you can put your tinkerbell theory to rest. Hear is some very interesting reading http://cancertutor.com/Cancer/DMSO.htm
    Last edited by A BIT DUSTY; 12-20-2011 at 11:27 PM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts