Day At The Track
Search Results
49 to 64 of 2382

Columbus, OH --- Applications for harness racing driver's and trainer's licenses can now be completed and submitted online through a USTA Online Account. After logging into the My Account Services page and selecting the license, then Driver/Trainer options, all of the necessary tools to apply for a license online are available. In addition, My Account allows the applicant to see the status of the licensing process, including whether references have been completed and exam grades, at any time. Typically, through the paper application method, it takes between two and six months for applications to be processed and written and practical exams to be successfully completed. However, the online application process, by utilizing referencing through My Account, can potentially reduce the processing time by weeks, if not months. As in the paper application, an applicant is required to provide at least six references, of which four who must indicate a positive response when their reference form is submitted. References must have a current USTA Membership/License in good standing and for drivers must hold an "A" Full Driver License, for trainers, an "A" Full Driver License or a "G" General Trainer License. The online process begins with an acceptance of terms and instructions prior to completing an application questionnaire and the submission of references, who will each receive an email notification or a form that will need to be returned to the USTA. Once the referencing requirement is met, the applicant is contacted by the USTA with a list of test administrators for the written exam. Once a passing grade on the written test is achieved, the USTA will send the practical exam, which also must be passed, and any other requirements, i.e. a vision exam, necessary to obtain a license. Upon completion of all licensing requirements, My Account will indicate the newly issued license with immediate access to the USTA Online Entry system for those who have obtained a trainer's license. To watch an instructional video on the license application process, click here. Ken Weingartner Media Relations Manager

All four non-Indian casinos in state are missing their financial targets Little more than a year since their grand openings, two of New York’s four non-Indian casinos are asking the state for financial help. Rivers Casino & Resort in Schenectady and Del Lago Resort and Casino in Seneca County are both making their cases with state lawmakers as the negotiations for the 2018-2019 state budget wind down to the final hours in Albany. Details on their requests are elusive and, given the secretive nature of deal-making in the Capitol, quite possibly subject to change or outright rejection. But the casinos' financial data is readily available through an online state database. Both casinos’ performance (and that of the two other casinos) has fallen well short of initial projections offered when their backers were trying to sell their proposals to state regulators and New York voters were being asked to approve limited legalized casino gambling. Rivers projected tax payments of $69 million to $86 million during its first year of operation but paid $45.45 million to the state from March 2017 through February 2018. Del Lago projected $59 million to $76 million but paid $42.92 million. Meanwhile, Rivers’ first general manager departed in November and Del Lago’s general manager announced Tuesday he would be departing at the end of this week. Both had been with their respective operations since before they opened. Also Tuesday, the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle reported that a Del Lago official was in Albany, asking state lawmakers to provide relief. The official would not specify what exactly he was seeking. A Del Lago spokesman would say only that the casino is suffering from recently increased and grossly unfair competition from nearby Indian-run casino operations. Details were likewise hazy on the request by Rivers. A New Jersey public relations agency working for Rivers said there would be no comment on the matter.  A lobbyist reportedly working for the casinos did not return a call seeking comment.  The state Gaming Commission and state Department of Taxation and Finance said the casinos’ requests has not reached the stage where it would be in their hands.  The State Division of the Budget would say only that “budget negotiations are ongoing,” which is certainly very accurate: The state budget deadline is 11:59 p.m. Saturday. However, Assemblyman Phil Steck, D-Colonie, whose district contains Rivers Casino & Resort, said he has been given a rough idea of what Rivers is requesting, and said he endorses it. In summary, Rivers seeks: To take 10 percent of the tax money it pays to the state and spend it instead on marketing. The goal is to increase patronage, increase gambling and thereby increase its own revenue. (This ultimately would bring in more tax revenue, Steck said; in the meantime, there would be no reduction in host-community payments to the city, county, city school district or to surrounding counties.) An end to the requirement that it pay the state to run security checks on its prospective employees. (Steck said that the state hasn’t been collecting that and doesn’t require it of the nearest competing gambling facility, Saratoga Casino Hotel.) An end to payments Rivers is required to make to Saratoga Casino Hotel to make up for revenue shortfalls in Saratoga. (An official with Saratoga Casino Hotel said this is inaccurate, Rivers pays it nothing — it pays the horsemen’s association to compensate for reduced prize money at the Saratoga harness track.) “None of this is a huge change,” Steck said, adding that the requests seem reasonable and he supports them. Thirteen months into the casino era in Schenectady, he considers Rivers a positive force in the city, having fulfilled its promise of increased economic activity in surrounding areas and a new revenue stream for the local municipalities. “I’m not a fan of casinos generally,” Steck said, calling them effectively a tax on the poor and the middle class.  He said he would have sought other means of boosting state tax revenue had he been governor. But he’s not governor, and the man who is, Andrew Cuomo, didn't share his views. So New York has four non-Indian casinos, and he accepts that as reality. Aware of the pun, Steck added: “You have to play the hand you’re dealt.” James Featherstonhaugh, corporate secretary and part-owner of Saratoga Casino Hotel, said the situation is unfolding much as he expected it would when the state authorized construction of a full-service casino 20 miles south of Saratoga. That is: a 25-percent revenue reduction for the Saratoga Casino Hotel, where the gambling options are limited to video gaming machines and wagers on harness racing. Featherstonhaugh expects nothing good to come of the late-hour move by Rivers and Del Lago to gain relief through the state. “I think it’s clear that the gaming universe in New York could be thoughtfully and responsibly reviewed with the goal being to have both a healthy industry which will continue and grow education revenue in New York,” he said. “But that cannot be done in 48 hours or 72 hours.” Featherstonhaugh thinks it will be another 18 months or so before the financial picture stabilizes for the two Capital Region gambling facilities.  Steck said he hadn’t researched the financial impact of Rivers on Saratoga Casino Hotel, nor has he heard any complaints about it. Rivers opened Feb. 8, 2017. A New York State Gaming Commission database shows that $1.99 billion was gambled at Saratoga Casino Hotel from March 2017 through February 2018, an 18.1 percent decrease from $2.43 billion in the preceding 12 months. By John Cropley Reprinted with permission of The Daily Gazette

Harness Racing New South Wales (HRNSW) Stewards conducted an inquiry on Monday following an investigation that commenced on 19 December 2017 during an inspection of the registered training establishment of licensed trainer, Mr Joseph Pace. During that stable inspection, HRNSW Steward Mr Daniel Westwood, located a bottle labelled PENTOFLEX GOLD, an unregistered product. Evidence was presented to the inquiry by Mr Pace and HRNSW Regulatory Veterinarian, Dr Martin Wainscott. Mr Ian Mitchell also provided evidence to the inquiry by telephone. The results of scientific analysis conducted on the product were also presented to the inquiry. Mr. Pace pleaded guilty to a charge pursuant to Australian Harness Racing Rule 194 as follows: 194.        A person who procures or attempts to procure or has in his possession or on his premises or under his control any substance or preparation that is not registered or labelled in accordance with either State or Commonwealth Legislation is guilty of an offence. As a result, the training licence of Mr Pace was fully suspended for a period of nine (9) months to commence immediately. In determining penalty, Stewards gave consideration to the following matters: Mr Pace’s second offence for such matters having been licensed in the harness racing industry in New South Wales in excess of 40 years; His guilty plea; Mr Pace’s overall licence history and other personal subjective facts, including personal hardship. Mr Pace was advised of his right to appeal this decision. MICHAEL PRENTICE | INTEGRITY MANAGER (02) 9722 6600 • GRANT ADAMS | CHAIRMAN OF STEWARDS (02) 9722 6600 •

North Island based harness racing driver Philip Butcher has been fined $600 for directing abusive and threatening language to junior driver, Jack MacKinnon during a race at Alexandra Park on the 23rd February this year. Butcher was interviewed on 2 March in relation to both his driving tactics and the alleged comments. Mr MacKinnon repeated what he recalled being said to him and this contained ‘profane’ language with repeated use of the ‘F’ word. Mr MacKinnon also made reference to Mr Butcher threatening to ‘drop him and put him in a chaff sack’. Mr Butcher clarified this by saying what he had actually said was ‘I should drop you and they would be picking you up in a chaff sack, but I have too much respect for the other drivers’. The race in question   Full details of the inquiry below: NON RACEDAY INQUIRY IN THE MATTER OF The New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT Mr Steve Mulcay, Senior Stipendiary Steward Informant And Mr PHILLIP BUTCHER, Licensed Open Horseman HRNZ Respondent Rule 303(2) Information No. A10554 Judicial Committee: Mr AJ Godsalve, Chair – Mr AJ Dooley- Committee Member Appearing: Mr PA Butcher, Respondent Venue: Cambridge Raceway Date of Hearing: 18 March 2018 Date of Decision: 21 March 2018 DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE BACKGROUND This matter has its background in race 9 at the Auckland Harness meeting on 23rd February 2018. As a result of concerns held by the raceday Stipendiary Stewards over the way two horses (MAX PHACTOR and WRANGLER) had been driven, an investigation was undertaken. This culminated in the Information, the subject of this hearing, being submitted. Information A10554 alleges that: “On the 23rd day of February, at Auckland, Mr PA Butcher. Driving MAX PHACTOR (in race 9) committed a breach of Rule 303(2), in that he misconducted himself by directing abusive and threatening language to Junior Driver, J MacKinnon (driving WRANGLER) during and following the running of this event”. RULE 303(2) provides: - No person or body who holds a permit or licence under these Rules and no owner, trainer, breeder, stablehand, unlicensed apprentice or racing manager shall misconduct himself or fail to comply with any request, direction or instruction of any Stipendiary Steward, Racecourse Inspector, or Starter. Penalty Rule 1003 (1) provides: - A person who commits a breach of any Rule shall be liable to the following penalties (a) A fine not exceeding $10,000 and/or (b) Suspension from holding or obtaining a licence for a period not exceeding 12 months and/or (c) Disqualification for a period not exceeding 12 months. Plea At the commencement of this hearing the relevant Rule was read to Mr Butcher by the Chairman. Mr Butcher acknowledged that he understood the Rule and confirmed that he admitted the breach. Summary of Facts Mr Mulcay submitted a written Summary of Facts, as follows: 1. Stewards had concerns with the respective driving tactics adopted by J MacKinnon (WRANGLER) and P Butcher (MAX PHACTOR) during the running of this race. (Race 9, Auckland Trotting Club 23rd February 2018). 2. Driver J MacKinnon was interviewed following the event with the assistance of trainer R Dunn, and during the course of the interview made reference to abusive and threatening comments made to him by Mr Butcher. 3. Driver P Butcher was interviewed on 2 March in relation to both his driving tactics and the alleged comments. Mr MacKinnon repeated what he recalled being said to him and this contained ‘profane’ language with repeated use of the ‘F’ word. Mr MacKinnon also made reference to Mr Butcher threatening to ‘drop him and put him in a chaff sack’. Mr Butcher clarified this by saying what he had actually said was ‘I should drop you and they would be picking you up in a chaff sack, but I have too much respect for the other drivers’. 4. Mr Butcher agreed with everything else that was stated by Mr MacKinnon. 5. Mr Butcher then apologised to Mr MacKinnon and Mr Dunn with the respective apologies being accepted (in the presence of the Stewards). 6. The matter was then adjourned to be given consideration. 7. Following consultation with the Chief Stipendiary Steward and General Manager of Stewards, and after receiving written permission from the Operations Manager, it was decided to issue Mr Butcher with a charge under Rule 303(2) and this information was given to him today by phone. Film - the films of the race in question were available and were narrated by Mr Mulcay. He identified the two horses concerned. WRANGLER was leading the race after drawing barrier 1. MAX PHACTOR had drawn 4. From about the 1500m mark to about the 1300m mark MAX PHACTOR challenged for the lead on the outside of WRANGLER. It was apparent that Mr MacKinnon had no intention of relinquishing the lead, in spite of Mr Butcher using some vigour to try to get MAX PHACTOR past WRANGLER. Mr Mulcay pointed out that from about the 1200m mark it was clear that Mr Butcher was directing ‘a lot’ of comment to Mr MacKinnon while still attempting to get past him. MAX PHACTOR eventually reached the lead when WRANGLER began to tire. Mr Mulcay noted that WRANGLER had finished last, some 20 lengths behind the field. MAX PHACTOR was beaten 4½ lengths. Mr Mulcay then confirmed that Stewards had interviewed Mr MacKinnon, and later Mr Butcher over their driving tactics and had been advised of the matters referred to earlier which resulted in this charge being laid against Mr Butcher. It transpired that the verbal attack by Mr Butcher on Mr MacKinnon had continued after the race when the horses were returning to the stabling area. The Committee asked Mr Mulcay to clarify Mr MacKinnon’s position when he was challenged by Mr Butcher, particularly any obligation he may have had to relinquish the lead. Mr Mulcay stated that Mr MacKinnon was not required to hand-up the lead to Mr Butcher. However, he referred to Rule 868(2), which relates to the obligation on drivers to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure their drive wins the race or obtains the best possible position. ‘Reasonable’ in this context could relate to drivers not engaging in ‘speed duels’ which may negate their chances at the finish. A discussion ensued where the Committee and Mr Mulcay confirmed that in their experience, drivers usually handed-up the lead when challenged in situations like this as it was often counter-productive to horses’ chances not to do so. Documents Mr Mulcay submitted in evidence a copy of a letter signed by the General Manager of the RIU dated 18 March 2018, in which authority is given for an Information to be lodged against Mr Butcher for breaching Rule 303(2). Mr Butcher Mr Butcher told the Committee that he apologised for the manner in which he had spoken to Mr MacKinnon. He said that he knew he shouldn’t have ‘done it’…that he was not in a ‘good space’ and that he was very disappointed with himself in that he was not a horrible person. Decision As Mr Butcher has admitted the breach we find that this charge is proved. Penalty Submissions Mr Mulcay submitted that Mr Butcher had never breached this Rule; that he had shown contrition; and that he had admitted this breach. He added that he considered that Mr Butcher’s behaviour bought the Industry into disrepute and added that the Stewards have a duty of care to ensure as much as possible that industry participants are provided a work place free from ‘bullying’. He added that he believed that an aggravating factor was that the behaviour complained of was prolonged and continued after the horses had pulled up at the end of the race. Mr Mulcay referred to an earlier prosecution (RIU v White) and stated that he considered a similar penalty was appropriate in this case. He said that if the Committee determined that a suspension was an appropriate penalty he believed it should be a 4 day suspension. He added that he believed Mr Butcher was likely to have 5 drives a day, and a 4 day suspension would result in him losing approximately 20 driving opportunities. Mr Mulcay said that in the case of a monetary penalty being imposed, Stewards submitted a fine of around $600 to be appropriate. Mr Butcher said again that he was ‘not in a good head space’ and would prefer a suspension as opposed to a fine. Penalty Discussion The JCA guidelines on penalty (2015) for Harness Racing do not list a starting point for the general charge of Misconduct. The starting point for general Misconduct under the Thoroughbred Racing guidelines is ‘fact dependant’. It can be therefore inferred that the starting point for general Misconduct for Harness Racing is also ‘fact dependant’. Previous matters which have been dealt with by various JCA Committees where language and/or threatening behaviour has been involved have in the main not been where a race was underway…mostly they have been where language has been directed at Officials, and/or other industry participants at times other than during competition. A serious charge in the Thoroughbred code (Jockey ‘W’) in 2015 involved threats and offensive language, including during a trial race, and ultimately led to a 12 month disqualification. We mention this to illustrate the seriousness of how this type of offending is viewed by racing Authorities, given the safety issues surrounding racing generally. Horseracing, either code, is at times dangerous and challenging, and participants should not be put at risk by threats from other drivers or riders. In 2009 another rider (Jockey ‘W’, not the person referred to above) was fined $2000 for using insulting and threatening language to another jockey in the weighing area after an inquiry. In 2017 driver ‘D’ was fined $850 after being charged with using offensive and insulting language to Officials while being interviewed about a raceday incident. Reasons for Penalty As stated above we approached this Penalty decision on the basis that there is no starting point, and penalties are ‘fact dependant’. We accept the fact that Mr Butcher has admitted the breach and has no prior history of any breaches under the general ‘Misconduct’ Rule. He has shown remorse. He made reference twice to the fact that he was ‘not in a good head space’ at present. That does not excuse his behaviour. Mr Butcher is a mature man and has been engaged in the Harness industry many years. We understand he also has employment outside the industry. Mr Mulcay has submitted that the Stewards’ preferred penalty involves a suspension of 4 days, which in his estimation could result in Mr Butcher not driving in around 20 races. The Committee finds difficulty in accepting that Mr Butcher would drive 5 times each raceday. Mr Butcher himself stated that he was not driving as often now as he has in the past. While he is a primary driver for one stable we are aware of, it is a fact that on some days he only drives once or twice. Judicial Committees are empowered to assess penalties on the basis that they are ‘meaningful’, i.e. that they will have a significant and appropriate impact on the offending party; and that they are seen to be meaningful to other industry participants, and the public at large. We therefore believe that to achieve a meaningful penalty we have to consider a fine. In assessing a penalty, we look at the mitigating and aggravating factors. Clearly the fact that Mr Butcher threatened physical harm to Mr MacKinnon is of real concern. It would be naive to think that drivers and jockeys don’t take issue with others during races when things ‘don’t go their way’. That is in the nature of competition. However, in this case Mr Butcher has gone past that and his threatening language to Mr MacKinnon cannot be condoned. It has to be said that Mr MacKinnon’s driving may have been a contributing factor, indeed the Stipendiary Stewards investigated the way in which both he and Mr Butcher drove their horses in that race. However, Mr Butcher is an experienced Open Horseman, while Mr MacKinnon is a Junior Driver and it is not unreasonable to expect a better standard of behaviour from Mr Butcher. The Committee therefore determined that this matter would be dealt with by way of a fine. We adopted a starting point of $800, and after taking into account Mr Butcher’s admission, his clear record, and his apparent contrition, arrived at a figure of a fine of $600. Penalty The Committee therefore imposed a fine of $600 on Mr Butcher. As this matter was heard on a raceday there was no order made in respect to costs either to the JCA or the RIU. Alan Godsalve   Harnesslink Media

Harness racing trainer Bruce Negus has been fined $5500 for producing a horse to race when not free of a prohibited substance. The horse in question was Living Legend who won at Addington on the 26 January 2018 but has since been disqualified. Full details of the hearing below: BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY Information No. A7154 IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT Simon Andrew Irving Racecourse Investigator Informant AND Bruce Robert Negus Trainer Respondent Judicial Committee: Ms N Moffatt (Chair), Mr T Castles (Committee Member) Venue: Manawatu Raceway Present: Mr Simon Irving, the Informant Mr B Negus, the Respondent Mrs C Negus, wife of the Respondent Date of Hearing: 15th March 2018 Date of Decision: 20th March 2018 RESERVED PENALTY DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE The Charge [1] Information No A7154 alleges that: On the 26th January 2018 at Addington, Bruce Robert NEGUS, registered trainer and person for the time being in charge of the horse, presented ‘Living Legend’ to the NZ Metropolitan Trotting Club’s meeting for the purpose of engaging in and did engage in Race 1, failing to present the said horse free of the prohibited substance namely Ketoprofen, in breach of the New Zealand Harness Racing Rule 1004(1A) & (3) and 1004(D) and subject to the penalties pursuant to Rules 1004(7) & (8). The Rules [2] Rule 1004 of the Rules of Harness Racing provides as follows: (1A) A horse shall be presented for a race free of prohibited substances. (3) When a horse is presented to race in contravention of sub-rule (1A) or (2) the trainer of the horse commits a breach of these Rules. (D) Any horse which has been taken to a racecourse for the purpose of engaging in a race which is found to have administered to it or ingested by it any prohibited substance shall be disqualified from that race. [3] The penalty Rule is Rule 1004(7) which provides as follows: Every person who commits a breach of sub-rule (2) or (3) shall be liable to: (a) a fine not exceeding $20,000.00; and/or (b) be disqualified or suspended from holding or obtaining a licence for any specific period not exceeding five years. 1004(8) Any horse connected with a breach of sub-rule (1), (2) or (3) shall be disqualified from any race entered and/or liable to a period of disqualification not exceeding five years. [4] Mr Irving presented a letter signed by Mr Mike Godber, General Manager of the Racing Integrity Unit, pursuant to Rule 1108(2) authorising the filing of the information. [5] The information was served on Mr Negus on 27th February 2018 and he signed the information form indicating he admitted the breach of the rule. [6] Mr Negus was present at the hearing on March 15th 2018 along with his wife Mrs Colleen Negus. The charge and relevant rules were read to him, after which he admitted the breach. Accordingly the charge was found proved. Summary of Facts [7] Mr Irving presented the following Summary of Facts: 1. The Respondent Bruce Robert NEGUS is a licensed public trainer under the Rules of New Zealand Harness Racing (HRNZ). He is 64 years old and has been a harness trainer and driver since 1983. 2. LIVING LEGEND is a 7-year-old gelding trained by Mr NEGUS and owned by MJ Stratford. The horse has raced 88 times for six wins and 17 placings earning stakes of $59,889. 3. LIVING LEGEND was correctly entered and presented to race by Mr NEGUS at the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club’s meeting at Addington Raceway on 26 January 2018. The horse was driven in Race 1 - the Bishopdale & Bush Inns Tabs & Tavern Harewood Mobile Pace - by Ms Cheree WIGG, winning the race and a stake of $5,300. 4. LIVING LEGEND was post-race swabbed by swabbing official Mr G Johnson who obtained a urine sample from the gelding at 5.46pm. The urine sample (#134315) was taken in the presence of Ms Wigg who does not contest the swabbing process. 5. On the 7th February the New Zealand Racing Laboratory Service (NZRLS) reported Ketoprofen was detected in the sample. The control sample was clear. 6. Ketoprofen is a potent pain reliever, fever reducer and anti-inflammatory medication. It is often prescribed for soft tissue injury, bone and joint problems or laminitis. Ketoprofen is also prescribed to reduce or control fevers due to viral or bacterial infections. It has a recommended withholding time of 4.2 – 4.5 days. 7. On the 13th February Mr NEGUS was spoken to at his property in Burnham and informed of the positive swab. He could offer no explanation for the presence of Ketoprofen and stated that he had never treated the gelding with Ketoprofen. 8. Mr NEGUS also stated that his vet had prescribed a 100ml bottle of Kelaprofen (active ingredient Ketoprofen 100mg/mL) on the 22nd January for another horse ‘NUCLEAR WAY’ who was ill. The bottle was located in Mr NEGUS medicine cabinet in his stables and was approximately half full. 9. A feed supplement given to ‘LIVING LEGEND’ taken from the premises was analysed by NZRLS returning a negative result to Ketoprofen. 10. Mr NEGUS also had a second horse ‘HIGHLAND REIGN’ swabbed on the same evening as ‘LIVING LEGEND’ which returned a clear result. 11. Mr NEGUS has been a licensed person for approximately 35 years. He has no previous serious racing offence charges. [8] Mr Negus said that while he accepted the summary of facts, as presented by Mr Irving, he wanted to clarify one point. Whilst not concerned about the validity of the swabbing process he did want it made clear that Ms Cheree Wigg did not actually witness the sample bottles being put into the plastic bag. [9] Mr Negus explained that he has struggled to come up with an explanation as to why his horse LIVING LEGEND returned a positive reading. He told the Committee that he was treating another horse at the time but this horse was kept at a different property 15 minutes away. The Kelaprofen was drawn up into a syringe at a dose of 10mls, and the syringe was taken to the other horse while the bottle of Kelaprofen remained at the stable. Informant’s Penalty Submissions [10] Mr Irving presented the following penalty submissions: 1. The Respondent, 64 year old Bruce Robert Negus is a Licensed Public Trainer under the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing. 2. He has held a trainers licence since 1983 and currently trains from his property in Burnham near Christchurch. 3. HRNZ records detail that Mr Negus has trained (some in partnership) almost 6000 starters during his career with 444 winners. 4. Mr Negus has admitted a breach of Rule 1004(1A) (3) & (4) for presenting his horse ‘Living Legend’ to the races on 26.01.2018 with the prohibited substance Ketoprofen in its system. 5. The circumstances are detailed in the attached Summary of Facts which have been agreed. 6. The penalties which may be imposed are detailed in the attached Charge Rule and Penalty Provisions Document. PENALTY SUBMISSIONS 7. The RIU believes that an appropriate penalty for this breach is a $6,000 fine. 8. Mr Negus is adamant that he, nor any employee at his stable, did not administer Ketoprofen to ‘Living Legend’. He has no idea how the positive could have occurred. 9. Mr Negus had been supplied a 100ml bottle of Kelaprofen by a vet from the Canterbury Equine Clinic on the 22nd January (four days prior to the positive) for treatment of another horse ‘Nuclear Way’ who had a suspected liver issue. 10. The bottle was located in the Respondents unlocked medicine cabinet in his stables, approximately two thirds full. 11. Ketoprofen has a recommended withholding time of 4.2 days as per the EVA guideline. 12. The Respondent very seldom bets and did not wager on his horse that day. 13. An analysis of TAB betting records revealed no unusual bets associated with the horse or the race. ‘Living Legend’ won the race by a neck and was 3/3 in the betting, paying $6.80 and $2.30 on the tote. 14. The Respondent trains another mare ‘Highland Reign’ which was also swabbed at the same race meeting, returning a negative post-race swab. 15. As per the JCA Penalty Guidelines effective from the 01st May 2015 the starting point for a Thoroughbred or Harness Racing first ‘Presentation’ offence is $8000. PREVIOUS CASES RIU v C & A Edmonds – 31 March 2016 2x Harness Racing Ketoprofen positives – fined $9,000. RIU v J M Whittaker – 17 August 2015 Harness Racing Caffeine positive – fined $1,000, plus costs $1,800. RIU v P M Williamson – 10 December 2012 Harness Racing Procaine positive – fined $3,500, plus costs $350 to JCA. The source of the positive was not identified. 16. Under Rule 1004(D) ‘Living Legend’ is required to be disqualified from the race. Respondent’s Submissions [11] Mr Negus presented the following written submissions: I am charged with, and have pleaded guilty to presenting the horse LIVING LEGEND with ketoprofen in its system. I have no idea how it got there. I have never had a hint of trouble with prohibited substances until now. My late father instilled in his children the belief you are buried with your reputation. I'm asking for a suspension. I recognize the need for someone to be held accountable. I submit my record entitles my request for real consideration. [12] Mr Negus addressed the Committee personally, expanding further on his request for a suspension in lieu of a monetary penalty. Mr Negus was concerned about the perception that he had given one of his horses a drug, and the effect this would have on his elderly mother who was suffering from ill health. He also provided two (2) written character references; one from a former stable hand and the other from Mr Negus’ veterinarian, Dr D A Senior. Both referees have known Mr Negus for a long period of time and both emphasised his honesty and integrity. [13] Mr Negus called both Mr Michael House and Mr Jim Curtin as character referees. Mr House gave a heartfelt account of all that Mr Negus had achieved throughout his career and said he was shocked when he heard one of his horses had returned a positive drug test. He said Mr Negus was a great trainer who had contributed enormously to the Harness Racing Industry over the years and it was an honour to know him. [14] Mr Curtin said he had known Mr Negus for many years and he was always honest and reliable. [15] The Committee asked Mr Irving for the RIU’s position on Mr Negus’ submission for a suspension instead of a fine. He said that suspensions were normally applied to breaches by drivers and were not appropriate for trainers. This was because a trainer could transfer their horses to another licensed person’s name but still effectively train the horses themselves. Reasons for Decision [16] Mr Negus admitted the charge of presenting his horse LIVING LEGEND to race at the NZ Metropolitan Trotting Club’s meeting on 26th January 2018 not free of prohibited substances, namely Ketoprofen. [17] The summary of facts was not disputed by the Respondent. [18] The JCA guidelines have a starting point of $8000 for a first offence of presenting a horse with a drug in its system. We considered Mr Negus’ request for a suspension but were of the opinion that we would be setting a precedent as all recent penalties have resulted in fines being imposed. The Committee did not find any compelling reasons to impose a suspension in lieu of a monetary penalty. [19] Mr Negus said he does not know how the horse LIVING LEGEND came to return a positive to Ketoprofen, nor did the RIU present any possible explanation. The drug “Kelaprofen” was properly prescribed by a registered veterinarian and was kept in a medicine cabinet in Mr Negus’ stables. The fact that the medicine cabinet was unlocked was not considered an aggravating factor in this case. [20] Mr Negus has an unblemished record after 35 years of training horses having never had any of his horses return a positive drug test. Character references have all emphasised the integrity of the Respondent. [21] The Committee has also been guided by recent penalties, in particular that of RIU v C & A Edmonds. This case however was in relation to two positive tests to Ketoprofen whereas Mr Negus has only one. The Judicial Committee in RIU v C&A Edmonds uplifted the JCA penalty guide starting point to $12,000 and applied a 25% discount for mitigating factors, arriving at a $9000 fine. [22] We have taken into account Mr Negus’ admission of the breach, his full cooperation throughout the investigation, the outstanding character references (both written and delivered in person during the hearing) and his excellent record over many years. For these mitigating factors we have allowed a significant discount. Penalty [23] Accordingly Mr Negus is fined the sum of $5,500. Disqualification of the Horse [24] Under Rule 1004(D) we order the disqualification of LIVING LEGEND from Race 1, the Bishopdale & Bush Inns Tabs & Tavern Harewood Mobile Pace. Amended placings are: 1st 10 WESTAR SAM 2nd 6 AVEROSS BRACHOLE 3rd 9 ROMANITE 4th 8 EJA PATRON 5th 11 GOING TO CALIFORNIA Costs [25] The RIU did not seek any award of costs and accordingly, no order is made. [26] The Hearing took place on a race day therefore no order of costs is made in favour of the Judicial Control Authority. N Moffatt (Chair)   Harnesslink Media

The Robert Dunn Racing Stable has accepted the charges laid by the Racing Integrity Unit in relation to the return of positive swabs from the Nelson Winter Cup two-day meeting in June. The Judicial Control Authority for Racing confirmed yesterday that the Dunn stable accepted the charges. A judicial committee are currently looking over the case and a disciplinary decision is expected in the coming weeks. The Dunn stable is charged with presenting horses with a banned substance. They returned four positive swabs for caffeine at the Nelson meeting which took place from June 9 to 11. Three of the horses which tested positive were directly from the Dunn stable, while the fourth was from Craig and Aimee Edmonds’ stable. However, that horse was under the care of the Dunn stable, which took it to Nelson. Dunn has previously claimed the horses were nobbled – where the caffeine is administered by an outside party. His claim caused rifts within the Canterbury harness racing community. He also enlisted the help of a private investigator to undertake his own investigation. The Dunn stable is currently second in the harness racing trainer’s premiership with 55 wins – 17 behind Mark Purdon and Natalie Rasmussen. Robert Dunn has three previous convictions for breaches of the prohibited substance rule.   By  Gordon Findlater   Reprinted with permission of Star.Kiwi site  

Harness Racing South Australia Stewards today concluded an investigation into a posting made by licensed trainer Ms Franca Carbone on `Facebook’ on Saturday 24th February 2018. After hearing from Ms Carbone, the Stewards issued a charge under Rule 248 of the Rules of Harness Racing. The particulars being that on Saturday 24th February 2018 she published offensive remarks about a senior racing official, and that such postings were considered improper within the meaning of Rule 248. Ms Carbone admitted the breach and after consideration of penalty the Stewards imposed a fine of $800.00 with $400.00 being suspended for a period of two years pending no further breaches of this, or similar rules. In reaching this determination the Stewards took into consideration that this was Ms Carbone’s first breach of this rule and that she, at the first instance, admitted her wrongdoing. Ross Neal Chairman of Stewards HARNESS RACING SOUTH AUSTRALIA.

NEW ORLEANS — Ted Shults, a nationally recognized expert in forensic toxicology and law, says racing chemists and regulators face “self-inflicted injury” if their testing policies fail to recognize the existence of environmental contamination and inadvertent transfer of recreational and prescription medications to horses. “We would never do this on the human side,” said Shults, who works in both the equine and human testing worlds. Such environmental transfer to horses was the topic of the Kent Stirling Memorial Scientific Panel at the National Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association Convention that concluded Friday at the Astor Crowne Plaza. The audience heard how increasingly sensitive testing has led to horses testing positive for drugs or therapeutic medications that were not administered to them by their trainer or veterinarian. Among them: cocaine, morphine, methamphetamine, dextromethorphan and the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory Naproxen. The Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association has lobbied hard for screening and threshold levels that would not call a positive finding for such substances when detected at trace levels that have no impact on horses’ performance. Shults said he worked for one of the first certified labs that did testing for the U.S. military. “One of the first things I learned was, ‘Look, we have a choice here: Do we want a litigation program? Or do we want a testing program?'” he said. “My view has always been, ‘Get the litigatable issues out of here. Figure out a way of fixing them. Don’t make believe they don’t exist. Don’t try to cover them up.’ Because the word will get out, and next thing you know we’re up to our elbows in cases.” Dr. Thomas Tobin, the veterinarian and pharmacologist at the University of Kentucky who is a longtime consultant to the National HBPA on medication and drug testing, showed findings from a 2016 study where swabs of the walls in 18 ship-in stalls at Hollywood Casino at Charles Town Races detected 30 different medications and drugs on the walls. The 50 total instances of contamination broke down to 20 findings of equine medications, 16 of recreational drugs and 14 of human prescription medications, he said. Shults said that with today’s testing technology “the race for sensitivity is over…. We’re on the verge of going toward (detection levels) of parts per trillion. “My concern is now–and what we recognize on the human side–OK, we’re down in the picogram level, but what are we measuring? What are we looking at?” said Shults, who began his toxicology training under Tobin. “… Now we’re dealing with environmental contamination, and it’s not just on the surface. We have it in the air. People smoke marijuana, they smoke crack, methamphetamine. And then we have water, and we have food. “… I first heard about this maybe 15 years ago when people were finding benzoylecgonine (a metabolite of cocaine) in the Po River that runs through Rome. I said, ‘You’ve got to be kidding me.’ Well they found it on the West Coast in the Snake River…I think there’s a growing awareness of environmental contamination out there, because it’s well established that most of the paper (currency) in circulation has benzoylecgonine. But there’s more and more paper that has–guess what?– methamphetamine. Now I don’t think the horses are eating the dollar bills out of the grooms’ pocket. But it’s become part of the environment, of the universe we live in. You have a drug user, maybe it’s a legal drug, maybe illegal. If they’re going to take whiz in the stall on the hay, guess who is going to eat the hay?… One of my favorite little ones, esoteric kind of thing, this is a guy that’s got a (positive) test for minoxidil–Rogaine. It was the guy’s hair spray.” Dr. Levent Dirikolu, who oversees Louisiana horse racing’s testing at the LSU lab, said a cocaine positive should not be called if only the metabolite benzoylecgonine is detected. That is a clear sign of environmental contamination that doesn’t impact the horse, he said. Dr. Clara Fenger, a Kentucky veterinarian and researcher, brought up Illinois harness racing cases where horses were testing positive for the pain medication Tramadol–all having raced out of the same paddock stall. “The paddock judge was urinating in the stall, and the paddock judge was on Tramadol,” she said. “…. We need to start considering an environmental contamination violation category, so we can separate contaminants from real attempts to cheat.” Hugh Gallagher, the New York Racing Association’s safety steward, offered the perspective of racing officials. He said mitigating factors must be considered in such cases. But he also said that trainers must do more to keep their barn environmentally contaminant-free, including stressing to employees that “stalls are not bathrooms.” He also cautioned about keeping coffee, tea, energy drinks and chocolate away from horses. Likewise, regulators must do a better job sanitizing those areas where horses have blood and urine samples taken, he said, also advocating drug testing employees who handle horses at some stage of a race. Dr. Scott Stanley, who heads California’s testing lab, said labs and commissions must be open to doing detective work to ferret out what might cause a positive finding, not just assuming the trainer is to blame. He agreed more can be done to reduce the transfer of substances to horses. One suggestion: having horse identifiers and the starting-gate crew wear latex gloves, and more pre-employment drug screening be implemented. MaryAnn O’Connell, executive director of the Washington HBPA, said some officials view contamination “as the new loophole for trainers” and are unwilling to consider the science. “It should not be taken as a loophole,” Gallagher said, saying he would refer the matter for Racing Officials Accreditation Program’s stewards advisory committee. “… We have to work together and find solutions together. Racing regulators and horsemen have to work for a common goal. And it has to be done the right way and done fairly and justly.” Drug contamination in tap drinking water By Jennie Rees Reprinted with permission of The Thoroughbred Daily News

Licensed harness racing trainer and driver Amanda Turnbull appeals against a decision of the stewards of 14 February 2018 to impose upon her a period of disqualification of three months to operate from that date for a breach of the prohibited substance rules, and that is, as is usually the case, a breach of Australian Harness Racing Rules 190 (1), (2) and (4) and it was particularised as follows: “that you Ms Amanda Turnbull, being the licensed trainer of the horse Taihape Sunset (NZ), did present that horse to race at Dubbo on Wednesday, 15 November 2017, with a prohibited substance in its system, namely triamcinolone acetonide, that was certified by 2 laboratories approved by the controlling body.”  When confronted with that charge, the appellant pleaded guilty. The stewards then proceeded to penalty. She has maintained that admission of the breach of the rule before this Tribunal. This is a severity appeal only and accordingly the facts to be canvassed can be reduced. To read the full transcipt click here.

The Harness Racing Victoria (HRV) Racing Appeals and Disciplinary (RAD) Board today heard a matter in regards to a charge issued by HRV Stewards under Australian Harness Racing Rule (AHRR) 190(1) against licensed trainer Maryanne Laffan. AHRR 190(1) reads as follows: A horse shall be presented for a race free of prohibited substances.  The charge under AHRR 190(1) issued by HRV Stewards against Ms Laffan related to a post-race blood sample collected from the horse ‘Westvillageemily’ after winning Race 4, the ‘Great Northern Super Crisp 3YO Pace’, on 25 July 2017 at the Kilmore harness racing meeting. Racing Analytical Services Limited (RASL) reported that analysis of the blood sample revealed the sample to contain a prohibited substance, namely alkalinising agents as evidenced by a total carbon dioxide (TCO2) concentration in excess of 36.0 millimoles per litre in plasma. This analysis was confirmed by referee analysis of the blood sample at the Racing Science Centre in Brisbane. Ms Laffan pleaded not guilty to the charge before submissions were heard from HRV Stewards and Mr Andrew Peace, acting on behalf of Ms Laffan.  The charge against Ms Laffan was subsequently found proven by the HRV RAD Board In determining penalty the HRV RAD Board considered the following: The serious nature of this particular rule breach, which was evidenced by a very high TCO2 concentration of greater than 39 millimoles per litre in plasma; Ms Laffan’s not-guilty plea; Ms Laffan’s disciplinary record, which included a previous TCO2 matter; Previous penalties for similar offences and the need for consistency; Specific and general deterrence; Ms Laffan’s personal circumstances put forward by her representative. In considering all of these matters, the HRV RAD Board disqualified Ms Laffan for a period of 12 months, deemed to commence immediately. The HRV RAD Board also ordered, under AHRR 195, that ‘Westvillageemily’ be disqualified from Race 4 at Kilmore on 25 July 2017 and the placings amended accordingly.  HRV RAD Board Panel: John Doherty (Deputy Chair), John Kearney, Kerry Willcock Harness Racing Appeals & Disciplinary Board 

An aggrieved harness racing bettor has gone to court to recoup more than $31,000 in winnings he said he was cheated out of when a doped horse won a race in New Jersey two years ago. Leading figures in harness racing said they had never before heard of such a lawsuit, which accuses the trainer of fraud and racketeering. The general practice is to reallocate the purse to other owners in the event a winning horse is later proven to have been doped, but not to pay back bettors. The trainer's lawyer said the lawsuit was flawed, and that he might demand its retraction. The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in New Jersey, represents an effort by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to open the gates for more litigation by bettors, which the animal rights group hopes would dramatically curtail illegal horse doping. PETA contends that injured horses are sometimes dying on the tracks because they were doped illegally or overmedicated to keep them running when they should be recuperating. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Jeffrey Tretter, an experienced gambler from Granite City, Illinois. The lawsuit says Tretter placed wagers through an online betting site on a harness race at the Meadowlands Racetrack on Jan. 15, 2016. The horses he picked to place first through fourth instead finished behind Tag Up and Go, who had been a longshot in the race. Meadowlands later revealed that Tag Up and Go had tested positive for EPO, a banned performance-enhancing substance, based on blood samples taken in December. As a result, trainer Robert Bresnahan Jr. was barred from competing at Meadowlands, but there was no redress for bettors such as Tretter. According to his lawsuit, he correctly picked the horses that finished second, third, fourth and fifth behind the doped horse in a variety of wagers that would have paid a combined $31,835 if Tag Up and Go had been disqualified. The lawsuit alleges fraud on the part of Bresnahan and the company that owned Tag Up and Go. It also alleges violations of the federal and state anti-racketeering laws known as RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), contending that the federal law was violated because Bresnahan was engaging in interstate commerce. The suit asks that Tretter be recompensed for his lost winnings in the race and be awarded additional punitive damages. Bresnahan, who runs a stable in Manalapan, New Jersey, referred The Associated Press to his lawyer, Howard Taylor, who said the lawsuit would not hold up in court. According to Taylor, the testing involving Tag Up and Go has no official standing in the U.S. legal system because it was conducted at a racing lab in Hong Kong. He also said the suspension imposed by the Meadowlands on Bresnahan was the act of a private business, and did not represent any official finding of wrongdoing by the trainer. Taylor said he planned to contact the New Jersey law office representing Tretter, demanding that they retract the lawsuit and apologize to Bresnahan. "If not, we're looking into filing a suit for libel," Taylor said. In February 2016, Bresnahan issued a statement insisting he neither administered EPO to Tag Up and Go, nor authorized anyone else to do so. "This news was a complete shock to me and obviously very upsetting," he wrote. Shortly after that statement appeared, Meadowlands announced that a second horse of Bresnahan's had tested positive for EPO. Bresnahan also was fined and suspended for 60 days for illegally administering the painkiller oxymorphone to a horse called Mr. Caviar in 2012, according to the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium. The owner of Meadowlands, Jeff Gural, has been among the leaders in harness racing trying to curb doping. The Tag Up and Go doping case emerged through one of his initiatives, establishing "out of competition" drug testing that subjects horses to the possibility of testing at any time. But he said unscrupulous trainers are constantly changing tactics to avoid detection. "It's a cat and mouse game, the same as in human sports," Gural said. "They know what drugs are being tested for — they try to stay one step ahead." There has been some federal engagement in the fight against horse doping. For example, a federal prosecutor in Pennsylvania last year won the conviction of a horse trainer at Penn National race track on charges of conspiring with three veterinarians to fraudulently administer prescription drugs for her horses on race days. There is also a bill pending in Congress that would establish a national anti-doping and medication authority for horse racing in the U.S., operated under the oversight of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, known as USADA. The bill, introduced in the House last year, has not advanced out of committee. Gural said he supports the bill as a needed step toward standardizing rules that now vary among the 38 different racing jurisdictions in the U.S. Many leading harness racing figures oppose the bill, including Mike Tanner, CEO of the U.S. Trotting Association. "There are too many holes in it," said Tanner, who worries that the bill would impose significant new costs on owners to underwrite additional drug testing. PETA is critical of horse racing, but is pushing for reforms rather than actively campaigning for an all-out ban. The group hopes the lawsuit will curtail doping. "Horses continue to be drugged, bettors get cheated, and trainers get slaps on the wrist," said PETA senior vice president Kathy Guillermo. "Maybe if they're hit squarely in the wallet, they will pay attention and stop hurting horses." By David Crary Reprinted with permission of ABC News

Northfield Park and the Ohio Harness Horsemen’s Association (OHHA) are pleased to announce that they have reached an amicable resolution regarding their legal disputes, and both sides have made meaningful compromises in order to find common ground for a working relationship going forward. The beneficiary of this agreement is the horse racing industry in that Northfield Park will continue its commitment to offer significant racing opportunities for horsemen along with continuing to offer the betting public its first class on-track entertainment experience and simulcasting broadcast to locations around the globe. The OHHA and Northfield look forward to working together now and in the future and with this chapter behind them they are optimistic about a new era of mutual cooperation, respect and a positive working relationship. Specifically, the OHHA and Northfield Park have agreed to mutually work together to make a number of capital improvements to the backstretch including the paddock, barns and drivers room. They have agreed on increasing purses, and the institution of paying drivers fees as well. And, they have agreed to work together in 2018 to provide even more racing opportunities regarding the Ohio Fair Championship and Stallion Series Championship, as part of Northfield Park and the OHHA's agreement to chart a new and exciting course for their mutual success. Northfield Park Contact   Brent Reitz VP & General Manager (330) 467-4101   Ohio Harness Horsemen’s Association R. Kevin Greenfield   President (419) 346-0609   Ayers Ratliff Director of Racing Communications        

The Harness Racing Victoria (HRV) Racing Appeals and Disciplinary (RAD) Board today considered a charge issued by HRV Stewards under Australian Harness Racing Rule (AHRR) 190(1) against licensed trainer-driver Josh Aiken. AHRR 190(1) reads as follows: A horse shall be presented for a race free of prohibited substances The charge under AHRR 190(1) issued by HRV Stewards against Mr Aiken related to a urine sample taken from the horse ‘The Defiant’ at the Shepparton trial meeting on 29 August 2017. The definition of a ‘race’ within the AHRR includes an official trial. Racing Analytical Services Limited (RASL) reported that the analysis of the urine sample revealed it to contain the prohibited substances levamisole and aminorex. The Racing Science Centre (RSC) in Queensland confirmed these findings in the reserve portion of the relevant urine sample.  Mr Aiken pleaded guilty to the charge before submissions on penalty were heard from the HRV Stewards and Mr Aiken.  In deciding an appropriate penalty, the HRV RAD Board considered Mr Aiken’s cooperation throughout the investigation and guilty plea at the earliest opportunity, his good record in the industry, the references he presented, his remorse and the steps already taken to ensure that he does not commit another similar offence. The HRV RAD Board also emphasised the purpose of the rules in relation to prohibited substances, the dangers associated with horses competing with these substances in their system and the substance in question not being registered for use in horses in Australia. Mr Aiken was subsequently fined $5000, of which $2000 was suspended for a period of 12 months. The HRV RAD Board also ordered that, under AHRR 195, ‘The Defiant’ be disqualified from Trial 3 at Shepparton on 29 August 2017. HRV RAD Board Panel: Alanna Duffy (Chair), Hugh Millar, Rod Osborne Harness Racing Appeals & Disciplinary Board 

On 21 February 2018, the Harness Racing Victoria (HRV) Racing Appeals and Disciplinary (RAD) Board considered a charge issued against trainer Nick Tardio under Australian Harness Racing Rule (AHRR) 190(1). AHRR 190(1) reads as follows: A horse shall be presented for a race free of prohibited substances The charge related to a pre-race urine sample collected from the horse “Kissed Flush” at Mildura on 4 April 2017. “Kissed Flush” finished ninth in Race 8, the “Mark Gurry and Associates Cup (2nd Heat)”. Racing Analytical Services Limited (RASL) reported that analysis of the urine sample revealed the sample to contain a prohibited substance, namely cobalt, above the allowable threshold of 100 micrograms per litre (µg/L). The reserve sample analysis by the Racing Science Centre (Qld) confirmed the result. Mr Tardio was represented by Mr O’Dea (solicitor) and pleaded not guilty to the charge. Mr O’Dea and Mr Tardio participated in the hearing by telephone. Mr Svanosio appeared for the HRV Stewards. Mr Paul Zahra (Scientific Manager at RASL) gave evidence and was cross-examined. Preliminary issues In correspondence sent to HRV late on 20 February (received on 21 February) Mr O’Dea indicated that he would argue that Mr Tardio had no case to answer relying on rule 191(7) (set out below) and requested “copies of any certification that RASL and QRIC have with regards to their instruments used to obtain the results presented in the brief”. Documents showing the accreditation of RASL by the National Association of Testing Authorities and the HRV Policy showing approval of the Racing Science Centre (Qld) as an analytical laboratory were provide by Mr Svanosio at the commencement of the hearing. Mr O’Dea submitted that the evidence of the results of the urine sample should be excluded because they did not comply with section 10 of the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth) and the relevant regulations, particularly regulation 73. Section 10 provides: When, for any legal purpose, it is necessary to ascertain whether a measurement of a physical quantity for which there are Australian legal units of measurement has been made or is being made in terms of those units, that fact shall be ascertained by means of, by reference to, by comparison with or by derivation from: (a) an appropriate Australian primary standard of measurement; (b) an appropriate Australian secondary standard of measurement; (c) an appropriate State primary standard of measurement; (d) an appropriate recognized-value standard of measurement; (e) an appropriate reference standard of measurement; (f) 2 or more standards of measurement, each of which is a standard of measurement referred to in paragraph (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e); (g) an Australian certified reference material; (h) a certified measuring instrument; (i) one or more standards of measurement, each of which is a standard of measurement referred to in paragraph (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e) and an Australian certified reference material; (j) one or more standards of measurement, each of which is a standard of measurement referred to in paragraph (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e) and a certified measuring instrument; or (k) one or more standards of measurement, each of which is a standard of measurement referred to in paragraph (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e), an Australian certified reference material and a certified measuring instrument;  and not in any other manner. Mr O’Dea submitted that the hearing was judicial in nature and that the evidence of the urine sample results relied upon by the Stewards had to comply with section 10(h). Mr O’Dea provided written submissions and other material in addition to his oral submissions. He referred to Breedon v Kongras (1996) (unreported, Supreme Court, WA, Owen J, 25 September 1996).  Mr Svanosio submitted that there was no requirement that RASL or the Racing Science Centre (Qld) use testing equipment that complies with the National Measurement Act. He provided copies of and relied upon two decisions of the South Australian Racing Appeals Tribunal (Trotta, RAT 11/2017 and Borg, RAT 2/2017). In relation to this issue, the HRV RAD Board decided that it was not satisfied that there is a requirement that testing equipment be calibrated or otherwise approved under the National Measurement Act and noted that Mr O’Dea could not point to any specific requirement. Therefore, the Board did not accept that the evidence of the sample readings from RASL and the Racing Science Centre (Qld) should be excluded. The HRV RAD Board is not a court of law and the current proceedings are not a prosecution. The Board is established by legislation and operates pursuant to its own rules, which include VLR 50(1)(g) which provides that “the rules of evidence as generally applied in a court of record shall not apply”. Further, even if the National Measurement Act does apply, subsection 10(a) only requires that a measurement of a physical quantity “be ascertained by means of, by reference to, by comparison with or by derivation from (a) an appropriate Australian primary standard of measurement”, which is the case here. Mr O’Dea then sought an adjournment so that Mr Tardio could lead expert evidence. The expert that he proposed to call was not available immediately. This application was opposed by Mr Svanosio who submitted that Mr Tardio had not complied with VLR 50(5) which requires an expert witness report to be served 7 days prior to the hearing and states that a party may not otherwise call an expert witness without the consent of the HRV RAD Board.  The Board refused the application for an adjournment and did not grant consent for an expert witness to be called by Mr O’Dea, noting that the hearing had already been adjourned twice at the request of Mr Tardio’s legal representatives (16 November 2017 and 12 December 2017) and that there had been ample opportunity for Mr Tardio and his representatives to prepare his case. Submissions and evidence as to the charge Mr Svanosio referred to the material in the brief of evidence, which was tendered. Mr Zahra was called and gave oral evidence.  Mr O’Dea took issue with the certificates (marked HRV 8 and HRV 11) because they indicated that the cobalt concentration was greater than 200µg/L, rather than an exact amount. He cross-examined Mr Zahra on this issue. Mr Zahra explained that the calibration range for the instruments used for testing the sample only goes to double the allowable threshold of 100 µg/L, that is, 200µg/L. Mr Zahra gave evidence that the results were accurate and that he was able to estimate that the actual reading was 215µg/L. Mr O’Dea submitted that the certificate was not accurate because it did not show the actual reading; therefore the certification procedure was materially flawed and rule 191(7) applied. The Board took into account the evidence contained in the brief, the oral evidence presented at the hearing and the provisions of rule 191, which states:  (1) A certificate from a person or drug testing laboratory approved by the Controlling Body which certifies the presence of a prohibited substance in or on a horse at, or approximately at, a particular time, or in blood, urine, saliva, or other matter or sample or specimen tested, or that a prohibited substance had at some time been administered to a horse is prima facie evidence of the matters certified. (2) If another person or drug testing laboratory approved by the Controlling Body analyses a portion of the sample or specimen referred to in sub rule (1) and certifies the presence of a prohibited substance in the sample or specimen that certification together with the certification referred to in sub rule (1) is conclusive evidence of the presence of a prohibited substance. (3) A certificate furnished under this rule which relates to blood, urine, saliva, or other matter or sample or specimen taken from a horse at a meeting shall be prima facie evidence if sub rule (1) only applies, and conclusive evidence if both sub rules (1) and (2) apply, that the horse was presented for a race not free of prohibited substances.  (4) A certificate furnished under this rule which relates to blood, urine, saliva, or other matter or sample or specimen taken from a horse shall be prima facie evidence if sub rule (1) only applies, and conclusive evidence if both sub rules (1) and (2) apply, that the prohibited substance was present in or on the horse at the time the blood, urine, saliva, or other matter or sample or specimen was taken from the horse. (5) Sub rules (1) and (2) do not preclude the presence of a prohibited substance in or on a horse, or in blood, urine, saliva, or other matter or sample or specimen, or the fact that a prohibited substance had at some time been administered to a horse, being established in other ways. (6) Sub rule (3) does not preclude the fact that a horse was presented for a race not free of prohibited substances being established in other ways. (7) Notwithstanding the provisions of this rule, certificates do not possess evidentiary value nor establish an offence, where it is proved that the certification procedure or any act or omission forming part of or relevant to the process resulting in the issue of a certificate, was materially flawed.  The HRV RAD Board found Mr Tardio guilty of the charge, accepting that rules 191(1) and (2) applied and that it had not been proved “that the certification procedure or any act or omission forming part of or relevant to the process resulting in the issue of a certificate, was materially flawed”. Penalty Mr Svanosio submitted that it was a serious offence, that the rules in relation to prohibited substances are to ensure that the integrity of harness racing is protected and that racing is conducted safely and fairly. He also referred to other HRV RAD Board and VCAT decisions in relation to penalties for cobalt offences and Mr Tardio’s record, which includes a recent disqualification for a cobalt offence in South Australia. He submitted that an appropriate penalty in this case was a 2-year disqualification. Mr Svanosio stated that Mr Tardio did not hold a current licence, which was not contradicted by Mr Tardio. Mr Tardio addressed the Board in relation to penalty and asked that any penalty be backdated to the date of the offence. In determining penalty, the HRV RAD Board considered Mr Tardio’s record, specific and general deterrence, the serious nature of the prohibited substance rules and penalties in relation to other cobalt cases. Mr Tardio was not eligible for a reduction in penalty for a guilty plea or cooperation with the Stewards.  Taking all of these matters into account, the HRV RAD Board imposed an 18- month disqualification to commence at midnight on 21 February 2018.  The HRV RAD Board also ordered (under rule 195) that “Kissed Flush” be disqualified from Race 8 at Mildura on 4 April 2017 and that the placings be amended accordingly. HRV RAD Board Panel: Alanna Duffy (Chair), Rod Osborne Harness Racing Appeals & Disciplinary Board                         

Harness Racing New South Wales (HRNSW) Stewards conducted an inquiry today into a report received from the Australian Racing Forensic Laboratory that triamcinolone acetonide had been detected in the blood sample taken from TAIHAPE SUNSET NZ following its win in race 3, the BAKERS EARTHMOVING WINDMILL HEAT 3 (1720m) at Dubbo on Wednesday November 15, 2017. Ms Turnbull appeared at the inquiry represented by solicitor, Mr Hammond.  Evidence including the Reports of Analysis and expert evidence from HRNSW Regulatory Veterinarian Dr Martin Wainscott was presented. Evidence was also provided to the inquiry by Ms Turnbull regarding a procedure conducted upon TAIHAPE SUNSET NZ by a registered veterinarian. Ms Turnbull had previously informed HRNSW Stewards of this procedure on October 31, 2017, the date upon which the procedure occurred. Ms Turnbull pleaded guilty to a charge pursuant to Rule 190 (1), (2) & (4) for presenting TAIHAPE SUNSET NZ to race not free of a prohibited substance. Ms Turnbull was disqualified for a period of three months to commence immediately. In considering penalty Stewards were mindful of the following: This was Ms Turnbull’s first prohibited substance offence; Ms Turnbull’s guilty plea; Circumstances of this matter; Class 3 Prohibited Substance; Ms Turnbull’s offence record, training record and other personal subjective facts, including ambassadorial and charity roles. Acting under the provisions of Rule 195, TAIHAPE SUNSET NZ was disqualified from the abovementioned race. Taihape Sunset – Disqualified FOLLOWING the recent disqualification of TAIHAPE SUNSET NZ following its win in Race 3, the BAKERS EARTHMOVING WINDMILL HEAT 3 (1720m) at Dubbo on November 15, 2017, it has been determined that acting under the provisions of Rule 195A, TAIHAPE SUNSET NZ will also be disqualified following its win in Race 7, the 3D BUTCHERY GILGANDRA WINDMILL FINAL (1720m) at Dubbo on December 3, 2017, and the placings amended to: 1st – SIOTADA 2nd – RED HOT JERRY 3rd – JOGALONG DEE 4th – BIG BILL Relevant Rules - Disqualification AHHR 195. A horse which has been presented for a race shall be disqualified from it if blood, urine, saliva, or other matter or sample or specimen taken from the horse is found to contain a prohibited substance. AHHR 195A. (1) This rule is to apply to any race or series of races which the Controlling Body stipulates in the Conditions of Entry that it shall apply to; such a race or races being a qualifying race for some other race.  (2) If in relation to a race to which this rule applies a blood, urine, saliva or other sample or specimen is taken from a horse when it is presented for such race and a certificate from a person or drug testing laboratory approved by the Controlling Body certifies the presence of a prohibited substance in such specimen or sample then the horse shall be immediately disqualified from participating in any other race for which the race in question provides or provided a qualification for participation.  (3)  This rule is to have effect and to be conclusive irrespective of whether further testing procedures or other circumstances establish that the horse was presented for the race free of any prohibited substances. Ms Amanda Turnbull was advised of her right to appeal this decision. MICHAEL PRENTICE | INTEGRITY MANAGER (02) 9722 6600 • GRANT ADAMS | CHAIRMAN OF STEWARDS (02) 9722 6600 •

Clay Horner told HRU Thursday there are two major reasons the Standardbred Racing Integrity and Accountability Initiative (SRIAI) rule being proposed by the Woodbine Entertainment Group (WEG) and the Jeff Gural owned tracks will not be in effect until 2019. (Read previous stories: 2018-01-07 and 2018-01-12) Horner, WEG’s chairman, had hoped the new integrity rule intended to increase horse owner accountability would be in place for 2018, but with February 15 stakes payment deadline looming quickly and Ontario’s regulator asking for more time to properly vet the rule, Woodbine at Mohawk Park president Jessica Buckley confirmed the decision has been made to hold off until next year. “I think it’s going to take more time than we hoped, but we’re definitely not going to back away from what we’re trying to achieve,” Buckley said. Horner stressed this is not a sign WEG, Gural or the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) that oversees racing in Ontario is giving up on the rule. “That would be the wrong message to take away (from the delay in implementation),” Horner said. “There are two messages (to take away): this is highly constructive and we’ll be back.” Burke issued penalty over TCO2 In semi-related news, judges at The Meadows have handed trainer Ron Burke a 30-day suspension and $1,000 fine after TJ Blast — a horse trained and owned, in part, by Burke — had a high blood gas reading (TCO2) prior to the third race on Monday (Jan. 22) at the Pittsburgh-area track. At the request of the horse’s connections — and in accordance to an authorized procedure offered to others with horses with high TCO2 readings in the past — TJ Blast was sequestered for 72 hours after the initial positive and then retested. The Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Commission has been told the penalty will likely be appealed, but no such appeal had been filed by Thursday afternoon. To read the entire article on Harness Racing Update click on this link.

49 to 64 of 2382