Racing NSW Appeals - N.S.W Gallops - Racehorse TALK harm-plan harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Racing NSW Appeals - N.S.W Gallops - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Racing NSW Appeals  (Read 19022 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126
« 2020-Feb-18, 10:40 AM Reply #50 »
Latest updates from Racing NSW on appeal decisions.

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/appeals/

Giddy Up :beer:

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126
« 2020-Feb-25, 05:58 PM Reply #51 »
Several more decisions from the Appeals Panel three of which I've extracted and recommend for those interested in such matters .

Grant Allard secret commission case ...very confusing and conflicting evidence .....Anthony Newing .& Tommy Berry had some luck ..TB got out of jail free card .

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decision-A-Newing-22-Feb-2020.pdf

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decision-Tommy-Berry-20-Feb.pdf

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/APPEAL-OF-GRANT-ALLARD-Reasons-For-Decision-19-Feb-2020.pdf

Giddy Up :beer:




https://www.racingnsw.com.au/appeals/


« Last Edit: 2020-Feb-25, 06:08 PM by Arsenal »

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126
« 2020-Aug-14, 09:39 AM Reply #52 »

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126
« 2020-Oct-20, 10:23 AM Reply #54 »
https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decisions-D-Boal.pdf

Breach of COVID-19 and false testimony DQ’d from 6 months on each charge to 4 a total 8 months on the sidelines.

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decision-Marc-Lambourne-Glen-Pollett-AMENDED.pdf

This was a majority decision two lay members the majority still a big reduction in original penalties $6k and $5K both reduced to $2K quite a few precedents referred to very interesting observations most of them.

Orders Appeal by MrLambourne
1.In relation to the first charge for a breach of AR228(a):(1)The appeal against conviction is dismissed.
(2)The appeal against severity of penalty is allowed.
(3)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, Mr Lambourne is fined $1,000
(4)50%of the appeal deposit is to be forfeited and 50% is to be refunded.
2.In relation to the second charge of breach of AR228(d):
(1)The appeal against conviction is dismissed.
(2)The appeal against penalty is allowed.
(3)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, no penalty is imposed.
3.In relation to the third charge of breach of AR232(b):
(1)The appeal against severity of penalty is allowed.
(2)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, MrLambourne is fined $1,000.

Appeal by MrPollett
4.In relation to the first charge for a breach of AR228(a):
(1)The appeal against conviction is dismissed.
(2)The appeal against severity of penalty is allowed.
(3)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, MrPollett is fined $2,000.
In respect of both appeals5.50% of the appeal deposit is to be forfeited and 50% is to be refunded


Giddy Up :beer:


Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22954
« 2020-Oct-26, 04:54 AM Reply #55 »
https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decisions-D-Boal.pdf

Breach of COVID-19 and false testimony DQ’d from 6 months on each charge to 4 a total 8 months on the sidelines.

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decision-Marc-Lambourne-Glen-Pollett-AMENDED.pdf

This was a majority decision two lay members the majority still a big reduction in original penalties $6k and $5K both reduced to $2K quite a few precedents referred to very interesting observations most of them.

Orders Appeal by MrLambourne
1.In relation to the first charge for a breach of AR228(a):(1)The appeal against conviction is dismissed.
(2)The appeal against severity of penalty is allowed.
(3)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, Mr Lambourne is fined $1,000
(4)50%of the appeal deposit is to be forfeited and 50% is to be refunded.
2.In relation to the second charge of breach of AR228(d):
(1)The appeal against conviction is dismissed.
(2)The appeal against penalty is allowed.
(3)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, no penalty is imposed.
3.In relation to the third charge of breach of AR232(b):
(1)The appeal against severity of penalty is allowed.
(2)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, MrLambourne is fined $1,000.

Appeal by MrPollett
4.In relation to the first charge for a breach of AR228(a):
(1)The appeal against conviction is dismissed.
(2)The appeal against severity of penalty is allowed.
(3)In lieu of the penalty imposed by the Stewards, MrPollett is fined $2,000.
In respect of both appeals5.50% of the appeal deposit is to be forfeited and 50% is to be refunded


Giddy Up :beer:


They are "the Media". They do and say what they like and are a protected species. The judiciary will always back them up regardless of what they have done.

There is one law for the media and one for the rest of us.

Can you imagine what would happen to us if we stole secure documents and gave them to the media? Nothing apparently


ABC reporter Daniel Oakes won’t be prosecuted over Afghan Files reporting

ABC journalist Daniel Oakes won’t be prosecuted over the public broadcaster’s 2017 series The Afghan Files, which wraps up the Australian Federal Police’s investigation into allegations he obtained classified information.

The Australian Federal Police has informed ABC managing director David Anderson that the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions won’t proceed with any action against Oakes.

The news comes three months after the same decision was made in relation to ABC journalist Sam Clark, who also worked on The Afghan Files.


https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/abc-reporter-wont-be-prosecuted-over-afghan-files-reporting/






Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126
« 2020-Dec-08, 03:44 PM Reply #56 »
https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decisions-Dr-K-Squire.pdf

Dr  Squire  prescribed  and dispensed injectable  Altrenogest  (in  the form  of  Ovu-Mate  Injection)  to licensed  trainer  Mrs  Julie Pratten  on  1  January 2020,  to  use  such  substance  in  a  thoroughbred  horse,  with  such  advice  in contravention of advice published by Racing New South Wales, which led to Mrs Pratten breaching AR 240(2)  as  a  result  of the  detection  of  the  prohibited  substances  trendione  and  epitrenbolone  (both anabolic steroids) in a prerace urine sample taken from her horse, Rahaan, prior to it racing at the Ballina Races on 17January2020.

Very interesting case of a Vet 's professional responsibility to be aware of advice from Racing NSW regarding substances that are prohibited..he also failed to attend a stewards inquiry when required to do so ....6 months suspension.

Giddy Up :beer:



Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126
« 2020-Dec-18, 10:36 PM Reply #57 »
Trainer and stablehand had their penalties reduced on appeal .......horse was injected with substances which included one which caused the horse to die .....the product had been prescribed for treatment to a harness horse trained by the stablehand......and not for the racehorse Lesham.


https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decisions-Ostini-and-Faulker.pdf

https://www.racingnsw.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Reasons-for-Decisions-Ostini-and-Faulker.pdf


Giddy Up :beer:



Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17126


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap