Fletcher Out for 12 - Qld Gallops - Racehorse TALK harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Fletcher Out for 12 - Qld Gallops - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Fletcher Out for 12  (Read 94714 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2018-Oct-17, 01:49 PM Reply #225 »




Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2018-Dec-18, 09:17 AM Reply #226 »
Well, I'm laughing,
and crying,
and developing chest pains.



Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15808
« 2018-Dec-19, 09:39 AM Reply #227 »
I understand Fletcher's trial is set down for hearing on 30th September 2019 in the District Court ....it's been a long time coming since he was charged to get to the hearing.

Giddy Up :beer:

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2019-Mar-20, 04:31 PM Reply #228 »
Our pure as the driven Snow identity.


Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2019-Mar-20, 04:43 PM Reply #229 »

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15808
« 2019-Mar-21, 08:43 AM Reply #230 »
The question of Fletcher's status as an unlicensed person is thought relevant to whether the stewards have the power to demand his phone......based on the VCAT case in Victoria on Neville Clements.........I discovered a case in NSW harness racing where an unlicensed person was disqualified for 12 months by the stewards which he did not contest but later appealed to the Tribunal on the severity of the penalty which the learned member granted him a reprieve.
The details are posted under the Harness section .....NSW Racing Appeals Tribunal .

Giddy Up :beer:

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2019-Mar-21, 09:21 AM Reply #231 »
Interesting on a number of levels.

I presume that Fletcher still handles Commissions and remember there was once talk of licensing them, but as usual such initiatives fell through.

Perhaps there could a rule allowing Stewards access to phone record access to anyone reasonably suspected of being a Commission Agent?

Alternatively the phone records of Premium Punters (who already have to go through the rigmarole of contracts).

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4639
« 2019-Mar-21, 04:05 PM Reply #232 »

A few of us should attend the court hearing

I still do not understand the charged offence -- bar arrange for a few bowlers to beat bookies that outlaw winners.

Other things should be met with other charges.

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15808
« 2019-Mar-21, 04:11 PM Reply #233 »
A few of us should attend the court hearing

I still do not understand the charged offence -- bar arrange for a few bowlers to beat bookies that outlaw winners.

Other things should be met with other charges.

His injunction application was listed for Wednesday so you're a day late for that but you and anyone else interested who resides in Sin City should keep your diary free for the trial which from memory is set down for 30th September ...it's possible this could be changed so be alert.

Giddy up :beer:

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4639
« 2019-Mar-21, 04:57 PM Reply #234 »


Monday September 30th

........... at the Downing Center?

Preliminaries out of the way, these cases can be instructive about what goes on which the stewards never let on.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2019-Mar-21, 06:18 PM Reply #235 »
A few of us should attend the court hearing

I still do not understand the charged offence -- bar arrange for a few bowlers to beat bookies that outlaw winners.

Other things should be met with other charges.
There is something very seriously wrong with you.

Maybe you didn't bother reading the latest material?

The investigation is on 3 fronts.

If it turns out it finds these are true, then that is fraud.

The victims are
- Tabcorp shareholders including me
- Any punter who was unable to back contingencies where the odds were crushed.


Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 6942
« 2019-Mar-24, 06:31 PM Reply #236 »

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4639
« 2019-Mar-24, 07:02 PM Reply #237 »

There are things wrong with all of us sometimes

.............. but I am not pleading guilty to the 'jfc' charges

While he may have done other things, I understand the charges to be heard in June relate to 'betting in the name of someone else'.

The offences were compounded by the bets winning!

If as it seems F was denied the opportinity to bet in his own name, I am not sure what is wrong with getting a bowlwer to put bets on using an open account.

The KateMc story was from a year ago and those bets will presumably be evidence -- but of what oiffence?

A licensed bookmakershould be obliged to take bets from anyone subject to the published limits --we cant have a game where only losers are allowed to bet!

Offline gunbower

  • Group3
  • User 2463
  • Posts: 915
« 2019-Mar-24, 08:03 PM Reply #238 »
Mair it has happened . I thoroughly agree with you . "Bowlers " are used because our weak kneed politicians won't make sure that these parasites (internet bookmakers ) are compelled to take bets as per their predecessors had to do on race tracks. Make a rule. Make them  bet to predetermined limits ( to everyone ), or make it a criminal offence every time they or their staff refuse a bet. Ensure they are licensed  and if they are in any way in  breach any  of the conditions of that licence  run them out of town . Hit them with a fine they can't jump over . Until that is paid remove their licence to operate in this Country. There are a million ways to fix these bludgers. Governments just need the intestinal fortitude to confront these low lives. In the end the Industry will benefit.

Offline Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2866
« 2019-Mar-24, 08:52 PM Reply #239 »
I think there is a bigger picture with some of the coverage if it goes to trial.

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-18/cunneen-appointed-to-government-integrity-commission-panel/10630190?pfmredir=sm

When she was appointed, there was a bit of a stigma around her clash with the ICAC. She cannot be responsible for Fletcher’s alleged conduct if she introduced him to a police officer as stated in the article.

However questions will be asked nevertheless be asked of their friendship and introductions if it goes to trial.

Offline stevo63

  • Class2
  • User 2799
  • Posts: 22
« 2019-Apr-01, 12:16 PM Reply #240 »
@Peter Mair

i dont think it was the fact that bowlers were used (seems that wasnt the problem and happy to be corrected) but the charges stem from representing himself to operators as the actual bowler instead of himself

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4639
« 2019-Apr-01, 06:14 PM Reply #241 »


....... how is it a problem if F, as an authorized  'agent', makes the phone call to bet on an open account?

The issue here is about an operator closing an F account while another was used directly or indirectly by F to beat the ban.

The corporates betting fixed odds need to be pulled into line -- to the limit, accept bets placed by anyone.

Offline stevo63

  • Class2
  • User 2799
  • Posts: 22
« 2019-Apr-02, 07:18 AM Reply #242 »
in full agreement with your last sentence....

just bet the price on the board , you leave the price there , be allowed to go again , change the price , allowed to go again (to MBL each time)

and once you are signed up , verified and your deposit taken in the blink of an eye , when you go to withdraw not be subjected to all manor of bank statements etc , you want to take the money in an instant well you pay it back out in an instant (once your 100 point ID is verified just like all institutions Oz wide) ......putting Money laundering requirements on you is just an excuse to cheese you off and hope you go away .......how can you depositing money and betting be money laundering?? ...there's a paper trail from start to finish ....for authorities to chase (not scumbag bookies who have zero right to personal information , repeat zero!) if concerned about the proceeds of initial deposit.........can guarantee if you were losing tens of thousands you wouldnt be getting asked for bank statements for proof of income etc

the sooner we have a RC into gambling in this country the better it will be

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15808
« 2019-Apr-18, 09:50 PM Reply #243 »
NSW Supreme Court application by Steven Fletcher to protect privileged information on his phone which he handed over voluntarily on the demand of RNSW chief steward inquiring into the betting activities of Sally Snow.....the court made it clear that Fletcher was under no obligation to cooperate with the stewards request as he is an unlicensed person not bound by the Rules of Racing....Fletcher complied with the request out of concern if he failed to do so he could have been faced with warning off...lengthy judgment.
This case has to relevance to the criminal charges he is facing which are listed for hearing on 30th September.

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5ca2e36fe4b0196eea405a17

Giddy Up :beer:

Offline gunbower

  • Group3
  • User 2463
  • Posts: 915
« 2019-Apr-18, 10:18 PM Reply #244 »
Stevo and Mair couldn't agree more with you. Why governments in this Country have allowed these parasites to basically control the Industry should be explored by a body at arms length from both the Industry and both sides of Government. Maybe Governments wouldn't relish that sort of scrutiny  ? (on both sides ). If they would relish it then why wouldn't they do it  ? Who , and for what reason allowed them to pay "jackshit " to conduct their "business  " in this Country ?


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap