Ben Currie arrested - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK   harm-plan

Racehorse TALK

Ben Currie arrested - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Ben Currie arrested  (Read 4349 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5906
« 2021-May-21, 09:44 PM Reply #25 »

Spot on is about the 'law' .............. as it is dispensed in Queensland

................ this is the cultural morass that sent Ms Hanson to gaol well as a senior public servant ............. and otherwise delivers 'decisions', across the board, that stink.

Something has gone wrong in Queensland ............ a lot has gone wrong in Queensland.

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17492
« 2021-May-21, 11:22 PM Reply #26 »
Verdict in Ben Currie fraud trial
Queensland horse trainer Ben Currie. Queensland horse trainer Ben Currie.
By peter hardwick
03:22pm • 21 May 2021

After a two-week trial which followed a two-year investigation, horse trainer Ben Currie has been found not guilty of a charge of fraud.

Mr Currie, 30, and co-accused Anthony Raymond Stephens, 27, had been charged with fraud – dishonestly gaining a benefit relating to 14 races involving horses trained by Mr Currie.

Both pleaded not guilty to their respective charge.

The prosecution claimed a number of horses had been injected or stomach tubed with substances to enhance performance on the day of the race which is contrary to the rules of racing in Queensland.

However, in her judgment, Magistrate Kay Ryan said there was no evidence any of the horses particularised by the prosecution had tested positive for such substances after the particular races.

She also found there was no evidence that the term of “shampooing”, which the prosecution claimed was a code word for injecting a horse with performance enhancing substances, was associated with such a practice.

Mr Currie and Mr Stephens gave each other a nod of approval when Ms Ryan told the court that she could not find either defendant guilty of the charge.

Mr Currie’s racing licence is still under suspension until next month and it is not clear as yet if he will apply for his licence to be reinstated once his ban is over now that he has been cleared by the court.
Read all news by
peter hardwick

Giddy Up :beer:

Offline napes

  • VIP Club
  • Group3
  • User 29
  • Posts: 938
« 2021-May-24, 09:09 AM Reply #27 »
The difference between law and  "stuff him" he's too successful.

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17492
« 2021-May-24, 05:33 PM Reply #28 »
Toowoomba Magistrate Kay Ryan's decision in the case of Police v Currie &Police V Stephens lengthy decision worth reading most Mags Court decisions never make it to the courts'page

CRIMINAL LAW –FRAUD –Breach of Rules of Racing –whether defendants administered medication, prohibited substances and alkalinising agents by way of injection and stomach tubing – whether representations made that horses eligible to run – whether participation in a race continues until race run– whether a scheme existed to improve the performance of horses racing for prizemoney.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE – whether guilt is the only rational inference that could be drawn from the evidence – whether any reasonable possibility consistent with innocence – whether reasonable inference based on evidentiary facts – whether logical and rational connection between the facts found and the inferences to be drawn – where more than one inference is reasonably open.

HolBeck & Litzow who were arrested some time ago with Currie get a few mentions in recordings with  the defendants and there was evidence of substantial funds being transferred from Currie to Stephens and on to the suppliers of the product ......Holbeck & Litzow ....remarkably none of the horses which were particularised in the fraud charges returned any positive swabs...chief steward Peter Chadwick gave evidence with regard to the sampling of horses presented to race by defendant Currie.  He conceded that the substance L-arginine was not present in any of the samples taken, however drew a distinction between a substance being not detected and not present on the basis that if the substance was not detected it may have been that the substance was not tested for.
The learned magistrate concluded that the prosecution case was largely circumstantial and she could not be satisfied that it had been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Giddy Up :beer:

« Last Edit: 2021-May-24, 06:25 PM by Arsenal »