Chief Stipe

How so? FFS why the fixation by a small group of individuals?

Well a whole lot more people spent a whole lot more. He bought 4 yearlings. So what? Not that it's anyone else business but perhaps he has a number of investors backing him. Why the fixation on what he is doing? Is it jealously or envy on your part?

Your inference was that there was a lot more.

No all they have to do is finish the mandates. They are no longer relevant especially when we are being told not to get tested unless symptomatic, not to go to hospital unless we a seriously ill and so on. Not to mention Omicron can't distinguish between vaxxed or not vaxxed!

LOL the translation of La Crique is "The Circus" which probably describes what the Avondale Cup will be. I don't think there are enough lightweights to ride eleven horses at 52kg! Looking forward to see if the filly confirms my impression of her ability.

I was hoping that Clement would be a new broom. But the new setup is worse than before. He should comment less on policy setting (e.g. whip rules) and sort the outfit out. Some of what is going on now is scandalous. Clement did leave the Police under a cloud.

Crack nine-horse field for epic $1m Lightning Stakes Jamie Kah riding Nature Strip in a jumpout at Flemington on February 11. Photo: Vince Caligiuri/Getty Images. By Adam Dobbin 03:26pm • 16 February 2022 0 Champion sprinter Nature Strip will tackle eight rivals when he defends his Group 1 Black Caviar Lightning Stakes (1000m) title at Flemington on Saturday. The reigning winner of The Everest will be ridden by Jamie Kah who partners up with the seven-year-old gelding for the first time since the combination were successful winning the weight-for-age contest last year. Nature Strip has drawn gate six for the $1m showpiece while fellow Chris Waller-trained runner, Home Affairs, to be piloted by Nature Strip’s usual rider James McDonald, will exit barrier eight. Nature Strip and Home Affairs won Victoria Racing Club’s biggest spring sprints during Melbourne Cup week. Nature Strip won the VRC Classic while Home Affairs was successful in the Coolmore Stud Stakes. Both races were run over 1200m. Setting the scene for an enthralling edition of the Lightning Stakes is the appearance of the Joe Pride-trained Eduardo, the evergreen eight-year-old winner of $5.6m in stakes, drawn in gate five with Nash Rawiller to ride. Last seen when annexing the $1m Classique Legend Stakes (1300m) at Rosehill in October, Eduardo has been tuned up for his Lightning Stakes assault with two slick trials at Randwick recently. Home Affairs will be ridden by James McDonald in Saturday’s Lightning Stakes. Photo: George Sal/Getty Images. Saturday’s Lightning Stakes also marks the return of Masked Crusader which split Nature Strip and Eduardo with his electrifying finish in last year’s The Everest. The hugely talented five-year-old has drawn barrier three at a distance expected to be short of his best. Adding even further spice to Saturday’s race is the appearance of 2020 Lightning Stakes winner and The Everest placegetter Gytrash. Gytrash will be ridden by last week’s CF Orr Stakes winning jockey Mark Zahra and is unbeaten at two starts at the Flemington 1000m course and has drawn barrier two. The Mick Price and Michael Kent Jnr-trained Profiteer joins Home Affairs as the three-year-old colts to contest Saturday’s Lightning. Both will carry 55.5kg – 3kg shy of the 58.5kg defending champion Nature Strip will carry. TAB fixed odds have Nature Strip as the $2.60 favourite ahead of Eduardo at $4. Home Affairs has drifted slightly to $5.50 while Profiteer is $11 and Gytrash $15. R7 Flemington (VIC) Good 4 View Form Fav 1. Nature Strip (6) 58.5kg 😄 34:19-6-0 L10: x121x1211x J: Jamie Kah $2.6 2. Eduardo (5) 58.5kg 😄 24:10-3-5 L10: x1131x131x J: Nash Rawiller $4.2 3. Masked Crusader (3) 58.5kg 😄 17:7-3-2 L10: 125x15126x J: Jye McNeil $8.5 4. Gytrash (2) 58.5kg 😄 27:10-6-7 L10: 31x30x370x J: Mark Zahra $16 5. The Inferno (4) 58.5kg 😄 13:9-2-0 L10: 1111x6120x J: Damian Lane $23 6. The Astrologist (1) 58.5kg 😄 21:7-3-5 L10: x5411313x3 J: John Allen $67 7. Swats That (9) 56.5kg 😄 13:3-3-1 L10: x358x8052x J: Damien Oliver $46 8. Home Affairs (8) 55.5kg 😄 7:3-1-1 L10: 2138x191x J: James McDonald $6 9. Profiteer (7) 55.5kg 😄 7:3-2-0 L10: 1127x621x J: Brett Prebble $12

Morbid obesity is a high risk factor for Covid.

How do you get to "hundreds of thousands"? I counted 4 yearlings for a total of $223,500. Have I missed some?

If you rode two horses you would only be 1kg over.

$3k fine. $750 Costs. 4 month holiday.

Non Raceday Inquiry – Written Decision dated 16 February 2022 – Trudy Keegan ID: RIB7439 Respondent(s): Trudy Keegan - Trainer Applicant: Ms Georgina Murrow, Investigator, RIB Adjudicators: Hon J W Gendall QC - Chair, Mr L N McCutcheon - Member Persons Present: Ms G Murrow, Mr D Dow - Counsel for Informant, Mr T Wano - Counsel for Ms Keegan, Mr V Keegan, Ms T Keegan (by telephone connection) Information Number: A16851 Decision Type: Adjudicative Decision Charge: Failed to comply with a NZTR directive Rule(s): 802(1)(a) Plea: Admitted Stewards Report Results Code: Thoroughbred Race Date: 13/01/2022 Race Club: Otaki-Maori Racing Club Race Location: Otaki Racecourse - Te Roto Road, Otaki, 5512 Hearing Date: 11/02/2022 Hearing Location: Awapuni Outcome: Proved Penalty: Trainer Trudy Keegan is suspended for 4 months and fined $3,000 1. Ms Keegan is a Licensed Class A Trainer residing and operating at Stratford and presently has 22 horses under her care. 2. She was charged with a breach of Rule 802(1)(a) of the Rules of Racing in that: (a) On 13 January 2022 she attended the NZTR race meeting at Otaki as a Licensed Trainer and failed to comply with a NZTR Directive (in line with the government “COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020”) and was therefore in breach of Rule 802(1)(a). (b) That Directive was provided to all Licencees and persons entering a racecourse that they must have a “My Vaccine Pass” scanned or sighted to prove double vaccination. (c) Ms Keegan did not have such a pass and produced a fake or fraudulent pass that she had earlier obtained. 3. Rule 802(1)(a) provides that: a person commits a breach who acts in contravention of or fails to comply with any provisions of the Rules ….. or any policy, notice, direction, instructions, …… restrictions, requirement or condition given, made or imposed under the Rules. 4. Following upon Ms Keegan’s guilty plea we received extensive submissions in writing, as well as oral representations, from Counsel on behalf of the Informant and Ms Keegan. After deliberating following the conclusion of the hearing the Adjudicative Committee imposed the penalties recorded hereafter in paragraph 33 – we now record the reasons for that decision. Essential Facts 5. Ms Keegan was the Trainer of two horses entered to compete at the Otaki-Maori Racing Club meeting held at Otaki Racecourse on 13 January 2022. That meeting was subject to the policy and Directions issued on 26 November 2021 to Licensed Trainers, which followed upon restrictions required by the NZ Government agency aimed to protect persons who were engaged at raceday meetings (and otherwise). They were to enable race meetings to take place, and protect people from possible consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. 6. The Directive issued by the NZTR Board on 26 November 2021 provided: “This Directive outlines the following: 2.1(f) All persons admitted to a racecourse for a Meeting must: (i) Allow their “My Vaccine Pass” to be scanned or sighted as proof that they are double vaccinated. Any attempt to falsify proof of a person’s vaccination status (“My Vaccine Pass” or in another form) will be reported to the NZ Police and will also be treated as a Serious Racing Offence. A false statement regarding vaccination status to the NZTR, the RIB or a racing club will also be regarded as a Serious Racing Offence. 7. For completeness we record that the Directive also recorded the Government announcement that “workers” in a business where vaccine mandates applied had a short term exemption until 17 January 2022 but to qualify they had to: “have their first vaccination [by] 13 December 2021” and have documentary proof of having such first dose and evidence of a second vaccination booking. Ms Keegan had neither. 8. Ms Keegan chose, for personal reasons, not to have any vaccination so did not qualify for any exemption – assuming she was a “worker”. As at the day of the Otaki Races she was totally unvaccinated. That was her entitlement. But it did not entitle her to enter that racecourse – as her guilty plea acknowledges. Consequently, she did not have a “My Vaccine Pass” or any other documentation to authorise her entry. She knew this and had obtained a fake or fraudulent forged pass – which was entered on her cellphone. In answer to a question put to her by the Adjudicative Committee she said that she obtained the fake document from another person about 7 days before the Otaki meeting. Unquestionably her intention was to use it if necessary, of proof of vaccination when none had taken place. 9. After travelling from Stratford on 13 January 2022 with two staff members and two horses, Ms Keegan entered the racecourse at the gate as her “passport” was not sighted there. However, whilst on the racecourse she was approached by the RIB Investigator and asked to show her COVID-19 Vaccination Passport. The Investigator endeavoured to scan the passport using the Ministry of Health pass verifier, but was unable to do so as a “failed” response arose because the passport was invalid. Ms Keegan had earlier endeavoured to deflect the Investigator’s questions by stating that she had earlier that day been able to scan the passport at a takeaway restaurant. But then the enquiries revealed that the “passport” was not able to be scanned. 10. Ms Keegan was then confronted by the Investigator as to this. She then admitted that the passport was false. The Investigator understood from what Ms Keegan said, that she was “opposed to vaccination requirements”, and subsequent NZTR Directives and that she had had pressure placed upon her by others (owners) to attend at racecourses so as to continue to be able to train for them. She then became tearful and apologetic. We record that Ms Keegan now says that she did not assert that she was “opposed to vaccinations” but rather that her decision not to be vaccinated arose because of personal concerns about possible alleged health side effects that might impact on her, so she would not submit to such procedure. 11. The presentation of the fake passport was a “Serious Racing Offence”. 12. Ms Keegan has had a long involvement with thoroughbred racing with no previous breaches of the Rules of Racing. She has held a Trainer’s Licence for 14 years. Submissions as to Penalty The Informant’s Submissions 13. Counsel contended that this offending was serious involving planned and deliberate dishonest actions to flout the NZTR Mandatory Directive. It was more than trying to enter a racecourse without having the passport, but actively obtaining and using a fake in order to deceive Racing Club Officials, authorities and the RIB. She obtained and used it and intended to later use if she had not been caught, a document to which she was not entitled. 14. Counsel acknowledged that there is no jurisdiction of the NZTR and RIB to “police” non racing matters outside the NZTR Rules (which of course is correct) but contended that the properly issued Directive was to enable race meetings to take place and to promote the safety and welfare of all who go onto racecourses to participate in the racing profession (jockeys, trainers, owners, strappers, staff). 15. Counsel referred to some other cases within this framework in Australia and Ireland where very substantial fines and/or suspensions have been handed down. He referred to two other cases in New Zealand where penalties were imposed for what was said to be “breaches of COVID-19 “protocols”, and offences against Rule 802(1)(a). These attracted fines of $2,400 (RIB v Hewetson) and $2,700 (RIB v Harvey). They involved somewhat different circumstances to the present, being only the unauthorised crossing of domestic territorial boundary restrictions then temporarily in place. Counsel contended that they did not fall into a different category. 16. Counsel for the RIB referred us to two cases where forged documents were obtained, and used, to seek an advantage by thwarting Stipendiary Stewards in their enquiries into wrongdoing. They were RIU v Cameron (18.12.07) and RIU v Scott (22.2.05). In both cases orders for disqualification (4 and 6 months) and not just suspension, followed. There a jockey and a trainer presented altered (forged) documents in order to deceive. In Mr Cameron’s case, the Committee said: “the production of a document…. for the purpose of obtaining some pecuniary advantage or avoiding some penalty that might otherwise be imposed, could lead to the charge of forgery …. or fraudulently using a document for the purposes of obtaining an advantage”. 17. That is, such behaviour is the offence of “uttering” (using) a forged document under the Crimes Act 1961. 18. Counsel for the RIB submitted that because it was a Serious Racing Offence, the Adjudicative Committee “ought to give serious consideration to a period of suspension or disqualification”. He contended that if that did not follow a substantial fine from a starting point of $6,000, with a discount for Ms Keegan’s good record, to a fine of something between $4,800 and $5,400. Submissions of Counsel for Ms Keegan 19. We received comprehensive and able submissions from Mr Wano. They can be distilled, or summarised as follows. The decisions – or outcomes – in the Hewetson and Harvey cases, were analogue to the present offence, and resulted only in fines, so that – at most only a modest fine was necessary in this case. She genuinely believed she had health reasons for not being vaccinated. Ms Keegan made an error of judgment arising out of stress, mental or emotional pressures. She is remorseful and regrets her error of judgment. She has an unblemished history with a successful business and strong support of her owners and others in the profession. She has suffered from adverse publicity attracting blame upon her. Any restriction of her ability to act as a Licensed Trainer will impact adversely upon her owners, staff and business. She thought that she had until 17 January 2022 to produce a double vaccination passport. Outcome 20. We first deal with the last assertion as to her claimed belief. We reject it is a later manufactured or created that belief could not have existed at the time nor did it exist. She knew of the terms of the Directive and must have known that she could not fall into any transitory exemption. Indeed that required at least to have vaccination by 13 December 2021 was something she did not meet. She was determined not to do so. Any such (now) claimed belief cannot stand with the action of securing and using the fake passport. The Investigator was not told of that claim, because it could not have existed. And she pleaded guilty to what she did – that is go onto the racecourse and present the fake passport as alleged. Her claim now defies commonsense when viewed against the clear facts. 21. Where a crucial document has been falsified and presented (used or “uttered”) to achieve an advantage and intended to breach the Rules of Racing and to deceive those charged with administering the Rules, such behaviour clearly falls into the category of serious misconduct. 22. Ms Keegan, as with all Trainers, enjoys the privilege of a Trainer’s Licence. With that privilege goes the duty to comply with the Rules of the profession. Those who wish to participate in the profession/code are required to adhere to and comply with the Rules. If they do not wish to do so that is their choice but they cannot expect to have the privilege of participating in the profession. Ms Keegan has always adhered to the Rules until now which is to her credit. But as a licence holder she chose to deliberately, not mistakenly, breach a Rule so as to commit a “serious racing offence”. Whatever reason may exist for her personal belief or concern – and she is quite entitled to hold any beliefs she has – that belief cannot justify her deliberate and conscious actions. She did not have any exemption, medical or otherwise. 23. Counsel for the Informant has referred to remarks of the Appeal Tribunal in RIU v Lawson – which are well known for this Adjudicative Committee – as to some criteria to consider, where appropriate, in the “sentencing” process. These include: The need to punish a deliberate transgression of the Rules of Racing and to mark Tribunal’s condemnation of such behaviour. The need to protect the profession and the public, and to promote confidence in the integrity of the profession. To deter not only the offender, but others in the profession who might be tempted to breach the Rule. 24. To these we add that there is a vital consideration in this case, that is that Racing only has been able to take place, in some form, if Government conditions are met and honoured by participants. Any betrayal of the NZTR requirements which is manifestly damaging the whole industry is especially egregious 25. There were some aggravating features accompanying Ms Keegan’s breach of this Rule. They include: Her obtaining of the fake passport intending to use it so as to deceive others in the code. The actual fraudulent use of it on 13 January 2022 to secure for her a fraudulent advantage. Her initial attempts to deflect the inquiries of the Investigator, where it was not a mistake or error of judgment. She admitted to the Adjudicative Committee’s question that she had attended the race meeting at Awapuni and New Plymouth on 26 and 27 December 2021 (when the Directive was in force) and although she did not then have the fake passport, those actions also breached the Rule, but naturally she was not charge with this. 26. There is balanced against those features, strong mitigating factors for which credit is to be extended to Ms Keegan. These include: Her unblemished record of compliance with the Rules. Her lengthy involvement in the profession/sport. Her reputation as to past honesty. Impressive character references from many in the profession (we received five of these). Her personal circumstances. The opprobrium (public criticism) from media comment – although this will inevitably usually follow where any defendant is before a Court or disciplinary Tribunals. 27. A guilty plea and expression of remorse is not always to be regarded as requiring a discount in sentencing, as it will all depend on many circumstances. There was no prospect of defending the charge and, as commented on by the Supreme Court in Hessell v R (SC (02)/2009), “Remorse is not necessarily shown by simply pleading guilty. Sentencing Judges are very much aware that remorse may well be no more than self pity of an accused for his or her predicament and will properly be skeptical about unsubstantial claims that an offender is genuinely remorseful. But a proper and robust evaluation of the circumstances may demonstrate a defendant’s remorse.” 28. In this case any attempt to defend would have been futile. Ms Keegan’s tearful response to the Investigator when eventually confronted, may have been genuine contrition or sorrow, but may well have been anguish that her fraud had been unveiled. Having made that observation, the Adjudicative Committee still incorporates into the discounting mitigating percentage, some consideration of her now expressed remorse. Conclusion 29. We gave anxious consideration as to whether, as Mr Wano argued, this offence could be dealt with by a modest monetary penalty. But in the end we had to conclude that a Serious Racing Offence such as this requires a stern sanction. We do not think disqualification is necessary in this case. But the interests of the profession of Racing and its continued protection, together with the need to deter other Licencees from ignoring NZTR Directives and policy, and employing a fraudulent practice, requires an order for suspension. The community and all who are licensed to participate in Racing should know that such behaviour cannot be minimised nor will it be tolerated. A period of suspension plus a fine is necessary. 30. In fixing a suspension we take as a starting point a term of 5 months suspension. We allow a concession of 20% (1 month) to reflect mitigating features. A fine is considered necessary but moderated from the $6,000 sought by Counsel for the RIB, because of the suspension order, and adopt a starting point at $4,000 with a concession allowance of 25% so as to fix the fine as $3,000. 31. The RIB do not seek an order for contribution to its costs. The Adjudicative Committee of the RIB has incurred significant expense in dealing with the Information. It is proper that Ms Keegan be ordered to pay some contribution to these costs. 32. We defer the commencement of the suspension for 2 weeks to enable Ms Keegan, if she chooses, to make any arrangement for another with a Trainer’s Licence to take over training her horses. We have also referred her and Counsel to Rule 1106(1)(a) of the Rules of Racing. 33. Accordingly, we order that: (a) Ms Keegan’s Trainer’s Licence is suspended for 4 months commencing at 5pm on 25 February 2022 and to conclude at 5pm on 25 June 2022. (b) Ms Keegan is fined $3,000. (c) Ms Keegan is to pay $750 costs to the RIB Adjudicative Committee as a contribution to expenses incurred. Hon J W Gendall QC (Chair) Decision Date: 16/02/2022 Publish Date: 16/02/2022

Is it on a warning? This field isn't even a Grp 3.

But 10 horse fields or less are not optimal for turnover.

Quite a few Kiwis going around.

A Slow 9 on raceday. The fields have been trashed by scratchings. 46 scratchings in total.

The Avondale Guineas will be a good guide to La Crique's path to a Grp 1.

Top weight 60kg.....11 horses out of 14 carrying 52kg! The average Rating for the Cup is 75. I thought the Taranaki Grp 3 field was week but this for a Grp 2?

The rider of the horse needs some education in my opinion. I think Todd was as frustrated with her as much as the horse. You can hear and see that she doesn't follow Todd's instructions immediately and she doesn't give her horse much reward when it does OK nor give it much confidence or drive it towards the water. I gather from reading the other Facebook posts that it was a long day and this episode was at the end of it. I looked up the original post of the clipped video from the rider. The Eventing crowd generally tore her a new one! That lead to the posting of more video's from the day. The following is a longer video of the water jump lesson posted by someone else that was there. The training session was in Scotland, happened some years ago and Todd will not be subject to any RSPCA action due to statute of limitations. If the motivation of the rider was genuinely about horse welfare then she should have made a complaint at the time or at least within 6 months. I doubt it will be an issue for the BHA either. Also under the rules it certainly isn't a Knighthood removal offence.

If you ban the whip and you continue with the current rules regarding the limits to using the reins to drive your horse out - how will you drive your horse out? Harness isn't like the Gallops where you can give the horses a good dig in the ribs with your heels in the absence of a whip. Won't eliminating whips and limiting what you can do with the reins further diminish Harness racing as a wagering option?

So your only reason for banning the whip is the activity of the anti-racing minority? As for the "outrage driven by social media" - as I predicted it has lasted not much more than 48 hours.

Have you heard of making records available to see online? They do it with motor vehicles. As for delaying the payment of the change of ownership fee that seems a false economy given the protection it would give you.