The Centaur Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 This is a miscarriage of justice. Wrecking Weirs new business is vindictive and against legal principles. In fact its just laughable how so called intelligent legal ****wits can be so stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 3 Author Share Posted September 3 2 hours ago, The Centaur said: This is a miscarriage of justice. Wrecking Weirs new business is vindictive and against legal principles. In fact its just laughable how so called intelligent legal ****wits can be so stupid. At least Weir's daughter's are primed to take over. I guess they can't ban fireside chats or fatherly advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Centaur Posted yesterday at 03:16 AM Share Posted yesterday at 03:16 AM At last the big guns coming out firing. The VRT (Victoria Tribunal) will get their comeuppance. https://www.racing.com/news/2024-10-17/news-stewards-weir-lodges-supreme-court-appeal 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted yesterday at 04:46 AM Share Posted yesterday at 04:46 AM 1 hour ago, The Centaur said: At last the big guns coming out firing. The VRT (Victoria Tribunal) will get their comeuppance. https://www.racing.com/news/2024-10-17/news-stewards-weir-lodges-supreme-court-appeal Except the big guns here may prove to be the Supreme Court. Time will tell, but I don't see that he has much of a case myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted yesterday at 05:39 AM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:39 AM 53 minutes ago, curious said: Except the big guns here may prove to be the Supreme Court. Time will tell, but I don't see that he has much of a case myself. Not even the double jeopardy argument? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted 23 hours ago Share Posted 23 hours ago I don't see that any double jeopardy exists. The current penalty relates to different charges. You can't commit two separate murders and claim double jeopardy for the second because you've served your time for the first. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Centaur Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago On 3/09/2024 at 5:04 PM, Chief Stipe said: At least Weir's daughter's are primed to take over. I guess they can't ban fireside chats or fatherly advice. Maybe there is a case for all trainers to be in a partnership. If Weir had been in partnership all that could have happened is he departed the partnership. All clients would have stayed in the stable. Thats what happens when a lawyer in partnership is suspended and barred from practising. Why should there be any difference .....oh thats right lawyers are privileged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted 3 hours ago Author Share Posted 3 hours ago 19 hours ago, curious said: I don't see that any double jeopardy exists. The current penalty relates to different charges. You can't commit two separate murders and claim double jeopardy for the second because you've served your time for the first. I disagree. The later charges are essentially the same as the first except in the latter there was "new" evidence. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gammalite Posted 2 hours ago Share Posted 2 hours ago 29 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: I disagree. The later charges are essentially the same as the first except in the latter there was "new" evidence. they're different Chief. The first sentence of four years was for 'Possession' of the jiggers. Seems there must be a rule somewhere , where Licensed Trainers are not allowed them in their possession . I've seen them on farms though , along with electric fences too. 🤔 The 2nd charge is from actually using them said jiggers on 3 horses. (Video evidence is available I believe somehow) . now that is very damning. and how did his accomplices get off so light. That's a much much more serious charge? IMO it is anyway. you've got 'proven deliberate animal cruelty' involved then. way more serious than just having the damn things. as far as 'possession' goes , I could have a cellar full of medieval torture devices. I might be a collector , but should I be charged with anything ? If I went to use them on someone then YES. But what's in my cellar should be my business if I don't. I accept that 'weapons' should be licensed. wonder if crossbows have to licensed? It is interesting what you are allowed to possess. now where's my afternoon stash I wonder 😋 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago (edited) 56 minutes ago, Gammalite said: That's a much much more serious charge? IMO it is anyway. you've got 'proven deliberate animal cruelty' involved then. way more serious than just having the damn things. And punters, owners, jockeys, other trainers and the public image of the industry were all screwed. That's aside from the abhorrent cruelty involved. His penalty for these charges seems mild and has been substantially mitigated from the 10 years sought by stewards. Is he at risk here of the penalty being increased by the court? The very fact that he is challenging it makes it appear to me that he hasn't learned much. Edited 1 hour ago by curious 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.