Rangatira Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 32 minutes ago, Taku Umanga said: Perhaps HRNZ should take note of X and Y refusing the request of the racing inspector and refuse to re-licence them in the new season since they will clearly be signing a false declaration that they will comply with the rules. what makes you think it was a false declaration at the time they signed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 31 minutes ago, Taku Umanga said: How are the RIU supposed to do their job if they do not have tools to enforce the rules - hand it over to an authority that has the access to those tools .... seems common sense to me. Are you saying that the RIU should just shrug their shoulders when licence holders refuse to follow the rules they accepted at the time they were licenced? Perhaps HRNZ should take note of X and Y refusing the request of the racing inspector and refuse to re-licence them in the new season since they will clearly be signing a false declaration that they will comply with the rules. That's rubbish Taku. IF the RIU don't have the tools then why the hell do we bother spending millions on them each year? Geez it is apparent that they have huge gaps in their drug testing, they turn a blind eye or an ignorant eye to some of the shenanigans in the dogs, they are uneven in their penalties in galloping and on and on and on. This disclosure to the RIU process highlights another grey area in the rules. If the RIU shuffled the case off to the Police why can't they get the information from the prosecution? Or are they not a party to the prosecution? No they are using a loose interpretation of a grey rule to get the information off the defendants! Information that has yet to be fully tested in court. Not that they probably don't already have the information given the close ties between RIU employees and the Police. They just need to get it formally. Frankly I don't have much confidence in the Police understanding race fixing and certainly the RIU don't seem to have any idea. Watch this space if the prosecution fails in the higher court. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taku Umanga Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 30 minutes ago, Rangatira said: what makes you think it was a false declaration at the time they signed? I'm saying it will be next time they are required to sign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taku Umanga Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 27 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: That's rubbish Taku. IF the RIU don't have the tools then why the hell do we bother spending millions on them each year? Geez it is apparent that they have huge gaps in their drug testing, they turn a blind eye or an ignorant eye to some of the shenanigans in the dogs, they are uneven in their penalties in galloping and on and on and on. This disclosure to the RIU process highlights another grey area in the rules. If the RIU shuffled the case off to the Police why can't they get the information from the prosecution? Or are they not a party to the prosecution? No they are using a loose interpretation of a grey rule to get the information off the defendants! Information that has yet to be fully tested in court. Not that they probably don't already have the information given the close ties between RIU employees and the Police. They just need to get it formally. Frankly I don't have much confidence in the Police understanding race fixing and certainly the RIU don't seem to have any idea. Watch this space if the prosecution fails in the higher court. I think we will all be watching to see what transpires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taku Umanga Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Ran out of ime to edit ...... 45 minutes ago, Rangatira said: what makes you think it was a false declaration at the time they signed? 13 minutes ago, Taku Umanga said: I'm saying it will be next time they are required to sign Ran out of time to edit ..... I'm saying that next time they are required to sign a licence application that perhaps HRNZ should consider that since they have clearly failed to comply with a rule (supplying the information requested - there is no denying that they wouldn't) in this instance, what faith should be put in any declaration to comply in the future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Taku Umanga said: Ran out of ime to edit ...... Ran out of time to edit ..... I'm saying that next time they are required to sign a licence application that perhaps HRNZ should consider that since they have clearly failed to comply with a rule (supplying the information requested - there is no denying that they wouldn't) in this instance, what faith should be put in any declaration to comply in the future? You are over simplifying a complex situation. X and Y are facing serious criminal charges. They are paying huge sums to legal representatives from whom they will be taking advice. Sadly they are no longer completely in control of their destiny. If HRNZ did do as you suggest they should then HRNZ would face litigation. It would be a bit like someone who has been banned for a year for breaking the rules and then denying them a license because you assume that since they have done something before they will do it again. If that was the case we wouldn't have the All Stars stable racing would we? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the galah Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, Chief Stipe said: I would say because it will possibly hamper the accused right to a fair trial. The RIU with all due respect is somewhat sieve like with information. Although in saying that one of x or y's helpers isn't that good at keeping quiet. Proceeding down the JCA route BEFORE the higher court trial raises some interesting justice questions. If the JCA rules that they should have their licenses suspended or even revoked then that sends a message of "Guilty as Charged" to a wide audience. So the defendants will have to fight cases in TWO jurisdictions. What happens if the JCA find them guilty and the High Court doesn't? That would open up some interesting damages claims. The fact is the RIU could not obtain sufficient information by themselves even with all the resources available to them to make a case stick in the JCA even with its lower threshold of proof. Go figure? In my opinion the RIU has handed it over to a higher court and that is where it should be adjudicated. Your first paragraph just illustrates why this matter was always best handed on to the police. Do you really think the RIU could have conducted a thorough investigation without it being undermined. Have you forgotten the blue magic scandal where several trainers were tipped off on upcoming police raids by racing officials? You say 'the RIU is sieve like with information' then argue they should have conducted an investigation that required utmost secrecy over a long period of time while evidence/information was gathered. Its a contradiction. Your second paragraph is exactly what other sporting bodies do. Lots of examples.The Irish rugby players stood down for some time last year when they were charged with offences like rape which they were eventually acquitted on,the nz rugby league captain stood down for drug offences last year the day after he was charged, the many overseas cricket players immediately stood down when news of police investigations into match fixing surface. All other sports do it, its what sports do to protect their integrity. They all try to work with the police and the defendants to gain a balanced view so as they can make informed decisions as to what action is necessary to protect their sports reputation. Your 3rd paragraph seems to conclude that there may be a damages claim if racing authorities find guilt and the courts don"t. Then you quite rightly point out the 2 very different burden of proof thresholds that courts and racing have, possibly nullifying your initial inference. I think you have pointed out flaws in your own argument, which I supposed means your presenting both sides. The RIU are being criticized by many on here for not gathering the evidence/information themselves while at the same time being criticized for trying to gather evidence from other sources who have the evidence as a result of their investigations. I just don't get the logic of those making that argument. I've never been a great fan of the RIU, but i'm consistent, and I recognize when they are trying to uphold integrity and honesty. So I disagree with you for the above reasons. Edited February 20, 2019 by the galah 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blossom lady Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 40 minutes ago, the galah said: Your first paragraph just illustrates why this matter was always best handed on to the police. Do you really think the RIU could have conducted a thorough investigation without it being undermined. Have you forgotten the blue magic scandal where several trainers were tipped off on upcoming police raids by racing officials? You say 'the RIU is sieve like with information' then argue they should have conducted an investigation that required utmost secrecy over a long period of time while evidence/information was gathered. Its a contradiction. Your second paragraph is exactly what other sporting bodies do. Lots of examples.The Irish rugby players stood down for some time last year when they were charged with offences like rape which they were eventually acquitted on,the nz rugby league captain stood down for drug offences last year the day after he was charged, the many overseas cricket players immediately stood down when news of police investigations into match fixing surface. All other sports do it, its what sports do to protect their integrity. They all try to work with the police and the defendants to gain a balanced view so as they can make informed decisions as to what action is necessary to protect their sports reputation. Your 3rd paragraph seems to conclude that there may be a damages claim if racing authorities find guilt and the courts don"t. Then you quite rightly point out the 2 very different burden of proof thresholds that courts and racing have, possibly nullifying your initial inference. I think you have pointed out flaws in your own argument, which I supposed means your presenting both sides. The RIU are being criticized by many on here for not gathering the evidence/information themselves while at the same time being criticized for trying to gather evidence from other sources who have the evidence as a result of their investigations. I just don't get the logic of those making that argument. I've never been a great fan of the RIU, but i'm consistent, and I recognize when they are trying to uphold integrity and honesty. So I disagree with you for the above reasons. Stop it. You are speaking too much common sense. Couldn't have said it any better myself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newmarket Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Good post The Galah, Seems many want to convince themselve that nothing will come out of all this. Many will get off with a slap on the hand, mainly the drug offences. Some will be charged being part of a group that knew what was going on, but probably wont effect their lives too much. Then, there are those involved. Lets face it, their careers will be effected, and rightly so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 all court hearings put off too late may I'm been told was meant to be end of this month Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, hunterthepunter said: all court hearings put off too late may I'm been told was meant to be end of this month wont be at the request of the defendants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Rangatira said: wont be at the request of the defendants true I think every one wants it dun and dusted 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) Lack of evidence? Cases against defendants are extremely weak! Legal system in NZ is pathetic, is it any wonder our courts are so chocker when it takes so long to hear cases! If there is evidence against anyone have the hearing, and get on with life! Barrister are the ones who benefit as they just keep charging! Tick, Tick Tick Edited March 20, 2019 by Brodie 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) Ka Ching - Shania Twain but given its show a lot of love month on here and i feel compelled to include old brodie Money - Pink Floyd HD (Studio Version) Edited March 20, 2019 by Rangatira 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flagship uberalles Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 59 minutes ago, Rangatira said: Ka Ching - Shania Twain but given its show a lot of love month on here and i feel compelled to include old brodie Money - Pink Floyd HD (Studio Version) Now is that hippie the real pic of you ranga? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, Flagship uberalles said: Now is that hippie the real pic of you ranga? oh hell no someone sent it to me suggesting it was of a restricted harness punter no bites so far 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 4 hours ago, Rangatira said: oh hell no someone sent it to me suggesting it was of a restricted harness punter no bites so far your mean to the brodster lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 12 hours ago, hunterthepunter said: your mean to the brodster lol do you think it resembles "the brodster" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flagship uberalles Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 50 minutes ago, Rangatira said: do you think it resembles "the brodster" ? Only after dark 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newmarket Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Whats happening to Inca? Those involved are still winning races. Sort it out, one way or the other. If they are guilty, shouldnt be on track. If they are not guilty, so be it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 28 minutes ago, Newmarket said: Whats happening to Inca? Those involved are still winning races. Sort it out, one way or the other. If they are guilty, shouldnt be on track. If they are not guilty, so be it. june is next appearance date long way off resolution unless charges are dismissed then 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterthepunter Posted April 22, 2019 Author Share Posted April 22, 2019 26 minutes ago, Rangatira said: june is next appearance date long way off resolution unless charges are dismissed then was meant to be end may so June now??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 31 minutes ago, hunterthepunter said: was meant to be end may so June now??? lets go with may then dizzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongOwner Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Very poor performance RIU and NZPolice - the overzealous behaviour and confidence shown day 1 was unjustified . Surely the matter should of been before the courts as the respondents behaviour was it was black and white closed case . This is not fair to all involved and if they ask for delays then surely the case is weak and they should think about treated people and the cases properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Sunrise Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 13 minutes ago, LongOwner said: if they ask for delays They = Police? 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.