RIU vs Turnwald Appeal

[Chief Stipe]

Any news on the outcome of the sentencing appeal?

[Yankiwi]

3 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Any news on the outcome of the sentencing appeal?

The appeal was heard on 26 May & the decision was reserved (and now seemingly forgotten).

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/greyhound-trainer-whose-dog-tested-positive-meth-says-life-has-been-living-nightmare-ever-since

You'd think the JCA would release the outcome before they are dissolved.

[Chief Stipe]

Well at least Turnwald hired a decent lawyer.  

I fail to see how the RIU can change their mind and seek a higher penalty than what they originally asked for. 

[Chaser]

3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Any news on the outcome of the sentencing appeal?

Any news on the whereabouts of this dog and how it's progressing?

[Taupiri Wonder]

1 hour ago, Chaser said:

Any news on the whereabouts of this dog and how it's progressing?

Being a rising 4yo Bitch,I would not be surprised that she has been retired!

[Chaser]

45 minutes ago, Taupiri Wonder said:

Being a rising 4yo Bitch,I would not be surprised that she has been retired!

Thanks for that! I may of thought with only 46 starts and a 30.07 not so long ago at Addington she may of continued racing as Mr. Goodier is having success with other dogs from the same kennel. I Will look forward to seeing her on greatmates.  

[Yankiwi]

8 hours ago, Chaser said:

Any news on the whereabouts of this dog and how it's progressing?

On 08 March, her final race-day, connections initiated the process of determining her ultimate fate.

 

 

6 hours ago, Chaser said:

 I Will look forward to seeing her on greatmates.  

You may what to keep an eye on the methadone clinics as well. Zipping Sarah was proven to have had a problem with drugs. Since her guilt was by association, there might be others in attendance at the clinics that can inform you of how she is doing in her retirement. 

[Chief Stipe]

17 hours ago, Yankiwi said:

You'd think the JCA would release the outcome before they are dissolved.

Perhaps they are counting on a positive result and then can laud the victory as part of the new organisation.

Or the anticipate a negative result and can then assign it to the old regime.

[Yankiwi]

Appeal - Reserved Decision dated 9 July 2021 - Angela Turnwald - RIB (racingintegrityboard.org.nz)

[Chief Stipe]

Unjust and abuse of process.  But it highlights the incompetence of the RIU who only sought 14 months initially.

[88]  This is an Appeal against Penalty by the RIU.  On the Appeal the RIU submitted the end penalty should be 2 years disqualification however before the Judicial Committee the RIU submitted an end penalty of 14 months disqualification of the Respondent was appropriate.  This is an unusual situation.

 No point spending money taking it to a higher court as the RIU has endless sources of that.

She certainly didn't get 5 years or life like some were baying for.

[BitofaLegend]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

Unjust and abuse of process.  But it highlights the incompetence of the RIU who only sought 14 months initially.

[88]  This is an Appeal against Penalty by the RIU.  On the Appeal the RIU submitted the end penalty should be 2 years disqualification however before the Judicial Committee the RIU submitted an end penalty of 14 months disqualification of the Respondent was appropriate.  This is an unusual situation.

 No point spending money taking it to a higher court as the RIU has endless sources of that.

She certainly didn't get 5 years or life like some were baying for.

Got what she deserved penalty wise...

The people who pressed the original charges were clearly incompetent but its more in line with other cases.

As i said previously, the way grnz rules read, the source of contamination is irrelevant to the actual charges riu are presenting.

Edited July 12, 2021 by BitofaLegend

[Chief Stipe]

2 minutes ago, BitofaLegend said:

As i said previously, the way grnz rules read, the source of contamination is irrelevant to the actual charges riu are presenting.

Which is not how previous cases have been dealt with.

GRNZ needs to up its game in pre and post race access to the greyhounds and if I was a Trainer travelling any distance I wouldn't let the dog out of my sight and let know one else near it.

At the end of the day Turnwald has carried the penalty for something that she didn't do and there was no proof that she did.

[Yankiwi]

3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

At the end of the day Turnwald has carried the penalty for something that she didn't do and there was no proof that she did.

At the real end of the day, Turnwald agreed to be bound by the GRNZ rules by being an LP. With Zipping Sarah, she broke those rules by presenting the dog with Meth in its system.

Now after the appeal, she has been penalized in a similar fashion to recent previous Meth cases from within the code.

[Chaser]

6 hours ago, Yankiwi said:

At the real end of the day, Turnwald agreed to be bound by the GRNZ rules by being an LP. With Zipping Sarah, she broke those rules by presenting the dog with Meth in its system.

Now after the appeal, she has been penalized in a similar fashion to recent previous Meth cases from within the code.

At the end of the day the biggest name dragged through the mud here with no voice is ZIPPING SARAH! She has had her career quashed, her possible breeding career extinguished and the trainer and handler fights for their own name. Never mind the dog who was completely innocent! 

[Goldstar]

9 hours ago, Yankiwi said:

At the real end of the day, Turnwald agreed to be bound by the GRNZ rules by being an LP. With Zipping Sarah, she broke those rules by presenting the dog with Meth in its system.

Now after the appeal, she has been penalized in a similar fashion to recent previous Meth cases from within the code.

My problem here is they can’t prove where or when the contamination happened. Sharrock had his swabs dismissed because a person on meth urinated in a horse box he used. Who can say that dog didn’t touch a area where a meth user had been. In   Both situations the trainers are charged with presenting a dog/ horse to race with meth in its system. One gets off. Other gets 18 months and probably out of racing for ever. 

[Chaser]

4 minutes ago, Goldstar said:

My problem here is they can’t prove where or when the contamination happened. Sharrock had his swabs dismissed because a person on meth urinated in a horse box he used. Who can say that dog didn’t touch a area where a meth user had been. In   Both situations the trainers are charged with presenting a dog/ horse to race with meth in its system. One gets off. Other gets 18 months and probably out of racing for ever. 

Well that we will never know if the dog did touch it but it does say the readings were high! I'm unsure of Sharrocks readings or the circumstances.  Any one who gives/provides an animal  with meth in their system should  NOT be allowed to own or train animals in my opinion. It's greed and desperation. 

[Goldstar]

13 minutes ago, Chaser said:

Well that we will never know if the dog did touch it but it does say the readings were high! I'm unsure of Sharrocks readings or the circumstances.  Any one who gives/provides an animal  with meth in their system should  NOT be allowed to own or train animals in my opinion. It's greed and desperation. 

So sharrock should be gone too 

[Chaser]

3 minutes ago, Goldstar said:

So sharrock should be gone too 

But he's not. 

[Chief Stipe]

17 hours ago, Chaser said:

Any one who gives/provides an animal  with meth in their system should  NOT be allowed to own or train animals in my opinion. It's greed and desperation.

But there is no evidence that Turnwald or her partner administered the prohibited substance to the dog.  They both returned negative tests.  However the levels suggest someone did give the dog the substance.

With Sharrock they found the source of the drug and it was environmental contamination and the levels were low.  The horse was disqualified and the owners lost a considerable amount of stakes.

Expect more cases involving environmental contamination where no negligence or malfeasance by the Trainer has occurred.  Is that fair or just?  Especially if the detected levels are neither therapeutic nor performance enhancing.

[BitofaLegend]

30 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

But there is no evidence that Turnwald or her partner administered the prohibited substance to the dog.  They both returned negative tests.  However the levels suggest someone did give the dog the substance.

With Sharrock they found the source of the drug and it was environmental contamination and the levels were low.  The horse was disqualified and the owners lost a considerable amount of stakes.

Expect more cases involving environmental contamination where no negligence or malfeasance by the Trainer has occurred.  Is that fair or just?  Especially if the detected levels are neither therapeutic nor performance enhancing.

Again, the way the rules are written, the trainer takes responsibility regardless of contamination in greyhound racing. 

[Chief Stipe]

1 minute ago, BitofaLegend said:

Again, the way the rules are written, the trainer takes responsibility regardless of contamination in greyhound racing. 

Again, in my opinion the rules need to be reviewed and rewritten.  Also the industry vet needs to give some guidance on environmental contamination and positives that have levels that are neither therapeutic nor performance enhancing.

The only alternative is to have all three codes racing in closed systems aka Hong Kong Jockey Club.

[Yankiwi]

2 hours ago, BitofaLegend said:

Again, the way the rules are written, the trainer takes responsibility regardless of contamination in greyhound racing. 

Exactly.

By acquiring a GRNZ training license, you agree to adhere to the rules as they are written.

Do I believe Angela was behind this in any way, no.

Do I believe the same result would have happened if Angela was the person to travel south with the dogs, probably not.

But as being the trainer of record, it was her choice on who traveled with the dogs on the day. It is her choice who is involved in the training of the dogs in her kennel. Angela has made the kennels bed by putting it solely under her name, so to say, so now Angela is the one lying in it.

[Chaser]

Certainly many if, buts or maybes here. 

I did read up about the Sharrock case and his history, there was/is no history to read accept being a well respected trainer and horseman. Alan is a true advocate to the horse industry in my opinion and has been for many years.

On the other hand, Turnwalds' partner who was in care of the dog, has previous charges from the greyhound industry through changing dogs racing records and had been banned as a trainer for doing so.

No question the dog had been given the substance at some point, by who? - looks like too many avenues to go down. It was always my understanding that if a dog was a swab dog after a race, it shouldn't be touched by anyone other than the HANDLER at the conclusion of the race. So there is negligence here also?

[Chaser]

4 minutes ago, Yankiwi said:

Exactly.

By acquiring a GRNZ training license, you agree to adhere to the rules as they are written.

Do I believe Angela was behind this in any way, no.

Do I believe the same result would have happened if Angela was the person to travel south with the dogs, probably not.

But as being the trainer of record, it was her choice on who traveled with the dogs on the day. It is her choice who is involved in the training of the dogs in her kennel. Angela has made the kennels bed by putting it solely under her name, so to say, so now Angela is the one lying in it.

Couldn't agree with you more here Yankiwi! Very well said.

I find it very sad on Angela's behalf and also the dog who has been retired after one race since the positive test.

[Chief Stipe]

13 hours ago, Yankiwi said:

But as being the trainer of record, it was her choice on who traveled with the dogs on the day. It is her choice who is involved in the training of the dogs in her kennel. Angela has made the kennels bed by putting it solely under her name, so to say, so now Angela is the one lying in it.

Again the question at the end of this saga was not that the dog wouldn't be disqualified nor that the Trainer would receive a penalty and or a fine but what the Trainer penalty should be.

The lesson if any, for everyone, is you can now never ever let your dog out of your sight at all times because is someone knobbles your dog then it is you that will carry the can.  Now is GRNZ and the RIU in association with the Police and MPI pursuing an investigation into who DID administer the illegal substance?  Have the RIU, the Police and MPI started phone tapping anyone?