KickintheKods Posted September 18, 2022 Share Posted September 18, 2022 Curious is saddled up and ready to go in the Sense Or Shit Stakes over at Camp Scoop It Up Dog Doodoos. His work leading into the event has been sound, with Saturday morning's trackwork indicating a positive run is likely. JMO of course as who can tell what the head puppy is likely to do to save face. C'mon Cuuuuurious Giddy Up 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 18, 2022 Share Posted September 18, 2022 The Comic Dog does censor. There are numerous posters on moderation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted September 18, 2022 Share Posted September 18, 2022 I don't think moderation is necessarily censorship. However, it is if it is used to prevent posters posting on topics which the moderator has unilaterally decided can't be talked about at that media outlet. But who knows what goes on behind closed doors? I wonder what might have happened had the controversial topic been raised for discussion here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted September 18, 2022 Share Posted September 18, 2022 Lets go for it.......Malcolm Johnstone the great Mal was sued for causing a fall, it finished Mal, he should have hung up his boots a long time prior as his suspension record will never be beaten. The litigator had terrible injuries, I wonder when or if Cory Brown sues for his fall as he will never ride again either......there......it's out there..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KickintheKods Posted September 18, 2022 Author Share Posted September 18, 2022 Hugh Bowman's ride in a race at Rosehill on July 30 2020 was nothing short of madness. How Andrew Atkins survived that is an absolute miracle. He got 6 weeks - should have been 6 years. JMO of course. https://wwos.nine.com.au/news/hugh-bowman-suspended-six-weeks-careless-riding-andrew-adkins-injuries-rosehill-fall/23dbe693-6c33-4165-9e5b-7627435588a7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 18, 2022 Share Posted September 18, 2022 34 minutes ago, curious said: I don't think moderation is necessarily censorship. However, it is if it is used to prevent posters posting on topics which the moderator has unilaterally decided can't be talked about at that media outlet. But who knows what goes on behind closed doors? I wonder what might have happened had the controversial topic been raised for discussion here. Moderation is being used as censorship on other sites. I would have had no problems with the topic being discussed on BOAY. As you have pointed out there are many issues with regard to how the RIB handle things. You know my opinion on that. Yes the issue is sensitive for some as it involves the death of a young man but that shouldn't limit a wide-ranging discussion on what are serious issues. In my opinion the industry is suffering from a lack of robust debate on many issues and it should involve confronting those that are accountable. There are no legal reasons to not have these discussions including the one that has raised the issue of censorship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turny Posted September 18, 2022 Share Posted September 18, 2022 17 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Moderation is being used as censorship on other sites. I would have had no problems with the topic being discussed on BOAY. As you have pointed out there are many issues with regard to how the RIB handle things. You know my opinion on that. Yes the issue is sensitive for some as it involves the death of a young man but that shouldn't limit a wide-ranging discussion on what are serious issues. In my opinion the industry is suffering from a lack of robust debate on many issues and it should involve confronting those that are accountable. There are no legal reasons to not have these discussions including the one that has raised the issue of censorship. Chief, your last sentence is nonsense, if you are referring to RIB. RIB have their hands tied, via Coroner's Act .... it is that simple. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 33 minutes ago, Turny said: Chief, your last sentence is nonsense, if you are referring to RIB. RIB have their hands tied, via Coroner's Act .... it is that simple. I was referring in the first instance to Joe Poster no one else. With regard to the RIB they don't have their hands tied at all in relation to them fulfilling their racing obligations. Or at the very least communicating where they are at. However if you can point us all to the section of the Coroner's Act that ties their hands that would be good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy connolly Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Joe Bloggs said: Lets go for it.......Malcolm Johnstone the great Mal was sued for causing a fall, it finished Mal, he should have hung up his boots a long time prior as his suspension record will never be beaten. The litigator had terrible injuries, I wonder when or if Cory Brown sues for his fall as he will never ride again either......there......it's out there..... Don't think you can litigate against employment related injuries in NZ, you can only sue for negligence. Regarding race incidents, you can apportion blame to anyone or anything but when it's all said and done accidents and injuries will always happen, you're unlucky to be injured and lucky if not. There's as much chance being killed or maimed driving to the races in a car as there is on horseback. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 46 minutes ago, Turny said: Chief, your last sentence is nonsense, if you are referring to RIB. RIB have their hands tied, via Coroner's Act .... it is that simple. BTW the actual current Act as of 25 May 2022 is The Coroners Act 2006. I don't believe Section 74 applies in this case at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 If my research is correct in the case of Ashlee Mundy's death the accident occurred in December 2012. The RIU released their findings early February 2013. The Coroner's Report was published August 2014. Feel free to correct me if you will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turny Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 8 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: If my research is correct in the case of Ashlee Mundy's death the accident occurred in December 2012. The RIU released their findings early February 2013. The Coroner's Report was published August 2014. Feel free to correct me if you will. Your dating on the earlier case is correct. Prior to a formal release of a Coroner's Inquest Report discussions occur and authority given in regards release of information. I do not know but suspect the process was followed here. S74 is absolutely relevant in the current matter, and I suggest has been invoked by Worksafe to the Coroner and RIB on notice ... that is the normal process so as to avoid frustration if investigation. I would be astounded if this were not the case, knowingvery well how Worksafe work 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: BTW the actual current Act as of 25 May 2022 is The Coroners Act 2006. I don't believe Section 74 applies in this case at all. Correct. s74 applies to the Coroner (only) when they conduct an inquest and prevents them making public any evidence gathered during the course of that inquiry. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the RIB or any evidence they may have gathered in the course of their own inquiry. Edited September 19, 2022 by curious 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 5 minutes ago, curious said: Correct. s74 applies to the Coroner (only) when they conduct an inquest and prevents them making public any evidence gathered during the course of that inquiry. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the RIB or any evidence they may have gathered in the course of their own inquiry. That's how I read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 The Coroner/s in NZ are a bloody disgrace anyway, I know from first hand experience, and I'm being kind when I say disgrace!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Centaur Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 The greatest reward a jockey can have is getting the ride on a potential champion at the start of its career. I don't know what Sam Weatherley's role was in the fatal fall but I note that George Simon has got Weatherley on Denby Road which could well do to George Simon what McGinty did to his tutor Keith Haub. Given George's role in racing perhaps not the most appropriate booking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 46 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: That's how I read it. I'm not actually clear why this case would even be referred to the coroner. It's not like there is any question as to the cause of death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 55 minutes ago, curious said: I'm not actually clear why this case would even be referred to the coroner. It's not like there is any question as to the cause of death. I also agree with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turny Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 1 hour ago, curious said: I'm not actually clear why this case would even be referred to the coroner. It's not like there is any question as to the cause of death. All unnatural deaths are referred to the Coroner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turny Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 2 hours ago, Chief Stipe said: That's how I read it. Read S139, peculiarly written Act, with many aspects written back to a primary Section. S74 cannot be read in isolation but it is the S that controls information release 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Turny said: All unnatural deaths are referred to the Coroner Since when and by whom? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 (edited) . Edited September 19, 2022 by curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Turny said: Read S139, peculiarly written Act, with many aspects written back to a primary Section. S74 cannot be read in isolation but it is the S that controls information release s139 also has absolutely nothing to do with the RIB or this case. It applies only to self-inflicted deaths which this clearly was not. Do you just make this stuff up as you go along to suit your agenda? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turny Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 22 minutes ago, curious said: s139 also has absolutely nothing to do with the RIB or this case. It applies only to self-inflicted deaths which this clearly was not. Do you just make this stuff up as you go along to suit your agenda? 139A, no I don't make it up as it happens, trained to interpret Statutes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 19, 2022 Share Posted September 19, 2022 18 minutes ago, Turny said: 139A, no I don't make it up as it happens, trained to interpret Statutes Is that why you got the date of the Act wrong on the other site? I concur with @curious S139 or anything you have referred to DOESN'T stop the RIB from doing their job nor any forum from discussing it. Although you achieved your objective of scaring the Comic Dog into closing down the discussion. Was the RIU in breach of the Act with regard to the Ashlee Mundy case? 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.