According to an article in today's edition of The Globe & Mail, an Ontario Divisional Court has ruled that an Ontario Racing Commission panel made
an unreasonable decision during the erythropoietin (EPO) appeal of horseman Pat Hudon in March, 2007.
The ORC had initially given Hudon a $100,000 fine and 10-year suspension after he admitted to purchasing and using EPO in racehorses he trained.
Beverley Smith's story in The Globe & Mail explains that, according to ORC documents released yesterday, the ORC administration was the body that asked for the judicial review of its own panel's decision.
John Blakney, ORC executive director, stated, "It's something that we don't usually do."
To read the entire article, click here.
(With files from The Globe & Mail)
Just a little note of
Just a little note of interest...Hudon admitted to using this substance so why hasn't WEG suspended him from racing there....they say this is what they want to do...clean up the inegrity...how do the bettors feel about betting a Hudon horse and better yet how do they feel about betting against a Hudon horse...chances are they will not bet the race!!!
does not everyone forget
does not everyone forget that Hudon used these drugs on his horses! this guy is guilty of an offence regardless of all the legal nonsense talk that has been said! he shoulds be baanned from racing, PERIOD! obviously the betting public has been dupped by a dishonest horseman, SHAME!
If the ORC would forget the
If the ORC would forget the nepotism and hire the most qualified people and not give their relatives positions they are not qualified to do they would be a lot better off. In the long run hiring unqualified people can create a disaster. The judges are enforcing a provincial statute and the rules of collection evidence and statements have to be followed. Just writing an exam is not enough training. Putting a new judge with some of the old school judges to learn their bad habits just wont cut it anymore. They need a lot more training.
Let's face it this guy
Let's face it this guy admitted to buying and giving his horses this illegal drug.What a joke, everytime i see this person driving and training horses in Ont. it makes me sick. Giving this drug to innocent horses that when put on a set of cross ties can't defend themselves is pathetic and weak. I hope that one day the ORC and other governing bodies WILL GET IT RIGHT and nail all these cheaters in this great sport i love.
Mr Hudon should thank his
Mr Hudon should thank his lucky stars. I was a trainer for 20 years with no offenses untill a bottle of pain killer was found in my shared tack roon. I recieved a full 6 month suspension which ultimatley put me out of the business.
Anyone involved in an
Anyone involved in an investigation by the ORC, once they have been identified should without any question or doubt be informed of the following: A: Are they being considered as a suspect in an investigation or B: Are they a witness in the investigation. If they are being considered under A., then they should be provided the Right, "Right" to contact legal assistance, prior to any statements being made. It is only due process. If they are a witness then they should be granted those rights as well, which may include confidentiality of information. I doubt it very much if any materials or information would be admitted in a Criminal Court without the individual being read and or provided their Rights.
If I was pat I would
If I was pat I would seriously think of sueing the orc for defemation of character whos to say pat was using "epo" before there was testing for it or before it was even known by the orc many trainers used baking soda before testing come out If i said i have used soda on my horses should i be suspended i think not inocent until proven guilty,at least i think thats how it works in canada.Canadians have the right to remain silent and the right to council when being charged or interviewed maybe someone should tell the orc this.
I beleive that the ORC
I beleive that the ORC should be disbanned
Perhaps the ORC will give
Perhaps the ORC will give consideration to staffing the Administrative Tribunal with a vet, a lawyer and a horseman. In addition, that a firm bridge be built with the Humane Society to enable there own adjudication of applicable offences. This would be for the purpose of enabling the Humane Society to determine whether criminal charges should be levied for cruelty, a criminal offence. Studies have been done on the affects of EPO
long after the cessation of use, specifically in mares. There is a high frequency of miscarriages and deformed weanlings. I consider the use of EPO to be cruel, I consider the use of any product that enhances 'natural' performance as cruel ..provide the names of those offenders to the Humane Society for their handling. Hudon got lucky, that's all, a technicality. There might still masking agents being successfully employed.
I worked for the Children's
I worked for the Children's Aid Society for 25+ years. Like the ORC, the CAS is responsible for investigating allegations of 'misconduct' in accordance with the Child & Family Services Act (CFSA).
CAS investigators make 'judgments' regarding the abuse or neglect of children - and they act of those judgments. They (in consult with their Supervisors) regularly impact on the 'rights' of caregivers - and often remove children from their parents' care.
THE CAS IS MANDATED BY THE CFSA - AND JUDGES ARE HOUSED IN THE FAMILY COURT. JUDGES CAN (AND REGULARLY DO) OVERTURN AND/OR SIGNIFICANTLY MODIFY CAS DECISIONS. THE RULINGS OF THE JUDGES IN FAMILY COURT 'MOLD' THE INTERPRETATION OF THE CFSA - AND THE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF BOTH PARENTS, AND THE VARIOUS CAS's IN ONTARIO.
What IF the CAS 'governed itself' ... IF the rulings against parents were decided by 'judges' within the CAS itself ... IF 'appeals' were heard within CAS walls as well ... AND (adding salt to an open wound) IF an Appeal to a "Real Judge" was successful, the CAS could IGNORE that Court's findings.
"There is no factual basis for the majority's conclusion that the commission acted without integrity" was the ruling of a JUDGE ... further to a JUDICIAL REVIEW.
Shouldn't ALL charges against horsepeople (parents) be heard in REAL Courts ... by REAL Judges? Consistent, unbiased rulings would define the rights and responsibilities of both the Participants in Horse Racing ... and the Investigators licensed under the Racing Commission Act, 2000.
Props to the ORC for
Props to the ORC for recognizing it may have made an error and sought clarification. They are humans, and humans do make errors.
However, what is most distressing, is it appears that the ORC has been making rulings without an understanding of, '... the latitudes of investigations that regulatory bodies are allowed to do', as noted by John Blakney in the Globe article.
It would seem to be logical to have such an understanding before making a ruling...??
I once applied to be a
I once applied to be a judge, wrote the exam and passed. Had an interview and was not hired. Just for background. I have two University degrees in Human behaviour and 20 years experience as a driver,trainer, and owner of Standardbred horses yet I, appearently was not qualified to be a judge. The people they have as judges are not the most qualified. There are others that have more qualifications. The ORC made a feedman a judge yet some with much higher qualifications do not get the appointment. I say appointment as I feel to be a judge in this industry is an honour and the judges should be honourable people.
Start to correct the ORC from the top down.
Thank you
i agree that the orc should
i agree that the orc should be investigated--first the georgian downs qualifier --has anybody heard what happened to the people involved--no-and this is only another example of poor leadership.
In reply to i agree that the orc should by Anonymous (not verified)
I dont know of anyone that
I dont know of anyone that has heard what hapened in this case. It was certainly one of the most flagrent abuses of power that I can recall. The judges involved should have been suspended (without pay).
If they could have taken
If they could have taken action against Hudon they would have by now so clearly they need his confession to be used to move forward. If I was a gambler I think I would leave Hudons horses off the ticket. Maybe he was admitting to a False-Positive? What a joke.
There is a constitution in
There is a constitution in this country and anytime you are questioned you have a right to council and Mr Schendlen didn't make that clear! it was poor police work how he cohersed the statement from Pat telling him he was not to be investigated everything was confidential etc! The bottom line horsemen need to know their rights when dealing with the commission.
Ok Whether people Agree With
Ok Whether people Agree With me on this one or Not I believe that The ORC made a mistake by letting pat Hudon off of these charges. I mean ANYONE that is being interviewed by a Privet Investigator should know that he If I Admitt to using this Substance in my horses I am gonna Get into Trouble for it So I mean whether he was misled or not he still Admitted to using and he Should still be Suspended for it I mean Really are we not trying to Clean this Business up like come on People use your heads for more then a Hat Rack here
the orc should be
the orc should be investigated enough is enough !
In view of this ruling and
In view of this ruling and many others Is it not time to review the entire
makeup and stff of the ORC ? These times require leadership and direction
In reply to In view of this ruling and by Anonymous (not verified)
Historically a self
Historically a self administering agency of the Government does function more expediously in developing and carrying forward that which they consider appropriate. On the other hand, amendments to Bills and/or Regulations respective to other branches of the government, which are governed by and through the legislature, although not nearly as timely are objective, consistent with our laws and frequently stakeholders views are requested before an amendment or Regulation is cast in stone. Unlike the self administering agency such as the ORC, amendments and changes in regulations are reviewed by lawyers to insure that they fulfill the intent of our Constitution. IMO the ORC on the other hand takes more of a "shoot from the hip" style of governing. In the case at hand, it really doesn't matter if Mr. Hudon admitted to using a banned substance or not, in our judiciary the Prosecution must still develop evidences that would support the persons claims. I could walk into a police station tomorrow and admit to murder, however until the Prosecution can prove that I did in fact murder someone, I am not guilty. He could admit to using 10 ounces of baking soda on each horse, however as long as the black box does not register in excess of 37, he is innocent.
In reply to Historically a self by dp (not verified)
The ORC may very well have
The ORC may very well have made a hasty decision in this regard but I find it interesting and must give them credit for asking for a review of their own decision. What I do think has been accomplished here regardless of how this plays out is that a message has been sent to the appropriate individuals and if it stops even just one person from cheating in the future then it is worth it!