G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 22 Non Members


https://www.rwwa.com.au/steward-inquiries/thoroughbred-stewards-inquiry-trainer-brock-lewthwaite/

Racing and Wagering Western Australia stewards have been advised by the Chem Centre in Perth that Testosterone and Boldenone were detected in the sample taken from Star Present (trained by Mr B Lewthwaite) following it competing in and winning Race 4 at Ascot on 9 April 2022.

So a positive to Boldenone. It was commonly used on horses going out for a spell back in the day as it had at least a 10 week withdrawal time. If it was positive on 9/4/22, it must have raced at least 5 times with Boldenone in its system. I wonder how the swab on 5/5/22 went when it won at Pinjarra.

Comments

  • thefalconthefalcon    19,949 posts
    interesting, eh?
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,246 posts
    I believe they rotate what they test for (or at least they used to). 
    thats why you get a spate of arsenic positives for instance) come up in a short period
  • ArapahoArapaho    222 posts
    Since 2014 ,No Anabolic Steroid was to be used on any horse whether ,raciing ,spelling, pretraining or at anytime unless under the age of 6 months for welfare and therapeutic reasons  and even that exemption may have been withdrawn by now..
    According to the Australian Racing Board a zero tolerance would apply and  hefty penalties would apply if a person is found guilty of such.

    Think also any horse found with steroids in its system would be banned from racing or trialing for a peroid of at least 12 months 
  • ManchildManchild    679 posts
    In short ,i think he is in deep sh1t
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts
    At best a fine.
  • FlandersFlanders    1,197 posts

    At best a fine.

    Surely you're taking the mickey? If it is an outlawed anabolic steroid which has no allowed threshold, a DQ is on the cards.

    Tucool, Arapaho, RIO likes this post.

  • shothrushothru    243 posts
    Flanders said:

    At best a fine.

    Surely you're taking the mickey? If it is an outlawed anabolic steroid which has no allowed threshold, a DQ is on the cards.
    First posotive is normally a fine
  • spinkingspinking    3,737 posts
    Think Flanders is on the money. First positive or not

    RIO, Tucool likes this post.

  • RIORIO    14,882 posts
    Now to try to find how it was administered and by who.

    Does he have a stable manager?? I can see a sacking coming along with an assurance that he will tighten all processes in his stable.

    If proven, I'm with Flanders.

    But a fine is a more probable outcome

    jum likes this post.

  • GoddGodd    199 posts
    Well considering every other trainer gets off with a fine, can’t see this should be any different.

    jum likes this post.

  • RodentRodent    7,024 posts
    Anabolic steroids are controlled substances. Vets have to keep them in locked cupboards. We are not talking about a legal treatment administered too close to raceday. It's an interesting case.

    jum likes this post.

  • GoddGodd    199 posts
    No treatment is “legal” if they test positive on race day . Just different rules for different trainers I guess. Like I said if he gets rubbed out it’s not what you know it’s who you know . And who you can blame

    RIO, thefalcon, jum likes this post.

  • FlandersFlanders    1,197 posts
    Godd said:

    Well considering every other trainer gets off with a fine, can’t see this should be any different.

    The fines we see are generally for horses with substances in their system that have allowed thresholds and that are allowed to show up in the horse to some level and/or are permitted to be administered...
    If it is a controlled substance that can only be there because it was administered and has been outlawed for use entirely, this would have to be treated differently. Whether the excuses dished up are accepted- that is a different kettle of fish.

    Rodent, RIO, thefalcon likes this post.

  • shothrushothru    243 posts
    Flanders said:

    Godd said:

    Well considering every other trainer gets off with a fine, can’t see this should be any different.

    The fines we see are generally for horses with substances in their system that have allowed thresholds and that are allowed to show up in the horse to some level and/or are permitted to be administered...
    If it is a controlled substance that can only be there because it was administered and has been outlawed for use entirely, this would have to be treated differently. Whether the excuses dished up are accepted- that is a different kettle of fish.
    Incorrect
  • ArapahoArapaho    222 posts
    A pretty serious charge, but what ever the outcome ,
    every horse that has tested positive to a anabolic steroid has been banned from racing or trialing for at least 12 months from the date of the positive reading.
    So unfortunately for the owners , it would appear this horse may be disqualified from the races it competed in since the positive swab, including its win at Pinjarra on the 5th of May
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts

    This matter has gone to ground with no outcomes from rescheduled Steward inquiries.


  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts
    It won’t be a fine it’s something we were told as trainers were not allowed to possess or use at any time and it’s not something that can accidentally be brought into their system. The horse will definitely be not allowed to race for 12 months also
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts
    Legal representation has now been retained and transcripts are being supplied for review, so this matter will in all likelyhood be several weeks if not a couple of months.

    'Lawering up' does have it's consequences though, as penalties can be more punitive than what possibly may have been afforded by the earliest plea.
  • G-MacG-Mac    1,569 posts

    Legal representation has now been retained and transcripts are being supplied for review, so this matter will in all likelyhood be several weeks if not a couple of months.

    'Lawering up' does have it's consequences though, as penalties can be more punitive than what possibly may have been afforded by the earliest plea.
    Interesting. Do you have examples of when engaging legal representation has resulted in heftier penalties? 
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts
    G-Mac said:

    Legal representation has now been retained and transcripts are being supplied for review, so this matter will in all likelyhood be several weeks if not a couple of months.

    'Lawering up' does have it's consequences though, as penalties can be more punitive than what possibly may have been afforded by the earliest plea.
    Interesting. Do you have examples of when engaging legal representation has resulted in heftier penalties? 
    You would have heard of an 'early plea' ?
  • FlandersFlanders    1,197 posts
    Lewthwaite has gone to another level since his trip to Adelaide...
  • spinkingspinking    3,737 posts
    Smashing them in Kal
  • Vincent_vegaVincent_vega    463 posts
    I think you will find that Kal is a good level for the quality of his stock. Ive noticed that he takes a fair few up every race meet and good on him.
    No point racing them here to run 4th, you need to take a truckload of them where they can win.
  • GLAMOURGLAMOUR    677 posts
    His horses are in his Father's name now.i noticed.
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts
    edited January 2023
    Yesterday's Media Release

    Thoroughbred – stewards’ inquiry update – Trainer Brock Lewthwaite
    Racing and Wagering Western Australia (RWWA) stewards today resumed the inquiry
    concerning Mr Lewthwaite in relation to the reports from the Chem Centre in Perth and
    Racing Analytical Services Ltd (Vic), stating that testosterone and boldenone has been
    detected in the sample taken from Star Present following it competing in and winning race
    four at Ascot on 9 April 2022.
    As previously advised, considerable documentary evidence of both laboratories had been
    provided as requested by Mr Lewthwaite’s counsel.
    Further evidence was heard at today’s inquiry, including submissions made with respect to
    various matters and scientific journal articles that had been put forward in evidence by
    RWWA Head of Veterinary Services Dr J Medd, and Chem Centre representative Dr B
    Dorakumbura at the previous proceeding on 25 November 2022. Some of the matters
    having been tabled as a response to matters raised by Professor Thomas Tobin, after he had
    been excused from the proceedings of 25 November 2022.
    Counsel for Mr Lewthwaite requested the matter be adjourned to enable Professor Thomas
    Tobin, who is based in USA, to respond or provide evidence in regard to these aspects which
    he may not have previously had opportunity to respond.
    Having regard to the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness and the difficulty in
    progressing these matters over the Christmas period, the stewards resolved to adjourn the
    matter to 27 January 2023 on the understanding that final submissions would be made so
    that the panel were in a position to consider the charge issued previously under AR 240 (2)
  • loose_gooseloose_goose    2,069 posts
    GLAMOUR said:

    His horses are in his Father's name now.i noticed.

    Would that be getting your ducks in a row before the inevitable ?
  • RodentRodent    7,024 posts
    image
Sign In or Register to comment.