This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest Sep-20 by smartyslew
Latest Sep-19 by TexSquared
Latest Sep-19 by DogsUp
Latest Sep-18 by DogsUp
Latest Sep-17 by pianot
Latest Sep-16 by SameSteve G
Latest Sep-11 by SameSteve G
Latest Sep-7 by TexSquared
Latest Sep-7 by RAESFAN
Latest Sep-6 by pianot
Latest Sep-5 by Plus2lbs
Latest Sep-2 by smartyslew
Latest Sep-1 by PISTOL9
Latest Aug-24 by DogsUp
Latest Aug-23 by DogsUp
Latest Aug-21 by smartyslew
When I tutored under a local bookie and great friend in cases like this, and when there is gambling/bets: Steve would say-
'When there's a lot of money on the table; strange things happen.
Evidence not secured legally-no search warrant or probable cause, tampered intentially/unintentionally a judge usually dismisses on lack of , no or illgained evidence.
Dogs- u are correct, many variables that aren't nailed down, for this reason.
The Ky racing commission was responsible for the chain of custody of the samples. No way they can present the second sample as bona fide certified lab results evidence. Tainted
The court will throw out, dismiss, not hear the case.
The lab will lose the contract.
Churchill Downs will have to make the results Official.
Lots a bad 'Blood Horse relationships and precedents will evolve.
A motion to suppress evidence is a request by a defendant that the judge exclude certain evidence from trial. The defense often makes this motion well in advance of trial—if the defendant wins it, the prosecution or judge may have to dismiss the case.
The Lab loses a cushie contract. Depends on their state senator's power in the State House. He has to appease the commission
'I've read...in "other states' where the state senator who would have a vendor contract gone South has a real clean up job on his hands to get forgiveness votes of confidencefor his loyal constituent- vendor.
The sample was under joint custody and taken to Baffert’s choice of labs where it was “damaged”. It remains to be seen how it’s adjudicated but this was Baffert’s chance to clear his name and his people were at least partly responsible, probably mostly responsible. Legal loopholes notwithstanding they’ll disqualify Medina imo.
The 2nd lab was agreed upon by the parties and selected with court monitoring and instruction.
Different seperate labs. That I missed.
My dumb girl friend read the follow-up lab testing news story and thought the two Labs (arf arf) were...one golden and one chocolate brown.
But the transportation agreement was there, they swore to the court they'd handle with care