Why are TC and Inclusive showing at HITS and WHY is COTH posting pictures of them? This is so wrong IMHO.
[QUOTE=dags;8302570]
Additionally, any positive test results should be included on the Horse Report for that animal.[/QUOTE]
That is an excellent idea.
That transcript and those findings… wow, that is some reading. 
My sense of it is that the hearing committee considers Mr. Rivetts to be the trainer in care, custody, and control of the horse, and that they mostly took advantage of the situation to maintain the charges against Ms. Colvin, maybe less because they truly believed she injected the horse here, and as much or more because it’s apparent she’s stood by for years and watched horses being drugged.
(I have to say I have no idea how someone carries a needle around with them, injects a horse in the 7 minutes out in public walking to/from the rings, and then manages to dispose of or even carry said needle with no one noticing.)
Honestly… I have no complaint with that. Well done Hearing Committee. That bit with Moroney eliciting out the reason for the pastes was pure gold.
And you can see exactly why they wanted the rule change to allow them to go after anyone connected with the horse, not just the person signing the entry. It’s one more incident in a long line where it’s clear that people are gaming that signature, and where too many people know what’s going on and are at least complicit.
I question the judgement of whoever decided to go forward with this civil suit, exposing the (normally confidential) transcript for all to see, and spending boatloads of money to do so, if they meant to protect TC or help her in some way. Woo boy. She would have had much more benefit of the doubt without this.
As for “she needs her mom to go to shows as a minor” even lowly me managed to go to horse shows on my own when I was 16 and 17, and I wasn’t a child prodigy likely to be the Tiger Woods of horse showing. 
And I too am saddened to see such clear evidence that it’s not possible to play at this level without acting unethically.
California split run at Upperville in Large Junior Hunters instead of by age …younger and olders even though entries there to split by age. Exhibitors told by ingate woman the judges wanted a California Split. There were a lot of unhappy people before the Junior Division even began and the ingatevwoman at that ring was beyond rude.
Hasn’t Tori said recently that she want to focus on the jumpers in the future?
I don’t recall where or when this was said exactly, but I was surprised at the time given how successful she has been in the hunters. I wondered why she wouldn’t want to continue, having been so successful in that discipline from such a young age, even beating established professionals! The transcript of the hearing sheds a whole new light on the situation. If Tori has been privy to all the drugging and wants to turn pro, but get out of that scene, then the jumpers would be a better place for her. Not that people don’t cheat in the jumpers, but there are stiffer penalties so I think it would be easier to make a go of it from having a clean program.
For those wondering why COTH posted pictures of Inclusive from yesterday, here’s my guess:
The horse and rider are not suspended (because although the court of public opinion/Facebook/COTH forums think they should be, that’s not what the USEF did). They also topped the first round of the 500k hunter class. COTH is in the business of covering events at horse shows, they couldn’t exactly shun the winner of the class.
You may not like it, but I don’t think they’re making a statement one way or the other - just covering the events of the class.
Does TC need her mom at shows? Hardly. When I got my driver’s license, my dad would give me the keys to the truck and trailer and waive buh-bye (he was the show parent, not my mom). I’d been caring for my horses at A shows without a parent at least some of the time since I was 11. My dad had to sign my entry blank and give me a check for the office, but to think that a 17 year old who shows as much as TC needs her mom there is nuts. And, as posted above, now all the details are coming out in public record. Redacting out TC’s name doesn’t do anything in terms of protecting her here. I understand that BC feels wronged, but she probably should have just taken the suspension.
[QUOTE=supernatural;8303414]
California split run at Upperville in Large Junior Hunters instead of by age …younger and olders even though entries there to split by age. Exhibitors told by ingate woman the judges wanted a California Split. There were a lot of unhappy people before the Junior Division even began and the ingatevwoman at that ring was beyond rude.[/QUOTE]
What does this mean?
[QUOTE=poltroon;8303392]
That transcript and those findings… wow, that is some reading.
…
(I have to say I have no idea how someone carries a needle around with them, injects a horse in the 7 minutes out in public walking to/from the rings, and then manages to dispose of or even carry said needle with no one noticing.)
…
.[/QUOTE]
Practice?
[QUOTE=skydy;8301093]
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/m64d02zk2uwaboi/AAAQ8FFvnCFrBWTRoWG3NYsla/USEF%20Hearing%20transcript.pdf?dl=0
Whoops , that will start you on the 13th page but you can go back from there page 1. BAC you really should read when you have time. It is just…:eek:[/QUOTE]
I read the first 30 pages so far, hope to finish it today. What a mess.
I have no problem with COTH reporting who wins what, but I do have a problem with an incomplete report such as Brigid’s stay. They should have noted, at the least, that she is NOT contesting the finding the horse was drugged, she is only contesting her status as trainer. Pretty important distinction.
I’m disappointed that the penalties are not strong enough to deter potential offenders or repeat offenders. Seriously, USEF, grow a backbone and institute stiffer regulations for the sake of ethical and authentic performance, fair competition, and for the welfare of horses and ponies. And create a definition of “responsible party” to replace “trainer” to create a broader and encompassing category for those that are really taking care of the horse.
The stick needs to be much bigger and the result can potentially fund drug screening/monitoring programs.
Here are some thoughts based upon the decision by the Hearing Committee that the trainer/rider/responsible party is, in fact, guilty of using a prohibited substance for horses competing in jumper, high-performance, junior hunter, pre-green, or other $$$- rated divisions:
-
First time offender: set down for 4-6 months, plus a fine ($4,000 - $8,000) AND a required bond of $100,000 to be sustained for one year from the date of the end of the suspension. If the rider/trainer/responsible party has another positive test, they forfeit the bond and move to the second-time offender (see below).
-
Second time offender (didn’t learn from the first time): set down for 6-8 months, plus a fine ($8,000 - $10,000) AND a required bond of $250,000 to be sustained for eighteen months from the date of the end of the suspension, AND mandatory out of competition testing (at home, or on horse show grounds when horse is not competing) for the duration of the bond. If a positive result is yielded from the out-of-competition testing, then proceed to third time offender (below).
-
Third time offender - set down for 8-10 months, plus a fine ($12,000 - $15,000) AND a required bond of $500,000 to be sustained for twenty four months from the time of the end of the suspension, AND mandatory out of competition testing (at home, or on horse show grounds when horse is not competing) for the duration of the bond.
Offenders to pay for the out of competition testing, including lab testing/analysis/reporting and a share of travel costs for the tester if the testing is at a horse show.
I am assuming that several people will trip up and the bonds can be the basis of purchasing new lab equipment, dispatching more testers to the field, running more tests, hiring the FTE lab and admin staff for the lab, and building a defense fund for appeals.
SapphireBlue237
as vineyridge said earlier in this thread or the other
I too would like to see judges who, as owners or trainers, receive drug or rules suspensions loose their license, permanently. Their loss of time that scales along with their violation is not enough. Particularly if there have been persistent infractions over the years.
I would ,however, have a slightly softer take if the violation is for Bute and Banamine and the proper withdrawal time limit.
If that is a persistent problem, then no mercy, they are out as well
I dont want to be judges by someone who cannot figure out and guide their staff on proper withdrawal timing of a permitted substance
All for stiffer penalties not unsure of the value of testing outside of competition.
Instead:
1st timer: $10K and 6 months, horse, rider, trainer, owner/lessor
2nd time offender: $25K and a competition year, rider, trainer, owner/lessor
3rd time and you are out. Lifetime.
The $ defers the “regular” folks and the suspensions the big fish. If an ignorance is bliss owner/parent sues trainer when Mary Sue misses Pony Finals/Devon/Indoors for an infraction all the better. Self reinforcing.
If rider, trainer, owner/lessor is a USEF official /elected official they lose their license, first time a year, 2nd offense lifetime
No one was ever found culpable for the death of Humble, correct? If his owner got away with that, I have no hope that Betsee Parker, Brigid Colvin or whoever else is associated with Inclusive will ever be punished.
So correct me if I am wrong but:
FEI suspended (I am assuming she still has a hearing to defend her case) Sophie Simpson from showing at FEI and USEF events because her horse, Why Not, tested positive for capsaicin at the 2015 NAYJRC event in Kentucky. Sophie Simpson is being suspended because she was the rider of Why Not at the FEI event and suspension of the rider, if their horse tests positive for a prohibited substance, is an FEI rule. Correct?
Tori Colvin’s mount, Inclusive, tested positive for GABA at the 2014 International Hunter Derby Finals in Kentucky. She is not being suspended but her trainer/mother and Inclusive’s owner, Betsee Parker, are being suspended by USEF because the horse, they were associated with, tested positive for GABA.
So am I right in saying that Sophie Simpson and Tori Colvin are in the same boat because both of their horses tested positive for a prohibited substance? But because Sophie’s horse was tested via the FEI and was at an FEI event, she is suspended because the rider being suspended is part of FEI’s protocol. Tori is not being suspended because her mount was tested via USEF and at an USEF event.
So Sophie is being suspended for the same thing (horse testing positive for a prohibited substance) Tori is not being suspended for? 
Pretty much. Except the owner of Tori’s horse is not suspended.
I agree that junior riders should be suspended if their mount tests positive. That alone would be a HUGE incentive to follow the rules. Not allowing a kid to show is hardly putting them in jail. I do not believe that parents, juniors and amateurs should be allowed to hide behind statements like, “I had nothing to do with it, my trainer takes care of the horse.”
I am not in favor of extremely large financial penalties. There is quite a bit of disparity between the financial status of various competitors. Putting the possibility of huge fines out there is one more thing that would scare people of more modest means out of the ring. To an owner that spends five figures a month on horse showing and horse care, a four-five figure penalty isn’t going to hurt that much. Also, while they may be few and far between, there are instances where honest mistakes are made–where meds were given incorrectly, even in some cases by veterinarians unfamiliar with the rules. I believe that suspensions that affect all the people associated with a horse and the horse itself are the most fair way of handling the problem.
[QUOTE=skydy;8303813]
Pretty much. Except the owner of Tori’s horse is not suspended.[/QUOTE]
Gotcha! So just the “trainer” aka Brigid will be suspended, if everything pans out. Sounds to me like FEI has a more “no tolerance” policy, which I like more than USEF’s slap on the wrist.
