Kelly Farmer Additional Suspension

[IPEsq]

Just because you are in good standing with USEF doesn’t mean you are with show management. If I went to WEF and bounced a check with the office, for sure I couldn’t show anymore until I rectified that. Some shows have penalties related to where you park or what your dog is doing. I think if they made a policy and made it public in the prize list, they’d have some discretion about what those policies are and it could be more restrictive than and/or outside the scope of the USEF rules.

[HorseAlter]

I think USE lacks teeth because they are afraid of lawsuits.

@Denali6298

I realize it’s late to do that. I’m not suggesting right now, this year. Many people have renewed, paid, gotten to WEF etc. It just seems, that every time drugging comes up these threads start. People bemoan the state of the industry, and then go about their horse showing lives. Absolutely nothing will change.

I get I am a mere peon. I get I have been out of the show ring for a while. People want clients, the USEF wants memberships. So as someone who thought about rejoining, who thought about showing I am not. I am not because I feel all people get is lip service. I feel my dollars are better spent taking lessons and clinics then supporting a governing body who clearly lacks the teeth to sit people down. Why they lack the teeth who knows. I’m still trying to figure out how the USOC is relevant in a non-FEI sport.

Just 0.02 from a nobody. Carry on.

[scrbear11]

Money talks.

Loss of money causes action… or retreat.

Horse show life will carry on regardless of what KF and LG are doing.

[pds]

What about starting a petition to have LG/KF given more severe penalties or banned? Circulate it among the membership and then give to USEF and USHJA. Would that put our governing body more on notice? Give the regular membership more of a voice?

It could be written in a general way to address drugging and repeat offenders. Maybe a “three strikes and your out” rule?

https://www.ipetitions.com/

[vxf111]

Even if they eventually lose the arbitration, I suspect LG/KF have already won.

The real money for them is in selling horses, training/showing fees from clients, etc. Not prize money.

If they have to forfeit the prize money at the end of all this, they still get to keep all the profit they made over the circuit from everything non-prize-money-related.

So even if their arguments are frivolous and the USE ultimately prevails, they still come out in good shape. Only downside for them is their legal fees. I presume they calculated and the profit they’d make over the course of the circuit well exceeds those fees.

Not a dumb strategy, if I’m right.

[rollingabout]

@vxf111

Even if they eventually lose the arbitration, I suspect LG/KF have already won.

The real money for them is in selling horses, training/showing fees from clients, etc. Not prize money.

If they have to forfeit the prize money at the end of all this, they still get to keep all the profit they made over the circuit from everything non-prize-money-related.

So even if their arguments are frivolous and the USE ultimately prevails, they still come out in good shape. Only downside for them is their legal fees. I presume they calculated and the profit they’d make over the course of the circuit well exceeds those fees.

Not a dumb strategy, if I’m right.

Then the show managers must step up and ban them from the show grounds. KF and GL abuse their horses, plain and simple.

[findeight]

@HorseAlter

They wouldn’t sit out the very big shows, but might consider sitting out on something in the early or middle part of the season.

I like the idea that someone had for Mark Bellisimo to change his prizelist to state that people with unresolved drug infractions cannot show. That would be awesome if it worked.

Does anyone know if the USE rulebook would allow him to make such a restriction?

No, Innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land. He’s not going to ban a big exhibitor with a lot of friends filling a large number of stalls unless and until they have been proven guilty and suspended even then, on non show days USE cannot keep them off the property and even if the manager wanted to enforce his own ban, they got lawyers for it standing by, have an injunction in the managers office by noon.

I wonder if the lawyers for LCF are also owners or partners In the LLCs that own a lot of these horses? Every trainer I’ve ever been with has had either current or former clients handle the bulk of their legal work. And for whoever said their lawyers are acting like defense lawyers? Of course they are, that’s their job.And they seem pretty good at it. Everybody hates defense attorneys…until they need one.

[SunnyHtrJpr]

@AffirmedHope

Perhaps it’s time for NYT or another major publication to do another front page story…

https://www.nytimes.com/by/joe-drape

If you want to contact Joe Drape here is a link with an email contact. He is the NYT journalist who covers all horse sports and co-wrote the article about the pony death at Devon. He’s not anti-horse sports (actually a fan of racing himself) but he does want to see it all cleaned up. If he finds the story interesting enough he might pursue it.

[rollingabout]

@SunnyHtrJpr

https://www.nytimes.com/by/joe-drape

If you want to contact Joe Drape here is a link with an email contact. He is the NYT journalist who covers all horse sports and co-wrote the article about the pony death at Devon. He’s not anti-horse sports (actually a fan of racing himself) but he does want to see it all cleaned up. If he finds the story interesting enough he might pursue it.

Done. Wrote him an email and sent all the links.

[Limerick2017]

@findeight

No, Innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land. He’s not going to ban a big exhibitor with a lot of friends filling a large number of stalls unless and until they have been proven guilty and suspended even then, on non show days USE cannot keep them off the property and even if the manager wanted to enforce his own ban, they got lawyers for it standing by, have an injunction in the managers office by noon.

I wonder if the lawyers for LCF are also owners or partners In the LLCs that own a lot of these horses? Every trainer I’ve ever been with has had either current or former clients handle the bulk of their legal work. And for whoever said their lawyers are acting like defense lawyers? Of course they are, that’s their job.And they seem pretty good at it. Everybody hates defense attorneys…until they need one.

It was me! I said they are acting like defense attorneys in a criminal case. This was a hearing basically about if LCF was following the Sportsman Charter which involves not giving horses banned substances.

[rollingabout]

@findeight

No, Innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land. He’s not going to ban a big exhibitor with a lot of friends filling a large number of stalls unless and until they have been proven guilty and suspended even then, on non show days USE cannot keep them off the property and even if the manager wanted to enforce his own ban, they got lawyers for it standing by, have an injunction in the managers office by noon.

I wonder if the lawyers for LCF are also owners or partners In the LLCs that own a lot of these horses? Every trainer I’ve ever been with has had either current or former clients handle the bulk of their legal work. And for whoever said their lawyers are acting like defense lawyers? Of course they are, that’s their job.And they seem pretty good at it. Everybody hates defense attorneys…until they need one.

Let me get this straight. If I own a huge show facility, I CANNOT stop anybody that I feel doesn’t represent the sport in a positive matter from showing? It’s not a public facility but a private one.

[Mardi]

@mepkkg

Agreed. People who have worked and planned all year to get to WEF are not going to choose not to show or choose to scratch from classes just because Kelly is in their class. Same thing for other big shows. People are not going to sit out on Indoors or Derby Finals to try to make a point.

And therein lies the problem. Until the h/j membership gets fed up enough that exhibitors DO sit out one or two classes to make a point, USEF will not be required to take notice. As it is now, we keep having the same conversations about the same trainers over and over. If that’s working well for everyone, then by all means, keep doing what you’ve been doing.

[Limerick2017]

I went back this afternoon and re read part of the hearing transcript. Knowing they are out there showing with Juniors riding their horses makes me even angrier. They brought in a witness to try to say that GABA does not have an effect on a horse! That blew my mind. USEF has decided that it is banned and I understand why. I have been told (by a doctor) that GABA suppresses one’s reactions. Of course it is then performance enhancing…who wants a spooky hunter? Anyway, my point is if you get told an athlete is NOT allowed a substance and they test positive for the substance, you sound ridiculous arguing that the substance does no harm. What about trying to prove your athlete did not receive the substance?!

You can still read the hearing here. It is long but I still feel USEF handled the chain of custody well and they demonstrated the samples were tamper proof. Navin certainly tried her best to muddy the waters wherever she could and I don’t think she hired very impressive witnesses considering how much they were paid. Just my opinion.

http://www.ratemyhorsepro.com/usef-v-larry-glefke-kelley-farmer/

[Limerick2017]

@rollingabout

Let me get this straight. If I own a huge show facility, I CANNOT stop anybody that I feel doesn’t represent the sport in a positive matter from showing? It’s not a public facility but a private one.

The owner of Spruce Meadows prevented Eric Lamaze from showing there after his second positive drug test.

[Pancakes]

Maybe I’m wrong and opening a can of worms, but Kelly Farmer isn’t registered to show this week at WEF. I guess she plans on it another time? Entries don’t close yet either neither her nor Glefke are registered on there. Just to quell everyone’s fears about them competing…

[Denali6298]

@Mardi

And therein lies the problem. Until the h/j membership gets fed up enough that exhibitors DO sit out one or two classes to make a point, USEF will not be required to take notice. As it is now, we keep having the same conversations about the same trainers over and over. If that’s working well for everyone, then by all means, keep doing what you’ve been doing.

Thank you for this.

[Bent_Hickory]

@Limerick2017

USEF has decided that it is banned and I understand why. I have been told (by a doctor) that GABA suppresses one’s reactions. Of course it is then performance enhancing…who wants a spooky hunter? Anyway, my point is if you get told an athlete is NOT allowed a substance and they test positive for the substance, you sound ridiculous arguing that the substance does no harm. What about trying to prove your athlete did not receive the substance?

You do understand that GABA exists naturally in equines, right?

[findeight]

@rollingabout

Let me get this straight. If I own a huge show facility, I CANNOT stop anybody that I feel doesn’t represent the sport in a positive matter from showing? It’s not a public facility but a private one.

Yeah and that gets hashed out in court if that banned person files an injunction saying s/he is being prevented from earning their livelihood without just cause and before a final verdict. And IIRC, that’s an LLC, partnership or corporation. Not a sole proprietorship so others must participate in such actions.

Look, I have no use for these people, don’t understand how they are still in business but USE has to go by its own bylaws in regard to arbitration, apparently needs to shore up some loopholes in testing protocol and must abide by the laws of the USA and actions by the judicial branch. Everybody has a right to appeal. Some…overuse…that. But it is what it is and there’s no simple, one step answer.

[DMK]

@Bent Hickory

You do understand that GABA exists naturally in equines, right?

Right, but what does that have to do with whether it is dangerous or performance enhancing when artificially introduced into the body outside of an accepted therapeutic administration with corresponding dx (of which there is none)? I mean calcium exists naturally as well (and oxygen) but I’m sure you would (or I hope you would) strongly object to either of those substances being introduced into your veins?

[Mac123]

@Bent Hickory

You do understand that GABA exists naturally in equines, right?

So is magnesium, but pushing 50ccs IV is still incredibly dangerous and certainly violates the spirit of the drug rules, as does giving GABA to alter the horse’s performance.

My understanding is that the first test results showed GABA at well over normal levels, which have been established in order to isolate horses that have been given GABA in order to quiet them vs. naturally occuring GABA.