In doing some research I can find some 6 or 7 drug violations in the not to distant past, and a false medication report. If this was at the thoroughbred tracks, these folks would have lost their license’s long long ago.
8 Likes
Any chance the B sample was contaminated on purpose?
Please identify those for us because the USEF doesn’t have 6 or 7 drug violations for them.
1 Like
When you have time, could you type them out here? I know there was the Amber Eyes fine, Ace, switching horse for drug tester, Cocaine (upcoming)but could not find any others.
I would feel the same way if it had been proven that they didn’t drug the horse.
But that’s not what happened.
They didn’t deny drugging, their first complaint to USEF was that they weren’t correctly notified of the positive test, and all the samples tested positive.
If you were innocent and truly had no knowledge of why your horse tested positive, wouldn’t that be the first statement in your defense ? When dressage rider Adrienne Lyle’s horse tested positive for a banned substance in 2017, this was her statement: “All I can say at this time is that I am shocked and devastated to learn of this news,” said Lyle in a statement to the Chronicle. “I am beyond careful about everything that goes in or near my competition horses, and we have no idea how this substance could have ended up in Horizon. We are conducting a thorough investigation in hopes of finding some answers.”
About 30 days later, she and another rider were exonerated by USEF when it was proven that their horses’ feed had been unknowingly contaminated during production at the factory.
So I am grateful to the owners of of both horses, who believed in both riders’ innocence and how they care for their horses. The owners paid for the investigation and legal expenses to find the truth. In turn, that benefited the feed company, their customers, and most importantly, the horses.
10 Likes
While obviously the testing procedures and policies at USEF need to be audited to ensure that this type of screw-up never, ever happens again, until the culture and the mentality changes about pharmacological “enhancement” at the expense of horse welfare and owners continue to look the other way…it’s still like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Great example @Mardi of a very different and refreshing attitude!
6 Likes
And Sample A tested positive for GABA, Sample B tested positive for GABA and Sample B (2) tested positive for GABA. I wish someone at USEF would explain what went wrong-was it something with the machine due to a human error? I read the transcript and it seemed to me like USEF followed testing protocol. They even had someone from Racing Commission state that things were done correctly.
3 Likes
I think the speculation is that the issue is in the chain of custody of sample B, and I say speculation because it seems that USE is not going to tell us. IIRC from the transcript, the lab records showed sample B being placed in one freezer and then the records show it being removed from a different freezer for testing but there is no record of how it got from one freezer to another. Sloppy!
OTOH, there could also be a problem with the calibrations of the machine testing the samples, that was not as clear to me.
1 Like
If that lab is operating sloppily, hate to say it, they should get off. Any irregularity in the chain of custody where all changes of location are documented, anybody touching it has to sign and exposing a sample to possible contamination should void the test.
Long been employed where random unannounced drug and alcohol checks are required and any lab who screws up loses certification…because their screw up can cost somebody a career.
Growing up, the family business was an independent testing lab testing everything from contract work looking for pesticides in milk, gas looking for sugar to cat fur looking for accelerant after it was blamed for knocking a lantern over starting a fire, cat was fine but immediately confined as a suspect when house burned in the middle of a nasty divorce. Any question of the handling or allowing the sample to be contaminated would have put us out of business. My Dads job at the time of my birth was testing race horse urine for Hollywood Park back around 1950, if he got sloppy, he’d ruin his own career as well as somebody else’s.
Really ironic here but…if LCF has exposed sloppy procedures at that lab, which we pay for? Good for them. There will be another time…
3 Likes
What is so frustrating as our fees continue to rise on a yearly bases both annually and at the shows, the integrity of the USEF continues to drop, in so many ways besides this episode. But this is certainly a biggy.
2 Likes
The USEF needs to get their labs in line and operate with tightly Quality controlled procedures.
If the lab was procedurally in error, they got off on a technicality. That’s unfortunately how it works, and should as much as people hate it. It doesn’t mean they are innocent.
hopefuly this will be a wake up call and the money spent for drug fees will not be in vain.
People will still send their horses to them, buy horses from them, celebrate their victories. When you lay with dogs etc… It shows who who the ethical people are and whom you want to do business (same with those defusing them).
3 Likes
The new standard: The most egregious substances available in the industry is a maximum of 2 months suspension. (Cocaine) A new very low bar has been set by the regulators on any and all future positives, and this is mostly sad for the majestic horses which make the sport possible. Sad days for the sport horses.
5 Likes
Larry and Kelly are like the OJ Simpsons of the horse world. Everybody knows they did it and they got off on a technicality.
16 Likes
Not to worry, those two are career cheats. They will do it again and eventually get caught.
Even the juice eventually ended up in the can.
7 Likes
Did the NYT express any interest in this story?
1 Like
No. Nothing’s dead. Yet. That we know of. Remember in the news biz, if it bleeds, it leads and nothing beats a dead body. Especially if it’s an animal.
3 Likes
Getting caught doesn’t help–because then they get off. And each time they get off helps set the precedent for the next time.
2 Likes
Also, I think the fact that this is a fairly niche sport, often difficult for people to understand outside of the horse world (unlike showjumping or, of course, racing) is an additional protective factor regarding outside publicity.
It’s really hard to understand how hunters are judged, much less why this type of drugging is viewed as a performance enhancement, unless you are somewhat into horses (even if you don’t show hunters, which I don’t) IMHO. Poor little Humble drew people’s attention because as @findeight said, he died and also he was an adorable little girl’s pony. Other notorious horse stories have drawn media attention because of outside drama (celebrities, other associated crimes).
2 Likes
How is that pony lady still in business??
2 Likes
I assume in the same way all the other busted people do. They do well because they drug and that’s good for business because it wins them blue ribbons which sell horses. When they sell a horse they give the magic prep scrip to the new trainer to get the result they want in the showring. Look at the sharps containers in every show facility. They’re all full.
7 Likes
