My current hypothesis is that Baffert is going to wait until he sees what he’s got in the barn to seek an injunction. He’ll proceed per usual to chase points he’s not eligible for, and if he has a live prospect, he’ll go to court. Alternatively the owners of said live prospect(s) could file a motion to get the points awarded to the horse, using the argument that the horse deserves to start even if the trainer is banned. I am sure Wolf, Kumin, et al are scheming.
3 Likes
I thought that this was interesting in general, and specifically about the comments regarding Baffert. Out of curiosity, does anyone know what other trainers are currently banned from running a horse in the Derby?
I don’t think that a judge would have sympathy for an owner who can just change trainers and problem solved, but what do I know?
It would be fascinating for sure to be a fly on the wall…
I gave my attorney friend a brief synopsis of Baffert’s career and past, and he guesses that Baffert might be uncomfortable with the enormous amount of discovery that Churchill would be entitled to.
I’m sure Baffert’s attorneys are gung ho to proceed yet surely they must have informed him regarding the mountains of information he’ll have to turn over to Churchill, if he files a civil suit against them.
5 Likes
This isn’t going well for Bob!
11 Likes
His attorneys are certainly throwing everything at the wall to see if something sticks.
A retired New York Supreme Court Justice is not as easy to bamboozle as the CHRB (or any other racing authority) has been.
4 Likes
And now:
4 Likes
The NYRA is considering holding a disciplinary hearing regarding an issue with another trainer. Baffert can’t claim he’s being singled out if NYRA goes ahead with this.
What Potts did was unconscionable. I wonder what his reasoning was.
3 Likes
Latest on Baffert an the NYRA…
1 Like
That’s pathetic. I wonder how well the, they’re-just-envious-of my-success, defense will go over.
It does go to show how much better HISA would be than the current situation, of racing governing itself.
5 Likes
Well, this certainly doesn’t help Baffert’s cause. Interesting testimony!
4 Likes
So a lot was said about how intra-articular use of steroids can cause a positive blood test and the levels in his horses were potentially consistent with that, but was anything said about whether the results were actually consistent with expected concentrations after topical use as Baffert is claiming happened?
I suspect that Baffert’s experts will try and prove just that, when they are on the stand.
Topical or not, does not matter. It was not supposed to be in the horse.
13 Likes
Given that the alleged topical treatment was a product not licensed nor approved for use in horses, I doubt there’s much data on the pharmacokinetics in the horse.
5 Likes
I didn’t mean to imply that it was acceptable if it was used topically. It’s just that the article focused a lot on systemic absorption after intraarticular use, and said nothing about possible systemic absorption after use of a topical treatment, which is what Baffert was claiming happened with Medina Spirit.
Has it been stated anywhere that a vet gave an actual prescription for this topical to be applied to this horse for the skin condition? If so, why hasn’t he/she been questioned? Or was this simply somebody who had had this prescribed for their dog going ahead and trying it on the horse? If so, who was it?
It still boils down to the fact that the trainer is responsible for whatever is given to the horse.
3 Likes
Is Baffert there or will he testify? This wasn’t mentioned in the latest article that was posted.
Baffert said that the vet prescribed it. The vet’s name has not been mentioned so far.
Baffert is there, and it was stated that he will testify and be cross examined. THAT should be interesting.
5 Likes
