Master of Excuses or Victim of Vendetta? Caustic Baffert/NYRA Hearing Closes

Bob Baffert's five-day hearing on “detrimental conduct” charges levied by the New York Racing Association (NYRA) closed Friday with NYRA's attorney arguing that the Hall-of-Fame trainer has trashed the sport with such an unprecedented litany of medication violations that NYRA needs to be allowed to punish him, while Baffert's lawyer countered that the real extraordinary aspect of the case involves vendetta-based accusations that could result in draconian sanctions NYRA has never before attempted to impose upon any other trainer.

“Bob Baffert is not a cheater,” the trainer's attorney, W. Craig Robertson III, told hearing officer O. Peter Sherwood during the Jan. 28 proceeding. “NYRA used Bob Baffert when it was convenient for them…. Now, they want to kick him out, kick him to the curb…. Your honor, Mr. Baffert's career is in your hands. And that is not an exaggeration.”

NYRA's lawyer, Hank Greenberg, put his closing argument this way: “The statement of charges in this case charges [Baffert] with three violations: That he is a detriment to the sport of Thoroughbred racing, that he is a detriment to the safety of horses and jockeys, and that he is a detriment to NYRA and its business…. We respectfully submit that we have established our case, we have met our burden, and we respectfully urge you to recommend a lengthy suspension.”

The next step in the process is for the hearing officer to write up a report containing findings of fact, conclusions, and a recommended disposition. That report–there is no timetable for when it's due, according to rules that were created last year by NYRA–will then go to both parties and an adjudicatory panel appointed by NYRA's president and chief executive officer, David O'Rourke.

Patrick McKenna, NYRA's vice president of communications, told TDN via email Friday that members of that panel will be selected in the coming days. Asked who is eligible to be selected for it, he wrote, “Although there are no restrictions or required qualifications, individuals who possess an understanding of horse racing or its regulatory framework will be preferred.”

Within a week of the report's issuance, either party may submit written exceptions to it, and then the panel will have the discretion to adopt, modify or reject any or all of the hearing officer's report or recommended disposition. The panel will then issue a final decision that will include a statement setting forth the facts that form the basis of their decision, which shall take effect immediately and is not appealable to NYRA itself (although Baffert could once again bring the matter back before a court of law).

Although Baffert's legal team has previously protested the alleged “fait accompli” fairness of NYRA coming up with the rules for this hearing, its process, the charges, and the appointment of both the hearing officer and the deciding panel, a federal judge ruled last week that NYRA has a right to move ahead in that manner.

Because NYRA has the burden of proof, its legal team was permitted to start Friday's proceedings by offering both the first closing argument and then getting a rebuttal after Baffert's counsel had its turn. This last-at-bat arrangement that gave NYRA two turns to speak was unsuccessfully protested by Robertson as being “inappropriate” in the setting of a hearing, but Sherwood permitted it, presumably because that's how trials in court usually work.

Greenberg led off by accentuating how testimony this week had revealed that no witnesses could ever recall any other Thoroughbred trainer besides Baffert racking up six equine medication positives within a 14-month period, three of which occurred in Grade I stakes (the 2021 Kentucky Derby, the 2020 Kentucky Oaks, and the 2020 Arkansas Derby).

“What is presented to you by this case with these facts, your honor, are a rampage of positive drug tests and violations in frequency in number that has no precedent in the modern history of the sport,” Greenberg argued. “As a consequence of those violations, it is also undisputed and undisputable that there was an avalanche of extraordinary, negative, critical coverage of this great sport…. The consequences of that, the damage that it did to the reputation of the sport, is incalculable.”

Greenberg said testimony proved how NYRA goes to great lengths on a daily basis to make sure horses are fit and safe to race. He described the need to conduct pari-mutuel wagering anchored by integrity and brand equity as being the “lifeblood of existence for NYRA.”

Even if Baffert's recent history of equine drug violations occurred in other jurisdictions, it still “hurts NYRA” because of the “saga that was consuming the sport over that 14-month period as each violation came and each excuse was given,” Greenberg said.

“That harm, that fallout, was caused by one person–this person, your honor,” Greenberg said, referencing Baffert sitting off to the side in the Manhattan conference room, wearing a black sweater and black pandemic mask, his eyes and posture suggesting weariness at the end of a long week.

When Robertson had his turn at the podium, he underscored that NYRA was essentially attempting to re-litigate violations that had already been adjudicated by other regulatory bodies (none of which resulted in suspensions for Baffert), which he said is a violation of the legal principle res judicata.

“Your honor, when this matter started, I told you that NYRA was going to throw at you a bunch of inuendo, speculation and distortion. And that is exactly what they have done throughout this proceeding…” Robertson said. “At the beginning of this case, I said that vindictiveness, the bias, the unfairness of NYRA has no bounds. I should add to that the hypocrisy of NYRA has no bounds.”

By way of example, Robertson pointed out that NYRA never attempted to initiate any form of exclusion against two other high-profile trainers who had much more serious penalties handed down by New York regulators within the past decade.

One was Rick Dutrow, Jr., who in 2011 was suspended 10 years and fined $50,000 by the predecessor agency of the New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC) after one of his Aqueduct winners tested positive for an opioid analgesic and syringes containing a painkiller and a sedative were found in Dutrow's stable office. Robertson said Dutrow was allowed to start 516 horses at NYRA tracks while he unsuccessfully tried to appeal that ruling, and NYRA never once independently tried to banish him.

The other is Linda Rice, who in 2021 was given a three-year license revocation and $50,000 fine for “improper and corrupt conduct” by the NYSGC for receiving race-entry information about rival horses from NYRA employees. She is currently still actively racing at NYRA tracks after obtaining a court injunction that allows her to participate while she appeals the NYSGC ruling, but, like Dutrow, NYRA never initiated its own separate exclusion against her.

“So when Mr. Greenberg, with all due respect, says there's no evidence of a vendetta, why absolutely there is. It's the first time they've ever done this to somebody,” Robertson said.

Greenberg, in his rebuttal, said Baffert shouldn't be one to complain about not getting his figurative day in court.

“There isn't a person in this country that gets more [due] process than Bob Baffert, from more courts and more tribunals. He's maxxing out on due process. I don't know that anyone's ever seen anything quite like the amount of process he gets by courts, administrative agencies, and [other ruling bodies],” Greenberg said.

Robertson told the hearing officer that it was significant how NYRA, during this past week of hearings, didn't produce a single witness to substantiate or even read through its own statement of charges. NYRA's testimony had instead largely relied upon various specialists and experts who tried to paint a wide-ranging picture of how NYRA was accountable to many state entities and how the magnitude of Baffert's alleged harms put its franchise at risk.

“What's worse, your honor, is that the individuals at NYRA who created these trumped-up charges didn't have the guts to come here and testify about them,” Robertson said. “Where are the NYRA board members? Where was NYRA's CEO?  Where [were] any NYRA executives to testify about this? If this matter is of such great importance to them and their business operations, where are those individuals?…They at least ought to have shown up and looked him in the eye and explained why they're taking their actions against him…

“On the other hand, Mr. Baffert showed up and stood up…” Robertson said, alluding to Baffert's half-day of testimony Jan. 27. “There wasn't a single question that he didn't answer in a genuine manner.”

In his rebuttal, Greenberg blasted Robertson for even bringing that up. He pointed out that in comparable settings in a courtroom, it is not customary for prosecutors to introduce then go through an accusatory document like a statement of charges paragraph by paragraph. Plus, he added, it wouldn't have been appropriate to call NYRA's CEO as a witness, because he's the same person who will be appointing the adjudicatory panel.

“The most Derbies [Baffert] has won is the 'Excuse Derby,'” Greenberg said. “Maybe it's [a groom] urinating in [a stall] or back patches on assistant trainers or drugs being planted and rewards being offered, or it's the veterinarian's fault. Again and again and again, excuses.”

Most meritless of all of the claims made during the heated week of hearings, Greenberg said, is the notion presented by Baffert's legal team that the trainer just wants to be treated like anyone else.

“No he doesn't…not even close….. Mr. Baffert does not want to be treated like everyone else,” Greenberg said, implying that Baffert wants–and gets–special treatment.

Robertson scoffed at that assertion.

“So yes, when I say I want Mr. Baffert to be treated like anybody else, absolutely,” Robertson said. “Because they've singled him out…and in the face of [other] individuals found guilty of serious, serious violations, NYRA says, 'Come on in, you're welcome at our tracks–unless your name is Bob Baffert.'”

Friday's closing arguments marked exactly 257 days since NYRA initially tried to rule off Baffert back on May 17, 2021, in the wake of now-deceased Medina Spirit's Derby drug positive for betamethasone.

Greenberg, near the end of the proceeding, answered his own rhetorical question about what NYRA would have expected with respect to Baffert's initial disclosure about that test result, alluding to the series of press conferences and media appearances in which Baffert at first denied treating Medina Spirit with betamethasone, then later claimed the positive was the result of applying a skin ointment he didn't know contained that drug.

“What would we [have expected from Baffert]?” Greenberg said. “That he honor the profession that has been so good to him. That he comport himself with dignity. That if he made a mistake, it's not a shameful thing to say, 'I'm sorry. I regret it. I will do better in the future.' That is all we would expect. That's all we could expect. And what we saw was the exact opposite.”

The post Master of Excuses or Victim of Vendetta? Caustic Baffert/NYRA Hearing Closes appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

‘Are You Calling Me A Liar, Sir?’ Fireworks On Day 3 of NYRA/Baffert Hearing As Dutrow Case Recalled

Wednesday's session of the ongoing hearing between the New York Racing Association and embattled trainer Bob Baffert finished with fireworks during the testimony of retired New York state steward Stephen Lewandowski.

NYRA concluded the presentation of its case just before lunch, and Baffert's attorneys called their first few witnesses in the afternoon.

Lewandowski was called on behalf of Baffert and, under questioning from Baffert's attorneys, said he had no dealings with Baffert on any integrity or rule violation issues in his time serving as a steward in the state. Lewandowski said he called Baffert sometime after he was suspended by NYRA to offer his support.

“I feel like he's been unfairly taken advantage of,” Lewandowski said. “He's never had any problems in New York.”

On cross examination, NYRA attorney Henry Greenberg questioned that point by Lewandowski, bringing up the controversy about Baffert's non-coupled entry in the 2018 Belmont Stakes. Baffert saddled both Triple Crown winner Justify in that race as well as Restoring Hope, who was piloted by Florent Geroux. Mike Repole, co-owner of Vino Rosso and Noble Indy, would later complain to New York Post writer Tom Pedulla that Geroux put in a “reckless” ride aboard Restoring Hope, possibly in an attempt to block some of Justify's competitors.

Headlines in the Post questioned officials' decision not to launch an investigation into the race. Lewandowski said that he eventually spoke to Repole but also that he did not recall Repole's complaint. He said he did not speak to Baffert about the incident, and said he did not recall subsequent media coverage questioning the stewards' lack of investigation. He also said he did not recall eventually reversing course and speaking to Geroux, nor did he recall a meeting with the other stewards, who Greenberg suggested disagreed with each other on the best way to handle the situation.

Then, Greenberg asked Lewandowski about his support of Rick Dutrow, who was suspended 10 years and fined $50,000 after one of his horses tested positive for butorphanol and three hypodermic needles were discovered in a desk drawer in Dutrow's office. Following his retirement in 2019, Lewandowski wrote a letter to the Gaming Commission and to the Queens County District Attorney saying that Braulio Baeza Jr., then a NYRA steward, told him the syringes were planted.

Baeza later denied he told Lewandowski this.

Baffert attorney Clark Brewster objected to the scope of Greenberg's questions but was overruled by Justice O. Peter Sherwood, the presiding hearing officer. As Greenberg asked about the fallout from Lewandowski's letter, Lewandowski became agitated and began shouting. The New York commission released a statement following publication of Lewandowksi's letter in the media. Lewandowski also said he heard from New York's Joint Commission on Public Ethics, though it's not clear in what capacity.

“How can they run something without even speaking to me?!” Lewandowski cried. “I know, NYRA does the same thing. They just decide to suspend Bob Baffert without even telling him. How is that right? You're an attorney, you tell me. … That's what you're doing to Bob Baffert. How about talking to him about charges in Kentucky that haven't even been filed yet. … If I were him I wouldn't answer any questions. … He's a person who has been so kind as to show his horses to everybody who asked. All of NYRA's executives went down there, and Bob pulled him out and they took pictures with him and did all that.

“I never went down there, and why? I thought it was improper to do that.

“And another thing about Rick Dutrow, I never spoke to him, before, until I retired.”

Lewandowski said he asked about how Dutrow could go about reapplying for a license, and passed that information along.

“It took six months to even get an answer from the Gaming Commission, whose job is to protect people like him, not hurt them,” Lewandowski yelled to Greenberg, who by then had stopped questioning him. “It's their job, that's what they're supposed to do. They're here for the people, not for purses. And nowhere and no how has these charges ever been … 10 years and $50,000 … and you know another thing? They took his $50,000. There was an ongoing push to get Rick Dutrow reinstated. They made him pay $50,000 and then here's a man who's totally destroyed. Has no money. Nothing. He's completely broke. They made him pay $50,000 and then told him he can't be licensed. … I would never do that to a licensee. I would never take your money when I know you can't work.”

As to the dispute in stories between himself and Baeza, Lewandowski let loose.

“Braulio Baeza, one of us is lying. It's either Braulio Baeza or me. Are you accusing me of lying?” yelled Lewandowski. “One of us is lying. Why would Braulio Baeza speak to me about Rick Dutrow, who he had nothing to do with. One of us is lying. And I'm not accusing anybody. But it's either him or me. And believe me, he said it to more than one person.

“…Are you calling me a liar, sir? Are you calling me a liar? I am not a liar … I thought Braulio Baeza was a good man. One of us had the information to help a man who was wiped out.

“…Braulio Baeza is not a nice person, no.”

Wednesday's session also included testimony from NYRA lead equine safety investigator Tony Patricola, NYRA veterinary services director Dr. Anthony Verderosa, general manager of NYRA Bets Matthew Feig, and vice president of marketing for NYRA and NYRA Bets Donald Scott. At the start of Baffert's case, testimony came from Hall of Fame jockeys Mike Smith and John Velazquez.

[Story Continues Below]
  • Wednesday's session opened with Sherwood chastising Baffert attorney Brewster for providing a statement to media about Tuesday's proceedings. Greenberg entered the Paulick Report's recap of the Jan. 25 hearing into the record because it contained the statement, distributed on behalf of Brewster by public relations and crisis communications firm Trident DMG. Greenberg called the statement “highly unprofessional at best.”You can find the Jan. 25 recap here.

    Baffert attorney W. Craig Robertson said he had nothing to do with the statement.

    Brewster tried to say Greenberg posted similar content on his firm's website. This publication has not received statements from the firm.

    “Fortunately this proceeding is not going forward before a jury,” said Sherwood. “I'd be much more sharp-tongued if we had a jury here, sir. I do think these kinds of comments by a lawyer during a proceeding are inappropriate. I would ask you to restrain yourself.”

  • NYRA's attorneys had two primary focuses from witnesses on Wednesday: the potential for therapeutic drugs to impact pre-race veterinary examinations and injury, and the public reaction to Baffert's recent high-profile drug positive in the Kentucky Derby. Verderosa and Patricola both testified that therapeutic, permitted medications given outside time regulations could make their jobs more difficult in terms of identifying sore horses. They also testified to the danger posed to jockeys, grooms, and veterinary personnel by catastrophic injuries suffered on track.Baffert's counsel clarified that neither official had fielded complaints or themselves flagged horses for further examination from Baffert's barn on the basis they were unsound. (Baffert is primarily based in California and does not, according to Patricola, maintain a barn in New York year-round.) Robertson also pointed out that this summer, when protestors demonstrated their upset over the equine fatality rate in New York, Baffert did not have any trainees in the list of dead horses.
  • Both Feig and Scott agreed they received feedback from NYRA Bets customers following Baffert's announcement that Medina Spirit had a positive post-race drug test. Feig in particular cited a 20 percent increase in customer service queries on the day Baffert held his press conference, and continued with an elevated number of requests from players the next day.“We had a lot of questions regarding, 'Are you going to refund my wager because I bet on the second-place horse, Mandaloun?' or 'Are you going to give me the money I'm owed?'” recalled Feig.

    Feig said there is no mechanism for NYRA Bets or any of its competitors to refund parimutuel wagers based on a change in race results after the race goes official. To date, Medina Spirit has not been disqualified from the Kentucky Derby.

    Feig said he also heard from customers with queries or complaints about other trainers, any time there are headlines about an integrity issue. That includes Linda Rice, who had her license suspended by the New York Gaming Commission but who is still permitted to race at NYRA while she is appealing that case.

  • Feig also said that in the course of applying for the required licenses for NYRA Bets to take wagers from customers outside New York, the organization gets a fair number of questions from regulators about various aspects of its business, including finances, policy, and integrity proceedings. The organization also deals with banks and credit card companies to enable it to do business. Feig said that he did get questions “in passing” about the Baffert situation after the announcement of Medina Spirit's positive from regulators, financial entities, underwriters, and banking institutions. Regulators did not ask him questions about Rice or Wayne Potts, who is currently being investigated by NYRA.
  • Robertson was interested in the fact NYRA Bets saw a wagering record during the time Baffert was permitted to run horses at Saratoga. He and Feig examined handle figures for a couple of races in which Baffert trained entrants. Feig pointed out that one was a stakes race, which usually gets higher handle than non-stakes races, and the other was the start of the Pick 5 and Pick 6. Typically, Feig said he projects and analyzes handle based upon the number of entries and the wagering menu for that race; trainer of entrants don't normally factor into his forecasts.
  • Jockeys Mike Smith and John Velazquez testified on Baffert's behalf, saying they have always felt safe riding his horses and agreeing they would like to ride more for him. Both said they did not believe Baffert is a threat to the integrity of racing, nor have they ever witnessed Baffert do anything against the rules of racing during their time spent in his barn.

 

The post ‘Are You Calling Me A Liar, Sir?’ Fireworks On Day 3 of NYRA/Baffert Hearing As Dutrow Case Recalled appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

‘Social Licensing’ The Day Two Focal Point of Baffert/NYRA Hearing

The concept of perception versus reality has been a core plank on both sides of the highly publicized “detrimental conduct” case ever since the New York Racing Association (NYRA) first tried to banish trainer Bob Baffert eight months ago. On Tuesday, the second day of a hearing process that could lead to Baffert's exclusion from New York's premier tracks, the murky interpretation of who should be considered the true victim and which entity is in need of protection from harm rose to the forefront in the form of arguments over “social licensing” that at times played out in tense and pointed fashion.

Although Baffert is the most easily identifiable Thoroughbred trainer in North America, the key witness who testified Jan. 25 was not at all a recognizable name within the sport. Some 7 1/2 hours of testimony and cross-examination from four witnesses were anchored by about 90 minutes of debate regarding the opinions and PhD expertise of Dr. Camie Heleski, a University of Kentucky equine sciences professor who specializes in what the general public thinks of as horse racing.

“If somebody carries a lot of weight, if they have a strong visual branding in a certain piece of the industry, that's going to be noticed by a larger group of the public, a larger group of, let's say, horse racing fans than if it was not such a memorable person,” Heleski testified. She later added that, “Anybody that's paying attention to racing is going to know who Bob Baffert is.”

Heleski explained that in general, the public tends to regard any highly publicized news about pharmaceuticals in horse racing as something that could be damaging to the sport's social licensing, which is a way of terming general acceptance.

“Most of the time, they're simply feeling if there was a drug or a medication violation noted, they feel like it's bad. They kind of put it all under the umbrella of doping,” Heleski said.

And when Kelly McNamee, a lawyer representing NYRA, asked her to tie in the public's collective thought process and how it relates to Baffert's history of equine drug positives, his trainee Medina Spirit's betamethasone overage when winning the 2021 GI Kentucky Derby, and the “over 70 horses that have died under the care of Mr. Baffert,” Heleski didn't hesitate to answer that all of those things combined could adversely affect racing's social license to operate.

“I think drug and medication [positives] from a very prominent person carry more weight than people that are not followed as closely…” Heleski said. “[And] if a trainer has a large number of deaths in their stables, that's going to be looked on poorly.”

But under stern cross-examination from Baffert's lead lawyer, W. Craig Robertson III, the University of Kentucky professor at times seemed overwhelmed when challenged to explain how it could be Baffert's fault that the general public doesn't understand the difference between therapeutic medications and doping.

Robertson also hammered home points about Baffert's history of awards for sportsmanship and good deeds within the industry, plus his well-documented contributions to aftercare. He wanted Heleski to explain how, if Baffert is such an allegedly detrimental presence who could hurt NYRA, why didn't any activists protest his presence at Saratoga last summer, and why did the track enjoy record betting handles at that meet despite Baffert trainees being in the entries?

Robertson also attempted to dismantle Heleski's “amorphous” concept of social licensing, which, she admitted, has nothing to do with an actual “license” that a person or entity could apply for based on regulated standards, like a racing license.

But assuming such a concept exists, Robertson asked Heleski if it wasn't also part of NYRA's obligation to treat all trainers fairly as part of that social license to operate.

“They should treat trainers fairly, yes,” Heleski agreed.

And if NYRA singled out one trainer–like Baffert–for allegedly unfair punishment, Robertson wanted her opinion on whether “the public might not like that, either. That could hurt a social license to operate, couldn't it?” Robertson queried.

NYRA's legal team objected to that line of questioning, and hearing officer O. Peter Sherwood wouldn't allow Heleski to answer the question.

Baffert himself was not called upon to speak during the day-long proceedings in New York City. On the Zoom webcast made available by NYRA to the media, the Hall-of-Fame trainer could occasionally be glimpsed sitting alongside his lawyers in a conference room, dressed in a dark sport coat and open-collared white shirt.

Although his facial expressions were hidden behind a mask for pandemic precautions, Baffert's posture suggested tedium more than anxiety. He generally kept his hands folded in front of him, sometimes absently working his thumbs together repetitively while occasionally reaching up to flick his thick, silver-white hair off his forehead. For the most part, he looked more like a gent waiting for a bus than a seven-time Derby-winning trainer waiting to find out if he'd be exiled from one of America's most prominent racing circuits.

In previous legal pleadings that failed to keep Baffert's hearing from happening at all, his attorneys have described these proceedings as a “fait accompli.” Yet despite the fact that NYRA came up with the newly invented process for holding the hearings, the list of charges against Baffert, and was responsible for selecting the hearing officer who will decide Baffert's fate, a federal judge ruled last week that NYRA has a right to move ahead in that manner.

NYRA had outright banished Baffert May 17, 2021, in the wake of Medina Spirit's still-not-adjudicated Derby drug positive, noting that four other Baffert trainees had tested positive for medication overages in roughly the year before that. On July 14, a federal judge granted Baffert a preliminary injunction that allowed him to race at Saratoga, Belmont and Aqueduct. That injunction has since been made permanent, but with the legal stipulation that NYRA must afford Baffert a hearing process before deciding whether to kick him out or not.

NYRA is charging that Baffert's alleged conduct is or has been “detrimental” to three entities: 1) The best interests of racing; 2) The health and safety of horses and jockeys; 3) NYRA business operations.

Dr. Pierre-Louis Toutain, a France-based veterinarian considered an expert in pharmacology and toxicology, testified earlier Tuesday for 1 3/4 hours.

Some of Toutain's testimony tended to drag, in part because he was asked to offer definitions of and uses for phenylbutazone, lidocaine and betamethasone, three of the substances that NYRA purports are related to Baffert's alleged wrongdoing. Toutain also good-naturedly apologized a number of times for English not being his first language as he testified remotely while on a six-hour European time difference.

Toutain provided one of the lighter moments of the day when he politely interrupted a drug question from one of Baffert's attorneys, Clark Brewster, to ask, “Are you a scientist or a lawyer?”

When Brewster replied that he was a lawyer, that cued Toutain to know he shouldn't give too technical an answer,

“Ah, so I have to explain simply–okay!”

General laughter broke some of the inherent tension.

But there was no hint of humor from anyone in the room when a NYRA attorney, Hank Greenberg, asked Toutain if the presence of 21 picograms of betamethasone in Medina Spirit's post-Derby blood would have had the capacity to affect his performance.

“Yes, definitively,” Toutain replied.

But Toutain had been talking strictly about an intra-articular injection of betamethasone, which he said was the prevailing way that drug is administered to horses. So when it was Brewster's turn to cross-examine Toutain, he made sure to ask about betamethasone contained within a topical salve or ointment for a skin rash, which is how Baffert has alleged that the betamethasone found its way into Medina Spirit.

“Topical? I am not sure they use it [that way],” Toutain answered.

Toutain then seemed to be confused about whether Brewster was asking if betamethasone was sometimes administered via patch, like lidocaine (which the attorney was not asking).

Brewster then quickly ended his cross-examination of Toutain.

The post ‘Social Licensing’ The Day Two Focal Point of Baffert/NYRA Hearing appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Sides Coming Out Swinging in Baffert-NYRA Hearing

Attorneys in the hearing pitting NYRA vs. Bob Baffert made their opening statements Monday in what turned into a sparring session, with one side claiming NYRA Board members had a vendetta against Baffert and the other contending that the Hall of Fame trainer was responsible for a “rampage of doping violations” and is deserving of a temporary suspension.

The hearing, expected to last from three to five days, will determine whether or not NYRA's attempts to suspend Baffert over a rash of medication positives, including one in the 2021 GI Kentucky Derby, should be allowed. The hearing is being held before O. Peter Sherwood, a retired New York Supreme Court Justice. Baffert was present at the hearing.

Representing NYRA, attorney Hank Greenberg spoke first and zeroed in on the six medication violations Baffert accrued from July 27, 2019 through May 1, 2021, the date of last year's Derby, arguing that so many violations in such a short period of time was unprecedented.

“In the modern history of Thoroughbred racing, we can't find anyone who can recall anything like this by a prominent trainer,” Greenberg said.

Greenberg said that Baffert “took a wrecking ball over a two-year period to the integrity of the sport that was so good to him.”

He paid particular attention to Baffert's violations in the Derby, the GI Kentucky Oaks and the GI Arkansas Derby.

“In 2021 and 2020, the only Triple Crown he is responsible for is destroying three Grade I races,” Greenberg said.

After Baffert revealed that he had been informed by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission that Medina Spirit (Protonico) had tested positive for betamethasone, the trainer conducted several interviews, and Greenberg said he never once took responsibility while chalking his problems up to a matter of “cancel culture.”

“He gets on the Dan Patrick Show, he's on SportsCenter, he's on Fox and his attacks on everyone continue,” Greenberg said. “He says he doesn't believe in conspiracy theories and then he begins to float one. The damage that was done to Thoroughbred racing on these two days was incalculable.”

Greenberg's assertion that Baffert's actions were damaging, not just to NYRA, but to the sport of racing was a recurring theme during his opening argument. He said that NYRA has an obligation to act and to protect the sport and that was among the reasons it was taking action against Baffert. To do otherwise, he suggested, could mean that horse racing could go the same way as dog racing.

“What happens if those institutions do not give their best effort or do everything in their power to protect the safety of the animals, in this case horses?” he said. “What happens is what happened to greyhound racing, which you no longer see. It's what happened to the circus, where there were lion tamers. They don't exist anymore.”

Greenberg said that a lengthy suspension was in order so that, “NYRA can protect racing, protect the horse, protect the jockeys and protect itself.”

Representing Baffert, attorney Craig Robertson argued that Baffert's violations were not of a serious nature and that using terms like “doping” when it comes to Baffert were inaccurate and unfair.

“I suspect that you are going to hear a lot of inflammatory words from NYRA,” Robertson said. “You're going to hear the words 'doping' and 'illegal substances' and 'performance-enhancing.' Nothing could be further from the truth. Everything you're going to hear, all of the matters that Mr. Greenberg is going to discuss, involve lawful, allowable therapeutic medications that are used every day. Doping refers to the use of illegal substances such as anabolic steroids to gain a competitive advantage. There will be no evidence of any of that in this case.”

Regarding his argument that none of Baffert's violations were of a serious nature, Robertson questioned why NYRA would seek to ban the trainer. He suggested that certain influential members of the NYRA Board of Directors were out to get his client.

“Why are we here? The short answer is we shouldn't be here,” he said. “The long answer is the only reason we are here is that there are a handful of NYRA board members that can answer that question. They have some personal vendetta against Mr. Baffert. Do they not like him? Or perhaps since they own horses that race in New York, they are tired of Mr. Baffert coming to New York and beating them in New York races and they want to eliminate a competitor. Only they can answer that question. Despite the fact they want to ruin this Hall of Famer's career, we asked them to come here to appear, to testify, to tell us why they are doing this to Mr. Baffert. They refused to show up. It's a sad day in horse racing and a sad day when they are trying to punish this good man.”

Calling Baffert, “one of the most accomplished and respected individuals in all of racing,” Robertson asked Sherwood to decide “enough is enough” and prohibit NYRA from suspending the trainer.

The hearing began with the two sides arguing over what could and could not be admitted as evidence, including the Saturday Night Live lampoon of the trainer.

NYRA called its first witness, Rick Goodell, a lawyer who was formerly with the New York Gaming Commission. Goodell was largely asked to explain some of the more technical matters involved in the case, like what is lidocaine.

The post Sides Coming Out Swinging in Baffert-NYRA Hearing appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights