Your Ask The Experts ID
is separate from your
Order Online Account ID
 Race of the Week:  2023 Breeders' Cup Days Final Figures Santa Anita 3-4 November 2023  • 1 Specials Available
Order Online
Buy TG Data
Complete Menu of
TG Data products
Simulcast Books
Customize a Value
Package of Select
TG Data
Sheet Requests
Order The Last Figure for Any Horse
Free Products
Redboard Room
Download and Review previous days' data.
Race of the Week
With detailed comments
ThoroTrack
Email notification when your horse races
Information
Introduction
For newcomers.
Samples and Tutorials
For Horsemen
Consulting services and Graph Racing
Sales Sites
Where to buy TG around the country
Archives
Historical races and handicapping articles
Handicapping
Hall of Fame
Major handicapping contest winners
Home Page
Re: Baffert Arguments (506 Views)
Posted by: BitPlayer (IP Logged)
Date: February 21, 2022 09:04PM

There is a statement from Baffert's attorney to be found in the Paulick Report:

https://paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/baffert-attorney-slams-egregious-medina-spirit-ruling-vows-appeal/

While I don't practice law, I generally find that the language of the law is not so obscure as to be inaccessible to laymen willing to struggle through it, so I decided to have a look:

The cited Rule 8:010, Section 4, looks to me like it is intended to distinguish substances like liniments that non-veterinarians may apply from those that require administration by a licensed veterinarian. The requirement that the treatment "does not include any drug, medication, or substance otherwise prohibited by this administrative regulation" indicates to me that the section is not intended to broaden the permitted medications.

The cited Rule 8:020-2 is not actually a list of prohibited medications. Rather, it is a set of withdrawal guidelines that describes itself as purely voluntary and advisory. Their purpose is described as follows: "A licensee may present evidence of full compliance with these guidelines to the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission (the “Commission” or “KHRC”) and the stewards as a mitigating factor to be used in determining violations and penalties." The following caveat is also included: "Medications administered at dosages above manufacturer’s recommendations, in compounded formulations and/or in combination with other medications and/or administration inside the withdrawal interval may result in test sample concentrations above threshold concentrations that could lead to positive test results and the imposition of penalties."

In that context the argument that the regulations only prohibit injection of betamethasone acetate sems to fall flat. Rather, the KHRC has only provided withdrawal guidelines for administration in that form.

There is a separate section of those guidelines that applies to ointments: It reads: "The following substances may be administered or applied up to the scheduled paddock time of the race in which the horse is to compete: Topical applications such as liniments, leg paints, salves, and ointments which may contain antibiotics or DMSO, but do not contain steroids, anesthetics, or any other prohibited substances."

Betamethasone (without reference to any particular salt) is listed a a Class C medication in Rule 8:020.

I know there are good legal minds who read this board and would be interested if anyone thinks I am way off track.



Subject Written By Posted
It’s official (670 Views) johnnym 02/21/2022 01:21PM
Re: It’s official (493 Views) Fairmount1 02/21/2022 08:35PM
Re: It’s official (439 Views) shanahan 02/21/2022 08:45PM
Small problem (534 Views) Fairmount1 02/21/2022 10:00PM
Re: Baffert Arguments (506 Views) BitPlayer 02/21/2022 09:04PM
Re: Baffert Arguments (501 Views) Strike 02/21/2022 09:18PM
Re: Baffert Arguments (495 Views) RICH 02/22/2022 05:30AM
Re: Baffert Arguments (314 Views) johnnym 02/25/2022 12:00PM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.

Thoro-Graph 180 Varick Street New York, NY 10014 ---- Click here for the Ask The Experts Archives.