Thursday, 24 May 2012

RACING POST FRIDAY MAY 25th 2012.


RACING POST FRIDAY MAY 25th 2012
WEEK MONDAY MAY 21st  to  SUNDAY MAY 27th 2012

REVIEW YESTERDAY'S RESULTS
PREVIEW TODAY'S CARDS

SIR HENRY CECIL has outlined his preference to keep the world's best horse FRANKEL at a mile for his next run at Royal Ascot.

RELATED LINKS


The superstar colt took his unbeaten record to ten with an imperious display in the JLT Lockinge Stakes at Newbury on Saturday.
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/royal-ascot-ascot-sir-henry-cecil-cecil-reiterates-queen-anne-preference-for-frankel/1037452/royalascot/#newsArchiveTabs=last7DaysNews






YESTERDAY'S RACING POST REPORTS AS FOLLOWS 

GRAHAM GREEN "FITZSIMONS GIVES UP PURSUIT OF

LEGAL COSTS .....
"PAUL FITZSIMONS, who last December emerged from the biggest corruption investigation in the history of British racing without a stain on his character, has been forced to admit defeat in his bid to recover a proportion of the legal costs of close to £90,000 he incurred in clearing his name.



The BHA slammed the door to any further discussion of the issue when informing the jockey-turned-trainer he will not receive a penny after the disciplinary panel decided he was not unfairly treated. There is no appeal against the ruling.



"Fitzsimons, who was acquitted of being part of a conspiracy, of supplying inside information and of deliberately riding to lose on IT'S A MANS WORLD at Lingfield at Lingfield in February 2009, exhausted his life savings to fight the case and is angry at being refused ant recompense from the governing body that brought the charges against him.



"KIRSTY MILCZAREK, who was involved in the same inquiry and had her two- year ban overturned last month, is also understood to be planning to seek  compensation for her legal expenses, but is likely to channel her claim through the BHA's appeal board, which can sanction payments up to £20,000, a route denied Fitzsimons, as he was found not guilty on all counts.



"His plight not only highlights an apparent contradiction in how racing's disciplinary process operates, but also looks certain to produce renewed calls for the creation of a central fund to help meet defence costs in the most serious cases heard by the BHA, a move advocated by the Professional Jockeys Association.



" Fitzsimons, who retired from the saddle to concentrate on training at Saxton Gate Stables in Lambourn following the death of his partner Julia Tooth in December 2010, has been advised by his legal team that pursuing a case through the civil courts would offer little prospect of success and that he could be ordered to pay the BHA's costs if unsuccessful.



"I've no money left so there is nothing I can do but accept it, although I'm very unhappy," said Fitzsimons, "I would have been hung, drawn and quartered had I not fought the charges and my legal team were brilliant, so in that respect the money was well spent, but I believe I am entitled to at least some of it back as I hadn't done anything wrong."



"Fitzsimons, who had to remortgage  his home, has been forced to stop work on the new boxes being built in his yard as he was anticipating  a cheque from the BHA to finish the project.



"He added: I'm delighted Kirsty won her appeal and good luck to her if she gets compensation, but I don't even get a sniff at the door and that can't be right. I would bite the BHA's hand off if they offered me £20,000, but from the email I got from them I won't be getting anything."



"In a statement, the BHA said: "The disciplinary panel received an application for costs from Paul Fitzsimons . In his  own application Mr Fitzsimons does not contend  that there is any provision in the rules which empowers the panel to make any award of costs against the BHA.



"However, it is also true that Mr Fitzsimons was not treated unfairly in being proceeded against by the BHA, and if the panel did have the power to award costs to people treated unfairly, it would not exercise it in this case."



"The statement added:  Fitzsimons relies essentially on the fact that he always gave a clear and consistent account of his ride of' IT'S A MANS WORLD and that the evidence against him did not change from the outset of the investigation.  But it falls way short of establishing unfair treatment. The panel felt he had a serious case to answer on the basis of the material put before it by the BHA. Although the panel came to a different conclusion  about Fitzsimons' ride than the BHA advocate, the BHA's contentions were neither improper nor based on flimsy grounds."


J MARGARET CLARKE TURFCALL COMMENT

CALLING INTO QUESTION THIS  BHA QUOTE:
"The BHA's contentions were neither improper nor based on flimsy grounds ......
THIS IS  actually a case of improper BHA justice/judgement based upon flimsy grounds, due to the fact that the BHA disciplinary panel are all Bloodhorse Illiterate so this immediately places all the issues in contention out of context.
The BHA are punishing people for achieving True Professional Bloodhorse Literacy in their own right, both In the Saddle and Out of the Saddle, both in Theory and in Practice. For this reason the BHA's working practices are redundant, estranged, not fit for purpose.
How much damage money do the BHA owe Paul Fitzsimons? And all the others who have been prosecuted unjustly same?

TURFCALL -  JOIN UP -  KEEPING WATCH OVER OVER
 THE BRITISH HORSERACING AUTHORITY
http://turfcall2.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/british-horseracing-authority-called-to.html  






No comments:

Post a comment