Bevie’s Delight (far side) was tested positive for Trendione after dead-heating with stablemate Except Temptation in her last start (Candiese Lenferna Photography).
Horseracing owner and aficionado, attorney Robert Bloomberg, toiled for many years to bring the NHA’s “strict liability” rule into line with the six major racing jurisdictions around the world and he finally succeeded a couple of months ago.
It could well be a timely rule amendment for Summerveld trainer Peter Muscutt, because it might well save him from conviction in an inquiry, due to be held tomorrow, into a horse of his which was tested positive for a forbidden substance called Trendione.
Bloomberg explained, “My fight in bringing it into line was in allowing trainers to discharge the onus and burden of proof where contamination has taken place beyond their control and not merely being automatically guilty as the trainer of the horse that tested positive to a prohibited or forbidden substance”.
Rule 76.16 now states: 76.16 If a TRAINER and/or OWNER of a HORSE is convicted of a contravention of any of the subrules to RULE 73.2, it shall be mitigatory even to the extent of no penalty for such TRAINER and/or OWNER if he is able to conclusively prove in discharging the onus and burden of proof, that the TRAINER and/or OWNER took all reasonable precautions to prevent such positive finding of that PROHIBITED SUBSTANCE and to prove that the TRAINER and/or OWNER could not have reasonably foreseen the circumstances which led to the PROHIBITED SUBSTANCE from being present in the HORSE and that such positive finding resulted only from contamination. Notwithstanding the aforegoing, all affected horses shall be automatically disqualified and the provisions of RULE 67.7.8 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
[Amended 01.09.2023]
A forbidden substance is not allowed in a horse at any time or in any amount.
However, Trendione is known around the world to be associated with a substance called Altrenogest, an oestrus suppressant, whose use is provided for in the provisions of the NHA’s Exempted Substances List.
The details about the Muscutt case, and how the cause of the positive was likely due to Altrenogest that was contaminated at manufacture stage, was published in an article by Turf Talk last week.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE
It would seem then that Muscutt will, as is reflected in the new rule, be able to conclusively prove in discharging the onus and burden of proof, that as the trainer of Bevie’s Delight he took all reasonable precautions to prevent such positive finding of Trendione and can prove that he could not have reasonably foreseen the circumstances which led to the Trendione from being present in the horse and that such positive finding resulted only from contamination.
If he succeeds in doing that he will not be convicted.
