Today via the DRF:
"A U.S. District Court judge has ordered that an indictment against a Pennsylvania trainer be dismissed...... The indictment stated that the trainers had allegedly given illegal
substances to horses or intended to give illegal substances to horses as
part of what the indictment claimed was a scheme to fix horse races. In his ruling, Caldwell said the indictment against Webb did not
contain any evidence that the trainer had actually bet on any of horses
that had been given illegal substances or urged anyone else to bet on
any of the horses."
We don't know the logistics of the case and we certainly will not comment on whether this gentleman is guilty or innocent of anything, but why do judges rulings think we don't matter?
We may have bet some of these races. Money may have been taken from us.
If a Fortune 500 CEO cooks the books would the judge say because he does not own stock in the company and did not profit from it we'll let him or her cook the books?
What about other horse owners? What about other trainers - a trainer who wins races illegally (allegedly), gets press, win percentage headlines, is noticed and gets new clients (possibly some of yours).
When a race is "fixed" there are victims. The trainer who is supposedly doing the fixing does not need to bet on his horse to make financial gain, or hurt others.
That's our opinion. What's yours?