In view of the collapse of the fixing case against Kieren Fallon (amongst others), is horse-racing now clean, or was it a case of insufficient evidence?
The prosecution's main witness was Australian racing steward Ray Murrihy, who found fault with the jockeys in 13 of the 27 races, but also admitted he knew little about the rules and culture of British racing.
The judge, Mr Justice Forbes said: "It is abundantly clear that his evidence fell far, far short of establishing a prima facie breach of UK racing rules.
"I have reached the conclusion that even if it was appropriate to admit Mr Murrihy's expert opinion... very little value can be attached to it."
(from:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7105207.stm )

Was it 'just' that the jockeys involved should have been suspended and thereby deprived of their livelihood (at least in Britain). It has been pointed out that other professions would have suspended the suspects but continued to pay them (until they were found guilty). Wouldn't it be constructive or unfair dismissal if pilots were prevented from working if suspected of contravening rules (or laws)? I understand that the Police and Horse-Racing Authority (don't know what they call themselves now) are scanning the evidence to see whether there is anything that can be used to bring alternative charges . . .

Will the prosecution serve to 'warn-off' any groups who might have considered interference with the results of races, however?

Or will things continue just as before?

Any horse-racing enthusiasts?
Obviously not . . . http://209.85.48.8/1889/52/emo/ermthink.gif

I may have been known to have a punt from time to time, but sadly do not know much about the English scene, nor the incident to which you refer!:ok:

Have a "Watch" barbie at Uttox if we can co-ordinate days off...Horses, what horses?....Oh yes, we can't start the barbies until after the last race...:ugh:
We're Hank Marvin by then......
watp,iktch

I may have been known to have a punt from time to time, but sadly do not know much about the English scene, nor the incident to which you refer!
Nor did the Aussie 'expert' who constituted the crux of the prosecution case it seems (apparently nobody from the UK would act for the prosecution).

So it's jst as crooked over there then?;)

Mrs. CP and I owned some race horses a while back. And yes, there are some things one does not really want to know about that goes on. However, these things usually occur at the end of the Meet.

Once we won a really large purse, $150,000.00 USD. (Well for us anyway.) Boy I was happy, Mrs C-P was really, really happy. Had a big party at the house, lots of folks. A huge time was had by all.

The next day I figured up what out net winnings were, outside of our personal bets at the window, (which we had our friends place) and after all the vet bills, track bills, feed bills, Jockey's share and all the other bills we had a net loss of over $5,000.00.

Now, do you really want to know why we are no longer in the horse racing business? :(

Oh, the name of the horse was Angel Biscuit. A little horse with a really huge heart. She loved to race.

is horse-racing now clean, or was it a case of insufficient evidence?
Nor did the Aussie 'expert' who constituted the crux of the prosecution case it seems
It would seem from the rather extensive story that I have just watched on one of the nightly sport shows here, that you were correct and the Aussie 'Expert' (sic) seemed to know nothing about the English racing scene!:rolleyes:

Therefore one would concude that your initial observation is also correct!:ok:

ie: Insufficient evidence was put forward!;)