Butler disqualified for

While the BHA identified nine other trainers who used the drug, no charges were brought because there were no positive samples and the treatments were advised and administered by vets and fully recorded to medical records.

However this loophole was closed at the end of last month with the BHA amending its rules so that from December 1 a trainer may be charged if certain prohibited substances are administered to horses in their care or control, without the requirement for a positive sample to have been obtained.



Translates to - depends who you are and who you know.

""Translates to - depends who you are and who you know.""

Totally agree, MagicD.

Maybe legal advisers also a factor .

Kelly - in what way?

So if you shoot someone with a gun and write it down its ok. Or if no one sees you doing it its grand. Five years for one and the others get off scot free!

The severity of the punishment here is because he was bullsh*tting all along about Sungate being the treatment in question.

Not much sympathy here, i'm afraid.

In fact, make that no sympathy. He's bang to rights.

LOL @ Dr G

pretty scathing comments against him there.

injecting his own horses with ilegal drugs, taken at face value the punishment looks right from what i've read and heard so far.

Used a drug not designed for equine use, paid for by himself, administered by himself, and then covered it up to the extent of not even informing the vet what he had administered.

Still had the cheek to try and play the sympathy card with the public when he got caught.

Dr I dont know the ins and outs of it but it appears harsh considering the others escaped any censure considering the effect on the horses was the same. You say he paid for the drug himself. I dont get the significance of this - are you saying someone else paid for the drugs used by the other trainers (including Al Zarooni)!!!

He bought a product not designed, and untested, for use on horses (not Sungate)
Paid for it himself (in order to cover it up)
Administered it himself, including using junior stable staff who wouldn't question him (in order to cover it up)
Didn't tell the vet what he'd given them (in order to cover it up)

And you think it's harsh? What a load of b*llocks.

Arklearkle; the other trainers horses were not found to be testing positive on the 2nd test.
Butler's failed consistently, if you read the BHA report section 6.1-6.7 it makes it v clear how naughty he has been & the deception was deliberate

You have not answered my question re who paid for the other trainers drugs. I dont really consider it harsh but relative to how the others have been treated I find it a bit strange.

But still, no matter what he did, the BHA knew in February he was up to no good.  They thought it was only Sungate, so no drama?  Yet Zarooni wiped inside a week for 8 years.  Butler allowed to train on for doing the same thing in their eyes, found to be much worse, and only wiped out for 5, after nearly 12 months of training horses after being caught?

It is all ridiculous really.  The amount we know has nothing on what we aren't being told.

You have not answered my question re who paid for the other trainers drugs.

You are missing the point. He paid for them himself, in order to not raise flags about what he was administering to his horses. This is entirely at odds with his initial public statements trying to make out he was just caught up in the Sungate issue like everyone else, and an example of just how underhanded he has been in this entire matter.

If the horses treated illegally with Sungate won afterwards should they keep their winnings?

In reply to Dr Gonzo I suggest, from what I have heard, that Butler knew vets were applying Sungate and purchased what he thought was a similar item and saved money by applying it himself and not employing a vet. A totally different scenario AZ.
We should be told who the other vets are because while we are being treated like fools we cannot know that justice is seen to be done.

*other trainers  (not vets).

Brig that is my point - justice should always appear to be done. I would hardly recognise Gerard Butler if he came into the room where I am now so I have no hidden agenda.

In reply to Dr Gonzo I suggest, from what I have heard, that Butler knew vets were applying Sungate and purchased what he thought was a similar item and saved money by applying it himself and not employing a vet.

He administered the significantly stronger Rexogin to the horses himself, then allowed those horses to be treated further by vets, without them having any knowledge of what he had given them.

Oh, and 'he purchased what he thought was a similar item'?

Yes, if I owned a horse and I was looking for some medication for it, my first port of call would be a website aimed at bodybuilders.

it would be extremly naieve to think that only Zarooni & Butler where/are at it

So does the stable continue with one of his team at the helm?

is he married?

married &
kids

I didn't say where he got them Dr. Where do you get them except vets? If the use of Stanozolol improves horses then we should know the facts about what trainers and horses were involved. Something doesn't fit. I cannot remember anything like it.

If the use of Stanozolol improves horses then we should know the facts about what trainers and horses were involved.

I don't disagree.

None of that changes the fact that Butler knew exactly what he was up to, and has been punished accordingly. The whole 'saving money' excuse is a complete crock of sh*t, and was recognised by the BHA as such.

And let's not forget - this punishment is as much about a distinct lack of care towards the welfare of the horses under his care than it is about the potential performance enhancement.

He bought the drug that he injected into the horses' knees (without the knowledge of a vet) over the internet!
Would anyone on here in his right mind buy medicines over the internet and administer them to themselves or to an animal?
He shouldn't be allowed within a hundred yards of a horse ever again.

I am not defending GB, even the press have been surprised with the details, but why are the racing press not asking the questions ffs? If Stanozolol improves horses what the f u ck is going on?

Rogg you don't know what experience he had, do you?

but why are the racing press not asking the questions ffs?

Errm...

Rogg you don't know what experience he had, do you?

"He accepted that he was not used to dealing with the glass vials of drugs and found them difficult to open and broke some vials and spilt Rexogin from others that he used."

Sounds like just the sort of person who is well-trained in how to administer drugs to a horse...

Thanks,Dr.  saved me having to respond.

feel sorry for his wife and kids......but he aint much of a loss now is he......what did he ever do anyway.....fukk all.....

Did the b do it?

..disgusting behaviour.....despicable......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/horse-racing/25211486

..banged to rights....no excuses.....lucky it was only 5 years......

sickening.......wonder what other dreadful practices are hidden from the public by the horsey community who we are always told have the horses best interests at the forefront of their minds...

..and when anyone dares to question them....although the racing journalists (I use the term very very loosely) will never do....

..the only reply is you are not a horsey person and don't concern yourself with things you don't understand.

sickening.

I know it involved less horses than Al Zarooni but in my view it appears Butler's actions were worse. So why does Al Zarooni get eight years and Butler only five years?

tough on his family but must agree 5 years wasnt harsh

Come on BHA who are the 9 other trainers? they must know where an awful lot of bodies are buried

How come some got no ban

It is immaterial as to how experienced he was at administering drugs, he is NOT a qualified veterinarian and so therefore is committing a criminal act by contravention of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 in injecting intra-articularly(into the joint).

Quote from the Daily Telegraph:
"With certain exceptions for farmers, under the Veterinary Surgeons Act it an offence for anyone other than a vet to give animals an 'intra-articular’ injection. Injecting into joints is a skilled job requiring great accuracy. Even the most experienced vets do not always get it right and should infection be introduced to the joint it is often curtains for a horse’s racing career.

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons confirmed this type of injection was not a “minor medical procedure” and it was therefore against the law for a 'lay person’ to carry it out."

I worked for a vet in the US some years ago and we did plenty of intra-articular injections.  The vet would scrub the area he intended to inject for about 20 minutes to ensure it was as clean as he could possibly get it.  If there is any transfer of bacteria, you run the risk of the joint becoming infected and then it is more than likely game over for the poor effing horse. I lost a filly like this due to a normal foot infection, which then tracked up to her hock.  Her whole hock seized up and went rigid.  Nothing I nor any vet could do.

So when I hear about a trainer injecting joints himself, with a product that isn't even registered for horses, that he has bought off the internet, it makes me very, very angry.  He's on a par with Howard Johnson, IMO.  It should have been longer than 5 years.

great post LM..

couldn't agree more.

It's a naive to think these people work completely independently and I am including Al Zarooni.

LM I wonder how many people have been prosecuted for said offence?

Well said LM

injecting horses himself,what a classy guy..remember his stable jock was e ahern..

Surely the owners of the 4 horses concerned have a case for suing him in the civil courts?

Gooroo and Arklearkle are completely missing the point. In the other stables Sungate was allegedly administered by a firm of veterinary surgeons. Butler's activities were in a totally different league.

Exactly. There should've been a proper investigation into the Sungate issue, but that in no way diminishes the seriousness of Butler's offences.

His excuses are risible.

looks like the injections occured dec/jan thus trying to get the training benefit but out of the system come the flat season how long would that drug take to leave the system LM?

I want to know which horses ran on this substance and when,if only for the formbook alone it is information that should be public,as for a newmarket vet not knowing this was banned,they deserve a ban also

I agree totally with Gooroo on that.

looks like plenty had their hand in the cookie jar but no crumbs left for authorities to bring charges that would stick.
As for Vet practice not knowing ROFLMAO.

All cheats should be banned.. well done the  BHB.........

In light of the recent announcement and revelation about the actual drug used as opposed to what Gerard Butler had previously claimed, this man should never be allowed to work in a position of responsibility in a licensed racing stable ever again, no matter where the location.

His actions were blatant cheating.

For a number of years there had been whispers within the industry about Butler's methods, you have to say they have eventually proved accurate.

Dec 4, 2013 -- 4:22PM, gooroo wrote:

I want to know which horses ran on this substance and when,if only for the formbook alone it is information that should be public,as for a newmarket vet not knowing this was banned,they deserve a ban also

Prince Alzain was one

WalkingStreet, I think you are absolutely right.  In fact if you read the last 2 paragraphs the RP has just posted, its amazing he hasn't been.  Or perhaps its due to the maximum sentence they can impose.

Can you imagine if you or I decided to treat a child in our care with such a procedure?  Just because we had seen a doctor on "Casualty" having a go!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gejEDjh_uWs

Anyone could try their hand at it.

Barking up the wrong tree there Silver......different thing entirely.

Try this one then JR?.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnGvfI378Fc

Would you like to try it Silver....seems so simple doesn't it....

Doesn't look that difficult at all JR.

You are barking up the wrong tree Lairy. If you feel like that you should outside battery chicken houses and calling for a ban on NH racing immediately.

Neither does nailing shoes onto horses feet....fancy a crack at that as well....

Anyone think a trainer would ever be able to administer an injection on his own to a sensitive part of a horse ? Minimum someone holding the horses head .

I would find it amazing if anyone attempted to administer any injection to a horse unless they were trained to do so or had been shown how to by a qualified person .  Which opens  another can of worms .

didnt he spend some time in america so would probably have more experience than some?

I think the Ban very harsh,when considering treatment of other owners,trainers(Godolphin)earlier in the year.

There lies the problem Geoff.....Butler spent to much time in America......injecting joints everyday ocurrance.....some horses wouldn't walk out of the box without one.

I'm always being labelled an apologist on here but what's the one summing up word to describe those who are so eager to see things that aren't there that they can't see the things that are? Most of the questions in the thread were already answered by post two of it and it just needs reading and taking in, rather than skim reading and then jumping to the nonsense conspiracy theories so beloved by so many.

The Al Zarooni and Butler cases were nothing like the other 9 unnamed trainers and you only have to break each part of post two down to see that:

"While the BHA identified nine other trainers who used the drug, no charges were brought because there were no positive samples and the treatments were advised and administered by vets and fully recorded to medical records."

So Butler's horse tested positive and the other 9 trainers' horses didn't......seems a fairly easy distinction to me.

The other 9 trainers were advised the treated by their vet (the same one) and was administered by their vet.....Butler (and Al Zarooni) didn't use a vet and did it all off his own back.

Plus if you were one of the 9 and were knowingly giving your horses banned drugs, would you record it in your medical books? Presumably Butler didn't and the 9 did.

And yes of course the 9 paid for their drugs but the difference is they paid the vet for them, the same vet who administered them too and if it was a case of "it depends who you are" as to whether they got a ban or not them Al Zarooni would still be training now if the inference is that those who are or who are connected to big names are treated differently.

That's a new look at justice Ima. You should try it when you can. Even if the evidence shows you did it, whether assisted or not, because you weren't caught in the act means it's OK.
I am not saying the trainers should be charged but where horses are given steroids, no matter what dose, and the effect of steroids can last a lifetime apparently, then the names of those horses an their trainers, in whose care they were, should be disclosed. Justice must not only be done it must be seen to be done.

Just repeating the facts brigust1, not giving a personal view but presumably this all came about once a Butler horse tested positive and then the BHA dug deeper, so without the Butler horse failing then it might never have surfaced.

You could argue that there's an element of protecting the other 9 but by the same token can argue that their names and reputations would be severely damaged with a knock on effect on their careers and their ability to earn a living for themselves and those who depend on them for theirs too.

Look how Kirsty Milczarek had struggled since being banned and then having that overturned.

Surely the trainers are totally responsible for the care of their horses including what medications are administered. Ignorance of a law is normally not accepted as a defence.

No-one will blame the trainers Ima, ffs, especially if the vets accept responsibility.

hat irks me is the BHA saying 'Trust us'. Why should I?

It sets a dangerous precedence. In fact had Butler not been caught would we have even heard about this?

Like I said 'It sets a dangerous precedent'.

I home owners sue,sick

I think the problem here is that the trainers didn't have the medical knowledge such as actual drug names, brand names and what each drug contained and nor did the vets didn't have the BHA rules knowledge and treated the horses' problems merely as horses with that problem, as opposed to thoroughbred racehorses under BHA guidelines and if the trainers have happily recorded in their medical books what drugs were administered then they clearly were in ignorance and not trying to hide anything.

Ignorance to the law isn't usually much of a defence when someone directly breaks a law or rule themselves but if say an accountant or lawyer does so on behalf of their client and without the client knowing then isn't it a bit harsh to punish the client for it? If somebody's accountant unbeknown to them siphons off their money and uses it for illegal purposes then I think it would be rubbing salt in the wounds to implicate and punish the client too and if some of the damning evidence towards Al Zarooni and Butler is that they cut out using a vet then the only other alternative is to actually use a vet and that's what the other 9 trainers did.

I agree to some degree Ima but on a slightly different tack I find it very difficult to accept that the vets were not aware of the significance of what they were administering.

I would be surprised if there is a vet anywhere in these isles who does not look sceptically at any new product which comes on the market . Having done that , the decision on whether to recommend use of the product is the crux . Successful horses , training success , all are grist to the mill , increased vets fees etc . Slippery slope .

The veterinary industry seems to be getting a bye ball in all this exercise , fair enough  if a trainer goes it alone in sourcing substances as in this case .  But if the source and administration of performance enhancing substances does not involve some blame and penalty for the vets it is not a level playing field .  Do the vets have a regulatory body with teeth ?

I think some of you might be overlooking the fact that some drugs are not illegal to give to different types of horses other than thoroughbred racehorses in training and that the BHA have no jurisdiction over general everyday vets so the vet treating an in-training racehorse might be the same one treating anything from a riding school pony to a farm horse to a police horse all with the same problem.

Under those circumstances it's not the vet's place to know any rules regarding racehorses and what they can and can't be given but by the same token racehorse trainers probably don't have the full medical knowledge of what can and can't be used and/or brand names, as opposed to technical names of drugs and what ingredients those brand names might include.

I'm sure all trainers are well aware that their horses can't be given steroids when you label it by that all encompassing term but how many trainers know what Stanozolol or Winstrol are and which if any brand name drugs contain those?

Fair point but I think in general certainly the vets that are used by the big training centres, Newmarket, Lambourn etc. are completely aware of what can and can't be administered.  In fact if you ring them up, they will give you a run-down of what the withdrawal periods are for most drugs.  There are certain vets who will get you what they term "safe but not yet registered drugs" - most likely from the US or Ireland.  And many trainers don't question that. 

I think what happened with the "Not Named Nine" is that a vet says "hey guys, there's this great product called Sungate just come on the market. Its excellent for slightly rickety joints - lets pop some into that horse over there and it'll be right as ninepence!"  There may or may not have been discussion of the steroidal content or the necessary withdrawal period.  And I think a lot of trainers jump on the bandwagon of the next new product/treatment that will allow them to train their horses who are too fragile.

The question has to be , who understands medication , Vets or Trainers and i think we all know the answer to that...

his behaviour is so unprofessional............administering drugs to equine athletes is a serious biz..............this is a health issue. i cant believe what i have read. he should be banned for life. i dont want to listen to any gravy chain merchants writing with sympathy on this one. its very clear cut.

Anyone think a trainer would ever be able to administer an injection on his own to a sensitive part of a horse ? Minimum someone holding the horses head .

Used junior stable staff to help him. Less likely to question him than the head lad etc, obviously.

Getting like a Dick Francis thriller , Dr Gonzo . All done at the witching hour of midnight no doubt . From the limited amount I would know re stables , minimum 3 to handle the injection job I would suggest .