Sorry that this is happening to you - please keep us posted. I will donate to your defense fund!!!
If you only compete at USEF sanctioned shows, you can create a progarm that becomes dependant on legal drugs because.....why not?
For what it is worth, I am not for zero tolerance nor am I for anything goes. I feel that if we altered how we judged hunters and looked at a better format for points (so we quit rewarding quantity over quality), the horses wouldn't stay on the road for weeks at a time and therefore not require so much chemistry to keep them going.
1. Any rider, driver, handler, vaulter, longeur, exhibitor, owner, agent, trainer or the parent of a junior exhibitor, or any Life, Senior, or Junior member present at the competition may file a protest with the Show Committee of a Licensed Competition or The Federation Hearing Committee alleging violation of any Federation rule(s).The protest must contain all information as specified in GR602.1 and must be:
a. in writing,
b. signed by the protester,
c. addressed to the Show Committee of the competition at which the alleged violation occurred, or to the Hearing Committee,
d. accompanied by a deposit of $200 if made by a Federation member or the parent of a junior exhibitor member or $300 if made by a non-member (if check, payable to the competition or to the Federation); said deposit will be refunded in the event the protest is upheld, and
e. received by the steward, technical delegate, a member of the Show Committee, the competition manager or the competition secretary within 48 hours of the alleged violation. If made directly to the Hearing Committee, the protest must be received at the Federation office by the tenth business day following the last recognized day of the competition, or by the tenth business day following the date on which the alleged violation occurred if it occurred other than at a Licensed Competition.
Just brainstorming here, but what if you also hit the horse in points for testing positive? Take them out of contention for Indoors and HOTY awards? Test positive, you automatically turn points for that competition year bad and are suspended for the rest of the competition year. Add suspension time for subsequent offences, leading to permanent suspension.
They don't need policing or subpoena powers, All they need is one more rule about investigations, members must have complete transparency, and present all paperwork and testimony required or their suspension becomes permanent. Kind of like someone who writes a bad check to a show. Either make good on requirements or be suspended indefinitely.
They are a private club, and can make the rules as they see them, no judge can say your rules are illegal as long as they don't discriminate. Suspending someone for failure to obey private club rules isn't discrimination..
As those of us who may be a little long in the tooth would have said in our youth, Right On DMK.
And re the big names on Amberhills Facebook page? Most of those people don't even "do" Facebook as a habit let alone remembering who they might have friended a few years back or to support that contest last year. The one that was made to sound like doing a favor for a lucky child that got some well known people helping her with it. They hardly knew her.
EM was never the biggest name in the business and came off at the shows as normal (or as normal as anybody else sweating by the gate for a Pony round). Seeing somebody casually for 15 minutes every so often does not mean you can tell they are crazy. Even on here, she posted under a different user name until recently-her posts always resulted in trainwrecks but I did not know it actually was somebody I knew very, very slightly until that contest and somebody linking to old posts under the old user name. Somebody with a user name Pony Mom with some numers after it, like a birth date, does not suggest a professional horse person any more then the thread contents did.
I dislike lawyer letters but can get one right back at her and still have no intention of posting anything on her wall...it just feeds the beast.
I think it would "inspire" a lot more fairness in competition. (At least as far as the use of drugs and medications.) I don't think that would be accomplished to such a degree with just a long suspension period.
I'm not sure what the amount per infraction should be. Enough to hurt most everyone. $15K sounded like a good amount, but maybe it should be more. I don't think that even extremely wealthy people would want to have to pay that as a fine.
Just because it wouldn't matter to some doesn't mean that it wouldn't help the sport.
I think it's fair to say that the person with the income that supports a $1500 horse would end up not paying the fine - and thus it's effectively a lifetime suspension.
Making it a set length of time is more democratic and more even regardless of the infractor's income or wealth. Kill all the points for the show year, make the suspension 6 months or longer.
And I do also agree that a person with a $1500 horse and a limited budget is going to be hurt more by a large fine, but I don't think they are the majority of the people out there trying to skirt the drug rules at rated shows!
Plus all they have to do is play by the rules and they don't get a fine or a suspension!
I still think both are a better deterrent than one.
The people who propose mandatory long suspensions combined with huge fines must be the kind of people who never, ever, ever make mistakes. Or have their horses handled by people who never, ever, ever make mistakes.
For the other 99.98 percent of the human race, it sounds like a bit much.
For example, I know a very upstanding trainer who got suspended several years ago. She had to go in the hospital for a few days unexpectedly for a health problem. She recovered, got out of the hospital, and went to the next horse show as scheduled. One of the horses tested positive for trace amounts of a sedative. It turned out that while the trainer was in the hospital, the vet had stopped by to do some routine work on the horse and sedated it, but nobody remembered to mention it to the trainer when she got home from the hospital.
She had a spotless record from decades of showing, and she explained the circumstances to the hearing committee. IIRC, she got a two month suspension and a fine of something like $4,000. Ouch. That seemed plenty harsh enough to me.
I do think the idea of increased fines and suspensions for repeat offenders has merit, but to clobber somebody for a first offense is overkill. It will certainly be an effective lifetime suspension for many people who either can't afford to pay a huge fine, or who will find some other enjoyable activity to pursue during a yearlong suspension.
Tammy Tucker, you might want to review legal ethics. You are not the attorney of record in the NJ case to which you make reference. By implying that you are Ms. Mandinaro's attorney, you are representing that you have the authority to subpoena people in that or any other case in NJ.Quote:
http://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/im...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by fair judyhttp://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/im...post-right.png..... and here you have it folks. if you even POST to Amber Hill's wall you get the attention of tammy tucker, attorney to the lunatic. what a piece of work she must be....... " Ms. Hochschwender,
Thank you for contacting my client, Elizabeth Mandarino. I understand that you post on the Chronicle Forums as “fair judy.” In June of this year, you posted that Kristen Williams, the woman who filed the protest regarding Humble, had “counsel for the protest.” You also have posted other comments that indicate a working knowledge of facts that are currently being litigated in a case pending in New Jersey. I would like to schedule a time to interview you by telephone regarding these facts. Depending on our discussion, I will be able to determine if we will ultimately need to issue a subpoena for your testimony.
Please let me know a convenient day and time after January 1 to talk.
Thank you, Tammy Tucker
A review of the NJ Bar Association list of members shows that you are not licensed to practice in that state.
Perhaps Ms. Tucker should limit her statements to those which are fully accurate; and not make comments which will potentially subject her to an ethics review by the only Bar Association of which she is a member -- the Virginia Bar.
Upon rereading the above post it seems more believable that Ms. Tucker, knowing her ethical responsibility and valuing her status as a member of the Virginia Bar Association, is not the person who wrote it. I am willing to give Ms. Tucker the benefit of the doubt that she is a hard working, conscientious lawyer whose name has been used by Ms. Mandarino without her permission or knowledge.
I agree leasing is a great option and often a lifesaver. However, doesn't a horse have to qualify in the hunter divisions for Devon? Even if not, the practice of leasing a pre-qualified horse for Devon or pony finals is a part of this story.
What is the case in New Jersey that folks are referring to??