Attorneys in the hearing between the NYRA and Bob Baffert issued an opening statement Monday while turning into a deliberative session, with one side claiming the NYRA Board members had an anti-corruption relationship. against Baffert and the other argued that the Hall of Fame coach was responsible for a “pervasive doping violation” and deserved a temporary suspension.
The hearing, which is expected to last three to five days, will determine whether the NYRA should allow efforts to suspend Baffert for a drug-positive rash, including one during the 2021 GI Kentucky Derby, allowed or not. The hearing is being held before O. Peter Sherwood, a retired New York Supreme Court Justice. Baffert was present at the hearing.
Representing the NYRA, attorney Hank Greenberg spoke first and foremost about the six drug violations Baffert amassed between July 27, 2019 and May 1, 2021, the day of last year’s Derby, argues that so many breaches in such a short period of time is unprecedented. .
“In the modern history of Thoroughbred racing, we cannot find anyone who can recall anything like this by a famous coach,” Greenberg said.
Greenberg said that Baffert “took a demolition ball over a two-year period because the integrity of the sport was so good to him.”
He paid particular attention to Baffert’s violations in the Derby, GI Kentucky Oaks and GI Arkansas Derby.
“In 2021 and 2020, the only Triple Crown he’s responsible for will destroy three Class I races,” Greenberg said.
After Baffert revealed that he had been informed by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission that Medina Spirit (Protonico) had tested positive for betamethasone, the trainer conducted several interviews and Greenberg said he We never took responsibility for solving our problems until we “destroyed the culture. ”
“He’s on the Dan Patrick Show, he’s on SportsCenter, he’s on Fox and his attacks on people continue,” Greenberg said. “He said he didn’t believe in conspiracy theories and then he started floating one. The damage to the Thoroughbred race in these two days is unforeseeable.”
Greenberg’s assertion that Baffert’s actions hurt, not only the NYRA, but motorsport was a recurring theme in his opening debate. He said the NYRA had an obligation to act and defend the sport and that was one of the reasons the NYRA took action against Baffert. Doing it differently could mean horse racing could follow the same path as dog racing, he suggests.
“What if those organizations don’t do their best or do everything in their power to protect the safety of the animals, in this case the horses?” he say. “What happened is what happened with greyhound racing, which you don’t see anymore. That’s what happened to the circus, where there were lion tamers. They don’t exist anymore.”
Greenberg says the extended suspension is so, “NYRA can protect the race, protect the horses, protect the horses and protect itself.”
Representing Baffert, attorney Craig Robertson argued that Baffert’s violations were not of a serious nature and that using terms like “doping” when referring to Baffert was incorrect and unfair.
“I doubt you’ll hear a lot of harsh words from the NYRA,” says Robertson. “You will hear the words ‘doping’ and ‘illegal substances’ and ‘enhance performance.’ Nothing could be better than the truth. All you will hear, all the matters that Mr. Greenberg will discuss, involve legal, therapeutic drugs that are allowed for daily use. Doping refers to the use of illegal substances such as anabolic steroids to gain a competitive advantage. There will be no proof of that in this case.”
Regarding his argument that none of Baffert’s violations were of a serious nature, Robertson questioned why the NYRA was seeking to ban the coach. He suggested that some influential members of the NYRA Board of Directors went out of their way to get their clients.
“Why are we here? The short answer is we shouldn’t be here,” he said. “The long answer is that the only reason we’re here is that there are a handful of NYRA board members who can answer that question. They have some personal opinions against Mr. Baffert. They don’t like him? Or perhaps because they owned New York racers, they were tired of Mr. Baffert coming to New York and beating them in New York races and they wanted to eliminate a competitor. Only they can answer that question. Despite the fact that they wanted to ruin this Hall of Famer’s career, we asked them to come here to present themselves, to testify, to tell us why they did this to Mr. Baffert. They refused to show up. It was a sad day in horse racing and a sad day when they were trying to punish this good man. ”
Calling Baffert, “one of the most accomplished and respected individuals in all of racing,” Robertson asked Sherwood to decide “enough is enough” and forbid the NYRA from suspending the coach.
The hearing began with the two sides arguing over what could and could not be admissible as evidence, including the trainer’s Saturday Night Live broadcast.
The NYRA called its first witness, Rick Goodell, an attorney formerly with the New York Game Commission. Goodell was primarily asked to explain some of the technical issues involved in the case, like what lidocaine is.
