RULING

The judges said in their ruling the issue was whether or not the defendants entered a dishonest conspiracy.

They found the jury did not reach its conclusion on the basis of one transaction, or one witness.

“There was extensive evidence of the use of drugs to pacify horses or diminish the symptoms of pain. The defence line on this was that such use was normal.

“The jury had to consider this evidence as a whole, with the defendants’ attitudes, and thus honesty, in mind.”

The judges said there was unanswerable evidence of Jurecka and Johnson manoeuvring and lying to ensure vetting was done by Smith.

“There was at least one example of extremely strong evidence a blood sample from a pony, other than the horse to be sold, was to be taken, so as to pass off the sample and the test results as coming from the traded horse. That is powerful evidence of dishonesty,” the judges added. “Even allowing for the concessions of the prosecution witnesses relied on under this ground, in our judgment there was ample material before the jury supportive of the Crown case.”

The judges added: “It was freely and properly acknowledged the jury had been reminded of all the material in respect of which the appellants criticise the judge. The argument really boils down to the complaint that the judge did not recapitulate this evidence.

“We are firmly of the view the case against the appellants was very strong. These convictions are not unsafe. The appeal on this ground is dismissed.” Two women and a vet jailed for a “despicable” scam involving drugging sick and potentially dangerous horses, and selling them to unsuspecting buyers have lost their appeals against conviction.

Equestrian centre partners Charlotte Johnson and Aniela Jurecka and vet David Smith went to the Court of Appeal in London after they were jailed for two-and-a-half years in July 2016.

They challenged the conviction on the single ground that Judge Martin Joy failed in his summing up to remind the jury of any of the concessions made by prosecution witnesses during crossexamination.

The argument was rejected by Lord Justice Irwin, Sir Alan Wilkie and Judge Gregory Dickinson QC in a written ruling.

Johnson also appealed against her sentence and won a sixmonth reduction to two years. The appeal court judges consid-