Racing special BHA rocked by trainer Morrison steroid case verdict
Panel decides trainer unlikely to be involved Verdict deals hefty blow to BHA regulators
Hughie Morrison was fined £1,000 – the independent Disciplinary Panel even considered fining him a nominal £1 – and exonerated of any wrongdoing in the case of Our Little Sister, a filly of very limited ability who tested positive to an anabolic steroid at Wolverhampton on Jan 14.
Nearly 11 months after a black cloud settled over Summerdown Stables, East Ilsley, it was finally lifted yesterday after the outcome of the trainer’s two-day hearing this week was announced.
Morrison, who invited all his staff into his house for a drink at the news, said he was “over the moon” that the panel had concluded he was not involved in any way with the administration of the steroid and relieved that after the hell of 2017, he could look forward to 2018 with the affair behind him.
In a statement released through his solicitor, Andrew Chalk, the trainer pointed out the effect the case had on him and his yard: “I cannot overstate the stress that has been caused by this long-running case for me, my wife and all my staff and connections and the relief now felt having been rightly and so comprehensively exonerated.”
Racing’s rules of strict liability, which the trainer accepted, meant Morrison stood to be disqualified for anything between one and 10 years under the British Horseracing Authority’s zero tolerance approach to steroids.
But, while the BHA sought to have the book thrown at him under that rule, the trainer’s legal team had argued at the close of the hearing for a small fine.
Having concluded that on the balance of probabilities the trainer was not involved in administering nandrolone laurate and that it had been carried out by “a person or persons unknown, for reasons unknown” the panel settled for that; a relatively small fine, similar to the penalty a trainer would expect to receive if there was, for example, a horse tested positive to a legal medication that had overstayed its welcome in its system.
The outcome will be seen as a heavy defeat for racing’s regulatory authority, indeed the second within a month on strict liability after Philip Hobbs also escaped a penalty after a horse tested positive to a prohibited substance. On that occasion the BHA appealed the result but the original decision was upheld.
Jamie Stier, the BHA’S soon departing chief regulatory officer, put a brave face on it, highlighting the only positive it could take from the case.
“The rules are clear that it is the trainer’s responsibility to prevent horses taking part in our sport with prohibited substances in their system,” he said.
“It is important, therefore, that the trainer accepted he was in breach of the Rules of Racing [on strict liability]. We respect the panel’s decision, the Rules of Racing have been upheld and the matter of penalty is a matter wholly for the Disciplinary Panel to determine.”
But the conclusion of Morrison’s statement should not be forgotten: “The culprit who injected the filly is still out there, so everyone needs to be on their guard.”