[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

The ultimate value of the information should not be in question. Value is always in the eye of the interpreter. But there is an official keeper of the data

I'm no lawyer, but I highly recommend everyone read the indictments, specifically of the clocker, if you haven't already. The federal involvement is made pretty clear. Here is my understanding...

1. The ability to bet on races from out of state is an exercise in interstate commerce, a power overseen by the federal government. This came through in the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978

2. The distribution of the signal across state lines is, essentially, a wire.

3. The feds allege, in the indictments, that attempting to or actually being caught injecting a horse with a substance that is prohibited, or at a time that is prohibited, is an act or an attempt to manipulate the outcome of the race.

4. As the race is distributed over "wire" across state lines, attempting to manipulate the outcome (or provide purposely incorrect information which is offered in the official record of the race and details of each horse, used by the bettors to draw their own conclusions), is deemed fraudulent - again, by the allegations put forth in the indictment.

Does it seem that hundreds of trainers or some number of clockers could be identified as in violation of the law, as it is attempting to be applied now? Yes.

Does it seem this is an attempt to set a new precedent, and thereby presumably clean-up the sport? Yes, absolutely...at least in someone's mind.

Paulick has the link to the indictments in his story:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...penn-national/

What they are claiming is pretty clear. My question is do these acts constitute felonies? Obviously they believe they can make these cases but I have doubts especially in the case of Rogers that the timing and person delivering a legal medication constitutes criminal manipulation other than in the broadest of definitions. Does the supposed personal monetary gain matter because the trainer of record (of which Rogers isnt) doesnt make a whole lot of money winning a race at Penn National.
In other words no one "manipulates" a race for the hell of it but the monetary gain here involving simply the trainers % of the purse is a pretty paltry sum for a case in Federal Court. I don't recall what class level her race was but the largest purse at Penn is generally 35k which would make the trainers % worth about 2000 which is less than the limit of small claims court. I understand that there are people who are betting on the race but as in every race in the parimutual system, the same amount was paid out to betters regardless of who wins.

I am not defending the accused here because they did in fact break the rules. My question is are these really felonies, should taxpayer money be spent trying cases in which the publics interest is only marginally affected (only the losing bettors could claim harm) and how broad are these interpretation going to be?

We have legal wagering on sporting events in 4 states I believe. Are pro sports next? Isn't a player who takes a PED doing the same thing?