Norman gets six-month suspension

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You don't believe the words to be true? Does that mean you think I'm lying or you think the former commisioner from the CHRB is lying. I've known the guy for 25 years. We even owned a horse together back in the 1980s. I can assure you that he's not lying.

Instead of accusing people of lying, why don't you call the CHRB and ask them if and how they make sure that a suspended trainer is not still collecting money while he's on suspension.

It's kind of like you are having a conversation with yourself. You said a great deal there. Wow, that's a real leap of semantics. Interesting enough -- I didn't say any of that. Here's what I said and here is what it means -- it means exactly what I said! Not what you think I said or accusing me of saying. Take a couple of steps back from the keyboard and relax. I am not nor did I accuse anybody of lying. I don't care what you and your friend claim on this matter. It's not a CA matter and I am not interested in your hypothetical matters, whether CA or otherwise.

I did not agree with your opinion on the entire subject. Thus, the words weren't my words and I didn't want them misconstrued as my words -- period!

Eric

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ELA

It's kind of like you are having a conversation with yourself. You said a great deal there. Wow, that's a real leap of semantics. Interesting enough -- I didn't say any of that. Here's what I said and here is what it means -- it means exactly what I said! Not what you think I said or accusing me of saying. Take a couple of steps back from the keyboard and relax. I am not nor did I accuse anybody of lying. I don't care what you and your friend claim on this matter. It's not a CA matter and I am not interested in your hypothetical matters, whether CA or otherwise.

I did not agree with your opinion on the entire subject. Thus, the words weren't my words and I didn't want them misconstrued as my words -- period!

Eric

You highlighted this quote from me:

"Here is what he told me about bank records: He said that the CHRB has invetigators and they will try to stay on top of the money trail and make sure the trainer is not getting paid. They don't actually subpoena the bank records. They ask the trainer to voluntarily turn them over. If the trainer refuses, then the Board can refuse to give him his license back. Then the trainer could take them to court if it got that far. But usually the trainers will cooperate and give the board their bank records for every month during the suspension."

Then you said, "I don't believe those words to be true".

If the words from my quote are not true, it can mean only one of two things. It would mean either I am lying or the guy from the CHRB is lying. If you don't think that either I or the guy from the CHRB is lying, then I don't know why you would say that you don't believe those words to be true. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the words are not true, then that would mean that either I or the guy from the CHRB is lying.

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You highlighted this quote from me:

"Here is what he told me about bank records: He said that the CHRB has invetigators and they will try to stay on top of the money trail and make sure the trainer is not getting paid. They don't actually subpoena the bank records. They ask the trainer to voluntarily turn them over. If the trainer refuses, then the Board can refuse to give him his license back. Then the trainer could take them to court if it got that far. But usually the trainers will cooperate and give the board their bank records for every month during the suspension."

Then you said, "I don't believe those words to be true".

If the words from my quote are not true, it can mean only one of two things. It would mean either I am lying or the guy from the CHRB is lying.

Richi,
In Ny(part of the United States) this is simply illegal, plain and simple.
NOONE can get that info except a police or govt agency and even they need a search warrant with probable cause of a crime displayed.
You don't get it.
No racing agency has that kind of power, none.
You are mistaking an agency for an agency with rights to do what you are describing.

[Scurlogue Champ]

How much does Pletcher charge?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by moodwalker

How much does Pletcher charge?

If you have to ask, you cant afford it !!!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If you have to ask, you cant afford it !!!

It would have to be at least $100. I would guess that it's probably more like $120.

Oops, this was meant as a reply to Moodwalker.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Richi,
In Ny(part of the United States) this is simply illegal, plain and simple.
NOONE can get that info except a police or govt agency and even they need a search warrant with probable cause of a crime displayed.
You don't get it.
No racing agency has that kind of power, none.
You are mistaking an agency for an agency with rights to do what you are describing.

Oracle, The guy said that they ask the person to voluntarily turn the bank records over. It's not illegal to ask a person to do something voluntarily.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You highlighted this quote from me:

"Here is what he told me about bank records: He said that the CHRB has invetigators and they will try to stay on top of the money trail and make sure the trainer is not getting paid. They don't actually subpoena the bank records. They ask the trainer to voluntarily turn them over. If the trainer refuses, then the Board can refuse to give him his license back. Then the trainer could take them to court if it got that far. But usually the trainers will cooperate and give the board their bank records for every month during the suspension."

Then you said, "I don't believe those words to be true".

If the words from my quote are not true, it can mean only one of two things. It would mean either I am lying or the guy from the CHRB is lying. If you don't think that either I or the guy from the CHRB is lying, then I don't know why you would say that you don't believe those words to be true. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the words are not true, then that would mean that either I or the guy from the CHRB is lying.

Valid point, and I do see your point, but again there is a disconnect here and somewhat of an inaccuracy. However, now I see and understand how you read that and inferred that I meant that. Be that as it may, it's interesting that when you quoted me, you only quoted part of my sentence. When you quoted me you took part of a sentence that I did in fact say, but you only took part of it and took that part of it out of context. What I actually said -- the complete sentence -- was as follows:

"I apologize as those are not my words and I do not believe them to be true."

So, let me clarify -- my use of the word "true" as part of that complete sentence was not to infer a lie. It was part of the larger context of me saying (actually apologizing) that those were not my words and I did not believe them to be true as I did not speak them. It's about them not being my words, not about your claim. It's a manner of speaking. That's all.

I also made my point to Cannon Shell and I think he clearly understood me. However, that's neither here nor there.

Eric

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ELA

Valid point, and I do see your point, but again there is a disconnect here and somewhat of an inaccuracy. However, now I see and understand how you read that and inferred that I meant that. Be that as it may, it's interesting that when you quoted me, you only quoted part of my sentence. When you quoted me you took part of a sentence that I did in fact say, but you only took part of it and took that part of it out of context. What I actually said -- the complete sentence -- was as follows:

"I apologize as those are not my words and I do not believe them to be true."

So, let me clarify -- my use of the word "true" as part of that complete sentence was not to infer a lie. It was part of the larger context of me saying (actually apologizing) that those were not my words and I did not believe them to be true as I did not speak them. It's about them not being my words, not about your claim. It's a manner of speaking. That's all.

I also made my point to Cannon Shell and I think he clearly understood me. However, that's neither here nor there. I'm

Eric

Alright fair enough.

[Dunbar]

Rupert, you have the patience of a saint.

Someone takes you to task over a hypothetical trainer who makes $55/day/horse, because his small town trainer only gets $45. As if that somehow invalidates your hypo. This same poster doesn't like your $6/day/horse salary estimate, but doesn't provide an alternate figure.

Another poster feels the need to point out yet again that in NY it would be illegal for a racing board to try to subpoena bank records. You calmly repeat yet again that it is not illegal to ask for those records from the individual.

Somehow you keep your cool. I'm impressed!

--Dunbar

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Rupert, you have the patience of a saint.

Someone takes you to task over a hypothetical trainer who makes $55/day/horse, because his small town trainer only gets $45. As if that somehow invalidates your hypo. This same poster doesn't like your $6/day/horse salary estimate, but doesn't provide an alternate figure.

Another poster feels the need to point out yet again that in NY it would be illegal for a racing board to try to subpoena bank records. You calmly repeat yet again that it is not illegal to ask for those records from the individual.

Somehow you keep your cool. I'm impressed!

--Dunbar

I don't disagree that they could ask someone for that info, but it would have to be stated as a term of the suspension when the suspension is handed down. Thats not what he said in his original post. He amended it later.
Same with phone records.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ELA

It's kind of like you are having a conversation with yourself. You said a great deal there. Wow, that's a real leap of semantics. Interesting enough -- I didn't say any of that. Here's what I said and here is what it means -- it means exactly what I said! Not what you think I said or accusing me of saying. Take a couple of steps back from the keyboard and relax. I am not nor did I accuse anybody of lying. I don't care what you and your friend claim on this matter. It's not a CA matter and I am not interested in your hypothetical matters, whether CA or otherwise.

I did not agree with your opinion on the entire subject. Thus, the words weren't my words and I didn't want them misconstrued as my words -- period!

Eric

It was not a hypothetical. The guy told me about a specific case where they asked a trainer(and he even named the trainer) to turn over his bank records. The trainer complied.