Fallon Case Collapses
- Thread starter Sara
- Start date
HS - he has not been vindicated 'in a sense,' he has been vindicated absolutely and unequivocally. I suggest that your posts on this and other Fora have the decency to recognise this. Separate your disqust at the Keystone Kops abilities of your civil servants from an unworthy tainting of an innocent man.
A repeat of the type of your recent JM defamation would be unfortunate.
davidjohnson
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 3,434
If you are making such allegations, would you care to make it clear as to whom you are referring to?
Fallon won't be able to sue the BHA . The reason is obvious , they followed their rules and the High Court upheld the ban.
Whether he will be able to sue the police will depend on whether the prosecution was held to be malicious . In the light of Forbes J's very unsurprising ruling that the case collapsed as the aussie expert witness was so discredited in cross examination that is unlikely.
Whether he will be able to sue the police will depend on whether the prosecution was held to be malicious . In the light of Forbes J's very unsurprising ruling that the case collapsed as the aussie expert witness was so discredited in cross examination that is unlikely.
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 24,799
This case may have collapsed but I know what I think of the individuals involved on the evidence of my own eyes.
Thanks for clearing that up Ardross, that's pretty well what I thought. Presumebly if the CPS can demonstrate that they acted reasonably in bringing the case (had grounds) and the HRA have observed correct procedure, then he's not going to win, yet alone be so daft as to risk bringing a case, which if he lost he'd be accountable for costs. I suppose he might try and negotiate an out of court settlement, but they could easily say see you in court etc
What about compensation through loss of earnings? Difficult to prove 100% I'd have thought in terms of a figure, but then he was employed and remained employed by Ballydoyle throughout the case.
Write a book, probably get more that way
What about compensation through loss of earnings? Difficult to prove 100% I'd have thought in terms of a figure, but then he was employed and remained employed by Ballydoyle throughout the case.
Write a book, probably get more that way
I'm speaking entirely in the legal sense that such a cocked up prosecution is bound to leave questions in *some people's* minds, in the sense that the case has been such a farce it can't be said to have answered ALL the questions, not just in the case of Fallon. The prosecution was unable to present any evidence at all which stood up in court against ANY of the defendants but I don't think any of us assume that ALL of them were whiter than white.
That is what I meant by 'in a sense'. The poor handling of this case has not only held racing up to ridicule, it will [imo] result in some people feeling justice may not have been done, and this will leave some small cloud [however undeserved] over Fallon. To think otherwise is unrealistic.
Who am I supposed to have defamed? I don't follow you? - Johnny Murtagh?
I don't think calling JM an occasionally incompetent jockey is defamation, it's just observation
Bar the Bull
At the Start
I thought you said he was back on the sauce and riding after nights out on the juice.
HS - for a self professed academic you have a knack of confusing me. A not guilty or 'nolle prosequi' answers *ALL* the legal questions for *ALL* the defendents and doesn't even leave *SOME* doubt. It is your system and you gave it to the world.
And as Bull Bar The, J, states, you stated that the said jockey was riding incompentently due to over consumption of alcohol, which is a defamation.
Is it just delightfully eccentric Irish jockeys that you pick on?
And as Bull Bar The, J, states, you stated that the said jockey was riding incompentently due to over consumption of alcohol, which is a defamation.
Is it just delightfully eccentric Irish jockeys that you pick on?
Bar the Bull
At the Start
Sincerest apologies.
There's a great deal of doubt in MY mind about SOME of the defendants in this case, and I daresay I'm by no means the only one.
A nolle prosequi can just as easily imply a totally incompetent prosecution case, which is extremely unfair on any innocent defendants - of whom on all the evidence, KF seems to be an unfortunate example. It's unfair as a prosecution this incompetent can't clear the air in the same way that a competently run case which goes the full distance to a jury verdict of innocent would.
Please stop trying to impute opinions to me which seem to stem from your own personal dislike rather than from anything I've said.
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
Even if a jury had found them not guilty of their own volition, the same questions over the prosecution evidence not being good enough and people having doubts would exist.
I think it's a moot point though, as I would have been amazed if the jury had come to any other conclusion.
I believe the evidence wasn't good enough, because good enough evidence simply didn't exist.
I think it's a moot point though, as I would have been amazed if the jury had come to any other conclusion.
I believe the evidence wasn't good enough, because good enough evidence simply didn't exist.
That's fine An C, we all ge4t overheated - I love you when you make me laugh which you often do!
I just get a bit upset when mis-understood - don't we all. Apology accepted BtB
I'm pretty upset about this case in fact, as I think we all are, esp for Fallon losing the rides on Dylan this year and the other good horses he helped to make -
and even more for racing as a whole as I think it's done untold harm with the general public as they will feel racing is more than ever a sport for insiders which the occasional punter can't hope to fathom, or trust
What a result for the lads, just shows what idiots they were and how bad the evidence was! I was told weeks ago that fallon knew the case would be thrown out and then he was going 2 sue and make a show of the authorities involved. Im at wolverhampton on my phone and after just chatting 2 a couple of the jockeys they said that the lads have all text already saying they will be back soon.
It was clear some time ago that the prosecution had a very weak case, although I was as surprised as anyone when it ended so suddenly today.
When the main "culprit" was getting around a 30% strike rate of winning rides in races he was supposed to lose, it was pretty clear acquittals would eventually be the order of the day. The "evidence" offered by the buffoon Mark "Clouseau" Manning and his pals was absolutely pathetic.
The judge should be congratulated for terminating the trial, thus saving further unnecessary waste of public money.
I wish Fallon every success during the remainder of his career.
When the main "culprit" was getting around a 30% strike rate of winning rides in races he was supposed to lose, it was pretty clear acquittals would eventually be the order of the day. The "evidence" offered by the buffoon Mark "Clouseau" Manning and his pals was absolutely pathetic.
The judge should be congratulated for terminating the trial, thus saving further unnecessary waste of public money.
I wish Fallon every success during the remainder of his career.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
It`s the lead on CH4 news.
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
Not been on here for a very long time through idleness, work and internet connection problems.
I think the CPS and CoL Police have done a ***** poor job of putting a prosecution case together personally. Some of the evidence they had in the early stages of the trial looked very solid and they've only got themselves to blame for the case collapsing.
The problem is, there are still plenty of corrupt individuals out there in racing and the BHA have barely slapped some recent offenders on the wrist.
I think the CPS and CoL Police have done a ***** poor job of putting a prosecution case together personally. Some of the evidence they had in the early stages of the trial looked very solid and they've only got themselves to blame for the case collapsing.
The problem is, there are still plenty of corrupt individuals out there in racing and the BHA have barely slapped some recent offenders on the wrist.
Powerscourt
At the Start
Glad its over
Well Done KF
Should never have gone to trial ..what a waste of money !!
Well Done KF
Should never have gone to trial ..what a waste of money !!
EC1
On a break
never had a doubt the ludicrous evidence would ever hold up.
Clive, I told you we would have a thread like this some time ago, I would imagine you are really pleased with the outcome :laughing:
A total witchunt that should never have gone to court
Clive, I told you we would have a thread like this some time ago, I would imagine you are really pleased with the outcome :laughing:
A total witchunt that should never have gone to court
Colin Phillips
At the Start
I think our old friend Krizon has put it very succinctly on Final Furlong :
"Since the whole case started because of Betfair informing the BHA that there were irregular patterns in betting on horses Fallon was riding, how willing is Betfair going to be, in future, to alert them to any more concerns if the best the prosecution's come up with is a racing/betting-ignorant copper who might shortly go into the pay of the BHA (although shouldn't if they have any sense), was known to Paul Scotney (their head of security, who claimed when drunk to say "I'm going to get Fallon"), and the appointment (by whom? Scotney?) of an Australian steward who, as the trial progressed, found less and less to support his assertions about the 27 races in question, since he had no idea about UK rules of racing?!
A right pig's ear's been made of an opportunity to have routed out any real wrongdoing - or to have clearly exonerated Fallon and his cohorts - by showing smooth professionalism, in tune with today's exchange-oriented betting scene, and with the support of experts who really do understand the British rules of racing, so as to be able to point out whether a particular ride was well within, or outside, them.
The police look like idiots, as does the BHA, with a fair dose of vindictiveness thrown in for good measure. If there was ever a way to throw a case, I'd be investigating these bodies right away!"
I think she should be persuaded to return.
"Since the whole case started because of Betfair informing the BHA that there were irregular patterns in betting on horses Fallon was riding, how willing is Betfair going to be, in future, to alert them to any more concerns if the best the prosecution's come up with is a racing/betting-ignorant copper who might shortly go into the pay of the BHA (although shouldn't if they have any sense), was known to Paul Scotney (their head of security, who claimed when drunk to say "I'm going to get Fallon"), and the appointment (by whom? Scotney?) of an Australian steward who, as the trial progressed, found less and less to support his assertions about the 27 races in question, since he had no idea about UK rules of racing?!
A right pig's ear's been made of an opportunity to have routed out any real wrongdoing - or to have clearly exonerated Fallon and his cohorts - by showing smooth professionalism, in tune with today's exchange-oriented betting scene, and with the support of experts who really do understand the British rules of racing, so as to be able to point out whether a particular ride was well within, or outside, them.
The police look like idiots, as does the BHA, with a fair dose of vindictiveness thrown in for good measure. If there was ever a way to throw a case, I'd be investigating these bodies right away!"
I think she should be persuaded to return.