- This topic has 32 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Sounds a nasty little individual. Anyone of his age who uses that phrase as a name on his contacts list for a teenage girl is not fielding a full team.
The more I know the less I understand.
Just when you think you’ve seen and heard it all in racing over the years….
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"He sounds vile. However, even if his training licence has gone, what is to stop him remaining on site and pulling the strings while someone else is nominally in charge?
It sounds like he should be kept far away from vulnerable young stable staff, but can anything actually be done to properly remove him from being involved with the sport?
I expect Nick Luck would like that matey interview he did with Harris to be put into the memory hole.
I’m surprised the police aren’t having a look , esp with age of girls involved
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
From the report:
The panel also records in its findings, however, that it does not “think that [Harris’s] conduct with SJO was done for reasons of sexual gratification.”
If he’s warned off I’d hope the yard must be a licenced racing yard so he cannot be there or own it if another trainer takes over the premises .
Will he be warned off?
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Having read the full report whilst I accept Harris clearly has no filter of boundaries the BHA clearly had it in for him. His appearance on the Nick Luck Sunday was probably the BHAs way of finding a way of permanently removing his licence.
Reading the report it comes across as very one sided. Harris is a liar. His head stable girl is a liar. Charlton is a liar. But everything said against him is deemed to be true. Earle was also covertly filming their arguments and presumably only showing the bits he wanted the BHA to see. It was admitted Earle trespassed on his property.
It said a number of people came forward as character references for Harris but they were ignored too. When 2 experienced BHA staff backed Harris they are now disregarded too.
Harris has had a colourful life starting out from very humble beginnings. Also recovering from bankruptcy to create a large stable of decent horses is no mean feat. I’m not defending his behaviour with young female staff but sadly he is of a generation brought up in the 1970s where inappropriateness was common. The BHA did confirm it wasn’t for his sexual gratification. We are not talking Rolf Harris here.
He was certainly a go to for a quote for the racing press and they will miss him.
“I’m not defending his behaviour with young female staff but sadly he is of a generation brought up in the 1970s where inappropriateness was common.”
Saying you’re not defending his behaviour and then defending his behaviour 🤔.
Inappropriate behaviour with young adults (especially women) has been widely condemned by society since at least 2017 (when the Weinstein saga was unfolding).
This is from the decision:
101. We should like to make it plain that we do not think that MH’s conduct with SJO was done for reasons of sexual gratification. However, it was nevertheless inappropriate, because, aside from her age, SJO, as MH well knew, had additional vulnerabilities, such as her home situation and MH, whether consciously or otherwise, was utilising this to create a situation where SJO was more dependent upon and beholden to MH. It all had potential to isolate her and expose her to MH’s control.
102. In his evidence, MH was taken to some of the passages we have referred to. He maintained that there was nothing inappropriate about the WhatsApp messages or the relationship he was cultivating with SJO more generally. Indeed, he chuckled at some of the ‘banter’ when he re-read the messages. It is clear to us that he does not recognise any problem with the way he behaved towards SJO. We had the impression that if it happened again tomorrow, he would behave in the same way.
It doesn’t make for comfortable reading.
Tbf there is a difference between defending behaviour and trying to explain why a person committing unacceptable behaviour might have thought it was acceptable.
But I’m 61 this year and I find Harris’s reported conduct as staggeringly awful as anyone else.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"“We are not talking Rolf Harris here.”
When the bar is so low it’s a trotting pole on the ground (and he still managed to trip over it).
“he is of a generation brought up in the 1970s where inappropriateness was common. ”
Does he still feed his horses oats and barley and train them on stubble fields and make his race entries by post? He could have adapted, but he didn’t want to.
Well, as my granny would have said, “Don’t Care was made to care”. In this case, he couldn’t be made to care either so got kicked out.As stated I was born in 1963, hence “grew up” in the 70s and, while maybe I was fortunate to have Guardian-reading college lecturer/school teacher parents, in no sense was I given the values that meant anything Harris did was acceptable.
I then went off to a campus university where feminism had long since taken root – Germaine Greer already a household name by then.
I get the attempts to explain it, but tbh what Harris did was viewed by many at the time as just as wrong in the 70s/80s as it is today.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"I was not defending him at all but merely pointing out the BHA were very one sided in their ruling and it’s clear any character witnesses or anyone who expressed a contrary view at the inquiry was either brushed aside or called a liar.
It’s up to Mr Harris to explain his motives and behaviour and I’m sure he will in the next week or so. I’m of his age and wouldn’t behave like him and have a young daughter of my own so the fact he said he sat on young employees bed with G&T in hand would raise alarm bells for me and obviously did with some of the stable staff.
But at the end of the day he ain’t Rolf Harris or Harvey Weinstein. From what I have read he has not committed serious fraud or abused or coerced anyone physically or sexually. That he had an ongoing argument with his neighbour (try living next to mine!!) is hardly a reason to remove his licence. Didn’t the BHA accuse Earle of being paranoid at one point over the doping of horses?
In the horse racing world you can abuse horses, commit fraud, expose yourself to work colleagues and still hold a licence. At least the BHA and other authorities could show a bit more consistency.
“It’s up to Mr Harris to explain his motives and behaviour and I’m sure he will in the next week or so.”
And I’m equally sure that he won’t, or that if he does, it will be a series of dubious claims that he was misunderstood, meant no harm, apologises and promises to clean up his act.
The problem is he was making exactly the same sort of statements when his licence applications were being reviewed as far back as 2010. Nothing is ever his fault.
A search for ‘Milton Harris licence’ will provide plenty of documents produced by the BHA over a period of many years and should convince anyone willing to do the research that it’s no surprise that the BHA have run out of patience.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.