- This topic has 21 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
MODS – I couldn’t remember or find where his horrendous case was previously discussed – apologies as I wanted to add to it rather than create another thread.
The lovely Stephen Mahon has had his ban for this god-awful case REDUCED on appeal. The IHRB were obviously impressed with his subsequent behaviour on courses giving foul mouthed abuse to Drug Testing Officials.
Starving horses to the extent they eat their own legs is clearly a relatively minor issue.
Another triumph for Irish Racing.
Stephen Mahon: trainer’s four-year suspension over neglect reduced by six months
Stephen Mahon: the suspended trainer “failed in his duties towards the horses in his care”
Stephen Mahon: the suspended trainer “failed in his duties towards the horses in his care”
Patrick McCann (racingpost.com/photos)
1 of 1
By Brian Sheerin
UPDATED 1:30PM, SEP 3 2021Stephen Mahon has had his four-year suspension over neglect-related issues reduced by six months by the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board’s appeals body following a sitting that took place over a month ago.
In publishing its findings, the appeal panel noted the original referrals committee had operated on the assumption that Mahon’s version of events in respect of Geoffrey’s Girl, who was found to suffered a catastrophic fetlock injury, was correct. The IHRB contended that the horse, referred to originally as ‘Animal A’, had suffered the injury over a week before its inspection on April 13, but Mahon insisted it occurred on the morning of the visit.
In relation to Geoffrey’s Girl, Mahon’s initial sanction found him guilty under rule 148 (vi), which pertains to a trainer’s responsibility to horses in their care.
However, the appeal panel did not feel there was sufficient evidence to uphold that view, which appears to be the main reason the sentence has been reduced by six months.
Accepting Mahon’s version of events, the report read: “In all the circumstances, it would be unfair and unjust to uphold the adverse finding in respect of Geoffrey’s Girl when there was insufficient evidence to support it.”
Beer With The Boys, who was previously identified as ‘Animal C’, was mistakenly referred to as ‘Animal G’ by the referrals committee, and therefore Mahon was found guilty of two breaches of rule 148 (i) and (iv) in respect of the same animal.
The appeals panel, which convened to hear the appeal at the Curragh on July 31, took into consideration this double count when arriving at its decision to reduce Mahon’s penalty.
In publishing its findings on Friday, the panel noted: “It is manifestly clear that Mr Mahon’s conduct is injurious to the good reputation of horseracing. As a licence-holder, he failed in his duties towards the horses in his care by failing to adequately supervise them and to identify even their most basic welfare needs.”
Inspections of Mahon’s Galway yard in April prompted the regulator to take the unusual step of suspending his training licence before a full referral, with his four declared runners for Ballinrobe on April 16 withdrawn by order of the stewards.
Lengthy details of regulation breaches were revealed on June 3, resulting in the trainer’s suspension over issues relating to the welfare of horses under his care, the registration of staff and bringing racing into disrepute.
Stephen Mahon: four declared runners in April were withdrawn by order of the stewards
Stephen Mahon: four declared runners in April were withdrawn by order of the stewards
Patrick McCann (racingpost.com/photos)
It was found that Geoffrey’s Girl had been entered to run at Ballinrobe within a week of the inspection but had a “catastrophic injury” to a fetlock joint, requiring her to be put down.The report noted that the horse had been treated for a fetlock injury four weeks previously and the committee was confident that even in view of the evidence most favourable to Mahon – in that the injury was a recent one – he had failed to exercise adequate care of her.
However, the appeal panel differed in its interpretation of that claim, noting that neither Nicola O’Connor nor Sarah Ross, the two IHRB veterinary surgeons present for the 11am inspection, initially ordered immediate veterinary attention for Geoffrey’s Girl.
It stated: “Firstly, there was uncontroverted evidence before the committee from Mr Mahon that he had attempted to contact his veterinary surgeon, Mr Paul Houlihan, at 10.56am by mobile phone before the inspection commenced.
“Secondly, neither of the veterinary surgeons in attendance at the inspection had directed that immediate veterinary attention was required but suggested that the animal be treated by the veterinary surgeon who was attending that afternoon to treat other animals. Mahon was subsequently advised over the phone after the inspection that Geoffrey’s Girl was to be produced that afternoon for veterinary inspection by Mr Houlihan.”
The incident was one of several failings identified in the initial report relating to 11 horses in all, including seven who were found to be inadequately cared for in a field. One was described as “emaciated”.
Mahon was also found to have neglected another horse who was returned to training as of April 13, but was let off to grass without the trainer notifying the IHRB of the change in status.
IHRB veterinary officer Sarah Ross stated that the horse had a “chronic and obvious injury, believed by her to have been present for weeks as opposed to days”, with the animal said to have been in pain for far longer than should have been the case if proper standards were observed.
The case was the second time Mahon has been punished by the IHRB for the neglect of animals within his care – something the trainer objected to being referenced in the case initially.
In 2008, he had his licence suspended for four months and was fined €1,000 after Pike Bridge was found to have been neglected to such an extent that she had eaten at her own legs, rendering her unable to stand and causing her to lie down for 12 weeks before being put down.
Mahon was also ordered by the Circuit Civil Court to pay over €34,000 in damages to the owner of Pike Bridge for the mistreatment of the horse.
Mahon’s suspension does not prevent him from earning a livelihood in racing and it recently emerged he has been working with fellow Galway trainer Pat Kelly.
Stormey: suspended trainer Mahon alleged to have interfered in the post-race sampling
Stormey: suspended trainer Mahon alleged to have interfered in the post-race sampling
Patrick McCann (racingpost.com/photos)
Mahon was listed as Kelly’s authorised representative and travelling head lad when involved in an incident at Tipperary on July 18, with the suspended trainer alleged to have interfered in the post-race sampling of Stormey – a horse he previously trained.After the 11-year-old’s first start for Kelly, when he finished third, IHRB veterinary assistant Avena O’Keeffe stated Mahon was “insisting that she turn the tumbler used to collect the urine sample upside down to prove that there was nothing in it, prior to the sample being taken”.
Raceday stewards at Tipperary referred the matter to IHRB chief executive Denis Egan for further investigation. No date has yet been set for a referral into the case.
BUY THE SUN
To be honest, this thread should be stickied until he is warned off for life.
It is an unmitigated disgrace to the sport that this individual is allowed anywhere near a racehorse and while most racing fans are outraged whenever this story pops up, it is usually forgotten after a few days…
I’ve probably not been back on here long enough to be qualified to pass comment, but I would say this is TTC at his best – getting straight to the point in his inimitable style.
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"The sad thing is that he never will be warned off for life. This man seems to have previously operated what is little short of an equine concentration camp, what more does he have to do? The decision-making here is absolutely deranged.
The fact a room of so-called professional officials in charge of protecting the image of the sport, examined evidence including a horse being starved to the extent it had chewed its owed legs and eaten part of them, and decided Mahon had been dealt with too harshly, leaves me incredulous. In modern parlance, they have ‘double-downed’ on their stupidity.
I am also incredulous (again!) that the bloke has avoided criminal charges for animal cruelty.
If I met this bloke I’d be sorely tempted to give him a clump and take the assault charge. I am aware this is not the solution.
BUY THE SUN
He’s a boll*x beyond compare, end of.
But if all of us were to start a thread full of anecdotal evidence where “sentencing guidelines” were actually used to the maximum extent horse cruelty would be last on the list.
Watch Police Interceptors or Motorway Cops on the telly and see the sentences after when human people are nearly left with their gizzards hanging out.
The system can’t even do justice to humans so what can be expected.
To be honest, this thread should be stickied until he is warned off for life.
Agree with that, BH. What is more incredible is the fact that other trainers don’t seem to bother that much about the entire matter. You would expect some voices from the training ranks to call for a lifetime ban. But maybe this is how things work over there. Jessica Harrington got away pretty good after running the wrong horse in a two year old Maiden.
- Total Posts 2553
Threads like this are generally more about the thread starter than anything else.
- Total Posts 2553
Maybe he should be given the same treatment (or lack thereof) that he subjected the horses in his care to. This man shouldn’t have been allowed anywhere near horses (in any form) after the first incident and if authorities had done their job properly many other horses wouldn’t have had to of suffered.
For those people that want horse racing banned entirely and are under the misguided thought that the whip issue is the best entry point to that ultimate destination, they would have a much easier time in swaying the majority if they concentrated on highlighting this aspect which does clearly show how incompetent those that run/police the sport are when it comes to dealing with those that couldn’t give a flying **** about the welfare of horses.
I don’t want to stress this too much as it’s not something I’m totally on board with but people make the same argument about prison. “Three years? Far too soft!” Whereas, as it was in this case, judges and lawyers (and more involved) actually know how shitty prison really is, and how long three years actually is, especially when you’re being deprived of all normal freedoms.
I can guarantee they’re taking the same approach with this trainer. It’s a man (deservedly) losing his entire business. At most he’ll be able to work for other people, other people who take responsibility for him and his behaviour, while earning a “simple” wage, rather than charting his own course with his own business. That is a big punishment. As I said, it’s a deserved one, but people really underestimate how severe of an impact losing all your clients is, not being able to pay for your yard, not being able to pay for staff, and simply being out of the head trainer game for years and years. This is on top of the idea that he has no guarantee that he will get his license back after the ban is up, as the IHRB has said. It’s going to take a lot of people vouching for him saying he’s changed to get it again, and the same people telling owners to go with him, and more people with money behind him investing in a “tainted” trainer, and even then it’s almost a certainty he’ll have plenty of random inspections, presuming he is allowed to train again.
It is not easy to come back from that unless you’re independently wealthy or have some secret backers. A multiple year ban, essentially losing your business, with no guarantee you’ll get it back, is a severe punishment, and whether the number is three, or five years, it doesn’t really matter.
FiftyP, interesting to hear an alternative point of view. I’m not normally one of the “hang ’em and flog ’em” brigade, but what really rankles here is that Mr Mahon has learned nothing from his previous suspension. The previous suspension was, in my view, far too light and has clearly served as no deterrent whatsoever.
It also seems that unless people are fully banned from being involved in the sport then they often continue doing pretty much the same in an unofficial capacity e.g. Gordon Elliott.
I’m all for giving second chances, but Mr Mahon seems to have learned nothing following an incident where he neglected a horse to such an extent it started eating its own flesh. He should not have any further involvement in the sport in any capacity. If that causes him a lot of hardship, good.
I think (and hope) that’s why it’ll be very hard for him to get his license back. Taking away someone’s entire livelihood is a massive punishment, so if another trainer is willing to employ him, take the risks, and stake his name and his ability to look after his own horses while Mahon is working for him in having him in the yard, then I’m mostly OK with that.
The guy will never (should never? maybe never?) have a horse’s wellbeing entirely be his responsibility, but if someone else, some other head trainer says, “I take responsibility for these horses and Mahon is being supervised, as an employee, for me,” then they’re the one taking the risk. And to me that seems like an “acceptable” solution. Someone isn’t ending up unemployed for life, with no real skills elsewhere (let’s assume his entire life is horses) but someone else is vouching for him.
Of course this would have to be a situation where there is actually someone taking responsibility and it isn’t just a paperwork dodge with only their name appearing on forms.
Even from a legal perspective, a body taking away someone in the industry’s entire right to earn a living, even as a supervised, managed employee is a massive punishment. And I wouldn’t be surprised if they felt if they did that it’d be challenged in the courts. Better to let him work in a proper trainer’s yard and earn a wage where someone else is the last word in horse care.
Thanks for the reply FiftyP. I agree he needs to be able to earn a living, but don’t see why racing has to be the answer. Assuming he has few other skills, there are other types of unskilled work. To give a parallel example, I wouldn’t want someone with multiple past convictions for being cruel to the elderly looking after my grandparents in a care home, even if they were being supervised.
Other people have been warned off for prolonged periods, which would definitely affect their ability to earn a living from racing over a number of years, so there are precedents of a sort.
On face value I’d also have some concerns about any trainer who was wanting to employ him or vouch for him, though I do appreciate things can be more nuanced than that in practice.
I just think that acceptance of his continued presence in the industry taints it and sends out some very concerning messages.
Yeah 100% get a job elsewhere
you wouldn’t put a paedophile back in a classroom for example
racing shooting itself in the footBlackbeard to conquer the World
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.