Greyhound Stewards Inquiry Trainer Mr Peter Brown VINAKA FIJI
RWWA Stewards today conducted an inquiry into a report received from the ChemCentre advising that cobalt at a concentration of 130 ng/mL (being in excess of 100 nanograms per millilitre threshold prescribed in the Greyhound Rules of Racing) had been detected in a urine sample taken from VINAKA FIJI after competing and winning Race 10 at Greyhounds WA Cannington on 11 March 2019.
The analysis of the sample (“B” sample) forwarded to Racing Analytical Services Ltd (Vic) for confirmatory analysis had reported a reading of 89ng/mL which was below the prescribed threshold.
Evidence was heard from ChemCentre Analyst Ms K Wilson, RASL Analyst Mr P Zahra, RWWA Industry Veterinarian Dr. J Medd, Senior Investigative Steward Mr P. Criddle and trainer Mr P Brown.
The evidence in the matter indicated, amongst other things;
- No evidence of the administration of substances at a time which was likely to give rise to such elevations in levels.
- No evidence at the time of the unannounced inspection of Mr Brown’s property of the possession of substances of concern in relation to cobalt with only routine supplements present whose use was consistent with RWWA Veterinary advice concerning those substances.
- A review of Mr Brown’s levels over a period of time which were consistent with his described training regimes which were unremarkable and did not indicate him to be using a high level of supplementation in his training programs.
- The evidence of experts which indicated that cobalt was a stable substance not known to be prone to factors such as degradation due to time, temperature, storage, handling or similar.
- The reason for the variation was therefore a matter of conjecture that could not be safely determined.
As the analysis of the B sample sent to RASL did not confirm a level of cobalt in excess of the threshold and all other circumstances, the Stewards were not satisfied that it was safe to proceed further in this matter.
In arriving at this decision the presented evidence confirmed that both laboratories had correctly applied the normal methodologies and it had not been found or demonstrated that either reported value, viewed in isolation, was not reliable. Accordingly no error was found or implied with respect to either laboratories analysis of the samples they received.
In view of these circumstances, the benefit of any doubt was afforded to Mr Brown and accordingly he was advised that he had no case to answer and in the absence of any new matters coming to light, the Stewards would not be proceeding further with this matter.