Mott Questions Flunixin Positive

When a Bill Mott-trained horse named Authorize (Curlin) broke down and had to be euthanized after an Apr. 26 race at Aqueduct, the trainer thought the worst was over with. Having a horse break down is excruciating for any trainer, but Mott was ready to move on. Little did he know that his problems were just beginning.

Tests were performed on Authorize and they showed that he was positive for the painkiller Flunixin, also known as banamine. Mott was incredulous. He did his own internal review, checking with vets, his assistants, grooms and others on his staff and concluded that there was no way his horse was given the medication. He had been given banamine some 60 days before the race to treat colic, but there's no way that drug would have stayed in his system that long.

“There's not a chance that Bill or anyone under his control gave the horse banamine,” his attorney, Drew Mollica, said.

So what did happen? From the time the horse broke down until he was put down, his care was completely out of Mott's control. Mollica speculates that during this period, banamine may have been given to the horse, perhaps as a painkiller, to get him through the moments until he was put down.

“…it is not in dispute that euthanizing drugs were administered to the Horse post-race due to his injury and it is our contention the alleged Flunixin overage was caused by that administration and/or an error in that administration,” Mollica said in a letter sent to HIWU in what is called a “Demand” letter, which asks for discovery and an investigation.

One thing seems clear: blood was drawn from the horse for the test after he was euthanized. The race went off at 3:32 p.m. Authorize was euthanized on the track, and his connections were notified that he would be tested at 4:31 p.m. “For fatalities,” confirmed HIWU's Director of Communications Alexa Ravit, “the samples are collected after the horse is euthanized.”

“If the tests were conducted after a third-party administration of medications when the horse was no longer under the control of the trainer, that breaks the chain of custody, and he cannot be held responsible,” argued Mollica.

So what medications were administered?

“We've said to them, we've done our own investigation and now we want you, HISA, to do an investigation into your end of this because it's not in dispute that you and vets there in an emergency situation treated the horse,” Mollica said. “All we're asking is that you investigate your procedures. They said we have no duty to investigate. That's contrary to HISA's mandate of transparency and fairness.”

When some of the same questions Mollica has been asking were sent via email to HIWU by the TDN, Ravit did her best to fill in the blanks.

Ravit wrote that, “if the agency collects any sample(s) from a deceased horse, the sample collection shall not interfere with any life-saving treatment.” She also wrote that “sample(s) should ordinarily be collected from the Covered Horse before it is removed from the relevant venue where it suffered a fatal condition, but otherwise may be collected at the location where the Covered Horse is transported to ( e.g., veterinary clinic).”

She added: “If a Covered Horse receives an Adverse Analytical Finding (positive test), HIWU reviews all veterinary records connected to that horse, including those associated with emergency treatments administered by a veterinarian(s), before determining whether to proceed with a Notice of a potential ADMC Program violation.”

Does that mean that HIWU did in fact examine whether or not banamine was given to the horse as part of a emergency treatments?

Ravit continued: “More broadly, every positive test undergoes a preliminary investigation to verify its legitimacy, which would include whether a substance was given as part of euthanasia.

“When HIWU's Notice letters of a potential violation are sent to a Covered Person, they include the sample collection documentation from the day of the collection. Per HIWU collection procedures, when a sample is collected on a deceased horse, the veterinarian(s) who collected the samples are prompted to declare any known medications administered to the horse prior to the collection. This information is captured in a Supplementary Report and given to the trainer as part of the full sample collection documentation.

“For the Covered Horse Authorize, the NYRA vets declared that the horse was given euthasol, succinylcholine, and xylazine prior to the samples being collected. Banamine (Flunixin) was not declared as being administered in the Supplementary Report, nor was it recorded in the HISA portal by any other veterinarians. All of this information was given to the trainer and his defense counsel.

“Once HIWU's initial investigation is complete and the Covered Person is notified, the burden is then on the Covered Person to request a B Sample and/or provide evidence of source of the Prohibited Substance to demonstrate No Fault or No Significant Fault (as applicable). If the recipient of a Notice has additional information, they have multiple opportunities to present that information to HIWU for consideration.”

“We haven't asked for anything crazy,” said Mollica. “All we have said is that this is an odd situation. Remember, the horse was euthanized while not under Mott's care, custody or control. We want to know if this event could have caused this positive. It's not an unrealistic question.”

The penalties for a Flunixin positive are far from severe. There is just a $500 fine. Wouldn't it would be easier for Mott to pay the fine and move on?

“Bill says in a case like this, for the betterment of the game, shouldn't we all know what happened to this horse?” Mollica said. “Why not the transparency needed to answer the questions we have raised? It's just a $500 fine point and a half. Why spend the money? This is the problem with this system. Everybody bails out because it's ridiculously expensive to fight.”

Mollica has requested a hearing, but the odds are against him and his client. Mott, at some point in time, will likely have to pay the fine and the banamine positive will be part of his official record. As a Hall of Fame trainer with a pristine reputation, he's not okay with that.

“It's a $500 fine,” Mollica said. “Let fairness be damned, walk away and take the penalty. Bill understands that he may not win, but he wants this story to get out there.”

Ravit wrote that “HIWU cannot comment on this case beyond what is posted on the HIWU website,” which is little. The website lists the name of the horse, the drug it was positive for and the date of the race in question.

Mollica doesn't intend to let it go at that.

“…given Mr. Mott's reputation and stakes that are involved for the industry as a whole, we demand that HISA and HIWU comply with this discovery demand and conduct a thorough investigation of its own into this alleged violation, because as stated above, it is clear that no one acting under or pursuant to Mr. Mott's agency and/or control administered Flunixin to the horse, period,” Mollica wrote in his “Demand” letter. “Hence the sui genius nature of this matter demands a full HIWU investigation, and that the discovery requested herein be disclosed, as justice demands it, and racing as an industry deserves to know answers to the questions raised herein.”