DEELEY'S SUSPENSION.

NZ Truth, Issue 569, 13 May 1916, Page 9

DEELEY'S SUSPENSION.

Apart from the published fact that B. JDeeley bad been suspended, no other Information relative) to the cose has been made public, and to try and learn more it became necessary for "Woimangu" to make independent m - <tulries. If the result of these inquiries is true, and there is no reason to doubt it it is,eafe to say that Deeley had very little chance of escaping-. In the first place, s it has to be \ remembered that Deeley is not a lawyer, and also was quite unaware when he attended to give evidence at too inquiry that he was likely to be blamed for the accident. He, therefore, did not go to defend himself, but only to give his version of what brought about the accident The riders m the race were called one at a time, the others being excluded until called. When Deeley*s turn came, he was told that, on the evidence, there was a charge to answer, and the chairman, after Deeley had protested, on the ground that he was not present when the evidence was given, offered to read the evidence over, and ho could then ask what questions he chose. t>eeley gave his evidence, which waa to the effect that the riders naturally raced for the corner near the seven furlongs post, and that the horses on tho outside, by gradually coming m, caused a squeeze, but he, on Soultane, did not feel it, and it was not till after the race that he was aware that Thoolomi had fallen. Everyone who knows the Elleralio course will understand the keenness of riders In mile races to roach the corner m question, and an instance of this was whon Ventura drew the extreme outside m the Easter Handicap two years ago, and cut right across the field, but, on this occasion, no horses or riders were injured and ail was satisfactory. But another point 10 bo considered m Deeley'a case is the punishment. Deeley is either guilty or innocent; there is no go-between. If the circumstances nro Kusplcjous, It m not sufllck-nt. Suspicion is not proof, nnd unless tho evidence is clear Uiat Deeley's riding was tho cuuao of tho accident, (.hen ho should not bo penalised. Tho fact that tho Judicial Committee deemed three months' suspension sutnclont punishment suggests that the committeo was not thoroughly satisfied with Deeloy's guilt, because there is no more serious offence m racing 1 Umn that of interference. . if Doeley was guilty, the committee, committed a grave error m not imposing a much more severe penalty. But without the ovidenco available it is impossible to cay whether the decision .was just w unjust And if, by any chance, an Injustice Ib done, the present closed-door policy of Inquiry, precludes, to a great extent, any reasonable obdnco of having an Injustice righted- '