Darcy Ward

[Studland Bee 177]

The hearing as we know lasted one day. The FIM would surely present their case and Darcy Ward would be asked to respond. If he were to have accepted the evidence, and in effect plead guilty to the offence under FIM rules and regulations, I think this would have been fairly straightforward and the FIM could probably have dealt with things on the day, or within a few days based on previous sentences for like offences. It seems to me from what has been reported, that Darcy Ward is in fact challenging the evidence and not accepting the alcohol test procedures and therefore pleading not guilty. Why else would he employ a Legal Team, other than to present some form of mitigation. The FIM would have to receive the defence evidence presuming there has been no previous disclosure or defence statement from Ward. From here the FIM would clearly need to seek Legal Advice and examine the evidence presented to them; what is the basis of the challenge ? The FIM or in fact Darcy Ward's team may need to seek advice from an expert witness, or refer to case law. These are some of the reasons why procedures in the Criminal Courts take so long. There is so much at stake here for Darcy Ward and for the FIM. This needs to be handled properly by the FIM and the relevant Legal representatives for both sides. I feel that 45 days is not unreasonable should this time frame be required.

[E I Addio 15,849]

Just to make my stance clear, I think the timescale is unacceptable in all cases not specifically the Ward case.

I understand an instant decision is not possible or maybe even desirable but even allowing for consultation and/or clarification of points of law/rules 45 days is excessive, but as others said once lawyers are involved you expect it!

In an ideal world of course the decision should be given immediately but we don't live in an ideal world. Those who pompously tell us it's taking too long don't know why it is taking this long or why the rules allow up to 45 days. I doubt that it is just a figure they plucked from the air. At one end of the scale it could simply be that they are totally incompetent , which is what some are happy to believe. At the other extreme we don't know what issues have been raised, or what other material has to be researched to ensure the decision in consistent with similar cases in other motor sports or sport generally. The truth may lie somewhere between the two but the point is we simply do not know the reason for the delay and those who speculate are merely guessing. Similarly we don't know why it took so long to get to the tribunal. For all anyone on here knows it could be that it was Darcy's side that wanted it put back. Again people are simply guessing when they don't have all the facts.

 

I wish some people would take a deep breath before they sound off without the information. It's bad enough hearing Muddlo's rantings with forum members doing the same.

[John Leslie 3,213]

So it now appears that a number of other clubs have to wait around for another 45 days in which to here the fate of Darcy Ward before they can name the remaining riders in their teams

 

Which teams would they be?

 

Aside from Poole, only Leicester haven't named a full team. They're still missing a 6 point rider who I believe is being announced soon, and I don't think that's anything to do with Ward.

 

Many teams were announced before Christmas

[Hannahrack 5]

Roll on 23 March.....

Roll on 23 March.....

http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?d1=11&m1=2&y1=2015&d2=23&m2=March&y2=2015

[mdmc82 2,878]

So it now appears that a number of other clubs have to wait around for another 45 days in which to here the fate of Darcy Ward before they can name the remaining riders in their teams all because Poole are waiting to see if they can sign him or not before those riders that are also waiting on the desision, are waiting to see if they can get a place in Pooles team.

We are getting very close to the start of the new season and teams are being help up by this stuppid desision of who will get the nod to ride for them.

If I was one of those riders I would have left and found a club that really wants me to ride for them not be a last minute choice. Because Superman decided to go and have a few few pints the night before a GP.

Lets just ban him for 2 years and hope that it will do him some good and if and when he does come back he will have learnt his leason.

To become a top class rider, that we all know he is but off the track he is a first class idiot.

Which teams are waiting?

Only Leicester have a rider still to announce.

 

Only Poole are waiting and if they are silly enough to build their team around one rider who let them down big time then that's their own fault.

Edited February 11, 2015 by mdmc82

[weatherwatcher 664]

Last week we had 3 teams that where still not up to full strength as you say only The Lions have now to make the name for the last rider, but I still say that this has held up teams being able to make the selections with riders srill hanging on for the place at Poole, what happens to those that have been waiting and now find that they have left things far to late to find a team, will Poole let them ride evry few weeks feeling sorry for them I very mush doubt it.

[uk_martin 1,606]

Honestly, 45 days to write up a report one someone guilt or not is a joke, I agree. But, the rules allow 45 days, the FIM have used the 45 days before. So it's difficult to criticize it.

 

Maybe the thinking is the 45 days is to make people sweat, to make the whole process so horrible people don't want to go through it again.

 

Justice runs slowly at times. Look at the number of people who have been on Death Row in the USA for 20 odd years - that's like a life sentence and a death sentence all rolled into one...these things happen.

 

Quite honestly, if it takes 44 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes to come up with the verdict for Darcy Ward, I still won't shed a tear.

[John Leslie 3,213]

Last week we had 3 teams that where still not up to full strength as you say only The Lions have now to make the name for the last rider, but I still say that this has held up teams being able to make the selections with riders srill hanging on for the place at Poole, what happens to those that have been waiting and now find that they have left things far to late to find a team, will Poole let them ride evry few weeks feeling sorry for them I very mush doubt it.

Nonsense. Which Poole assets have signed or been waiting to sign for teams (other than Poole) in the last week?....or the last 6 weeks even? None!

Edited February 11, 2015 by John Leslie

[Jacques 3,114]

The hearing as we know lasted one day. The FIM would surely present their case and Darcy Ward would be asked to respond. If he were to have accepted the evidence, and in effect plead guilty to the offence under FIM rules and regulations, I think this would have been fairly straightforward and the FIM could probably have dealt with things on the day, or within a few days based on previous sentences for like offences. It seems to me from what has been reported, that Darcy Ward is in fact challenging the evidence and not accepting the alcohol test procedures and therefore pleading not guilty. Why else would he employ a Legal Team, other than to present some form of mitigation. The FIM would have to receive the defence evidence presuming there has been no previous disclosure or defence statement from Ward. From here the FIM would clearly need to seek Legal Advice and examine the evidence presented to them; what is the basis of the challenge ? The FIM or in fact Darcy Ward's team may need to seek advice from an expert witness, or refer to case law. These are some of the reasons why procedures in the Criminal Courts take so long. There is so much at stake here for Darcy Ward and for the FIM. This needs to be handled properly by the FIM and the relevant Legal representatives for both sides. I feel that 45 days is not unreasonable should this time frame be required.

 

You are right with your analysis of how it works in the criminal courts work here, however you have it the wrong way round...All that you describe happens before the court date is set. You do get provisional dates however, some cases go ahead smoothly, generally in the case of a guilty plea, but very often cases get put back more than once in the absence of statements/reports etc.

 

Now, assuming that is the way the FIM proceed with their prosecutions, then I would suspect that the series of adjournments were caused by defence.

 

Why? As we have been told by his supporters here, questions have been raised about the validity of breath test ( alcohol test) and or the procedure that accompanied it. IF he had just taken the offence on the chin, it could have been done and dusted in weeks. He could have had his hearing, pleaded his guilt, taken his ban and be ready to ride sometime soon, March even.

 

Some people go on about the length of time it has taken, in Criminal case terms, 5/6 months isn't long at all.

 

If the defence raise questions of the prosecution they need to be answered, that could take weeks, if it's an expert witness for example then you MAY have the prosecution looking for an expert of their own to rebut the evidence of the defence witness..So that leads to the cogs of the justice system working very slowly and if you have witnesses not available for court dates for a myriad of reasons, if you are still waiting vital evidential reports etc that could put a date back too.

 

That doesn't include the defendant, I might add. He/She has to be there, no matter what

 

Again in Criminal cases, all evidence you hope, is there on the day the trial starts, but it's not unknown for trials to be adjourned because of something that has cropped up during evidence giving etc.

 

I don't know who sits on these FIM juries? But in Criminal cases here, we have juries made up of members of the public, who have jobs, families and other commitments and the justice system has to recognise that, so that they receive quite rightly, minimal disruption and ample expenses.

 

Going back to the Ward issue, again working on the criminal case scenario, was it an adjournment to hear further evidence, was it an adjournment to reach a verdict in a 45 day limit? It seems that the 45 day window in order to deliver a judgement is normal?

 

I had to laugh at the description someone used that the FIM procedure was "archaic"

 

The way Speedway is run is archaic FFS! Some people involved in the sport, think we are foolish enough to believe it's not still the old boys network, the nudge nudge, wink wink brigade etc.. That it one of the reasons that Ward is the mess he is, " Don't worry about it son, we'll sort it"

 

Hopefully and it's proving to be thus far, the FIM are a credible body and as I have said before, true justice will be served

[orion 7,621]

 

Then you are talking rubbish again.

 

The timescale in the Ward case is within 45 days.

 

Therefore anything within that time frame is acceptable.

 

As I said, whether the regulation itself giving 45 days is acceptable is another matter. That would be something to look at and be changed for future cases.

Pretty much sums it up ...The bottom line is the guildlines are pretty quite clear and they are sticking to that as they should . if it's a good rule is another debate .

[Grand Central 2,654]

I just wonder which side of the FIM we know about is the MOST credible.

 

Is it the side that appoints Race Directors Ad Hoc from available past editors of magazines.

 

Or

 

The one that follows due process to arrive at a judgement in cases of law that require proper and reasonable consideration.

 

Its a difficult one isn't it?

[pugwash 3,208]

 

Maybe,

But I think he would have had more chance of that if he had come clean straight away.

And not contested the charge.

 

A 'not guilty' plea on the basis of blaming the FIM procedures may not be so good for him if/when found guilty.

Am i missing something? Where has this information come from?

[Grand Central 2,654]

Am i missing something?

 

Apparently so.

[norbold 7,154]

http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?d1=11&m1=2&y1=2015&d2=23&m2=March&y2=2015

Ok, so we're both wrong.

 

Roll on 16 March.

Edited February 12, 2015 by norbold

[Jacques 3,114]

I just wonder which side of the FIM we know about is the MOST credible.

 

Is it the side that appoints Race Directors Ad Hoc from available past editors of magazines.

 

Or

 

The one that follows due process to arrive at a judgement in cases of law that require proper and reasonable consideration.

 

Its a difficult one isn't it?

 

 

Who?