Rice's attorneys argue other trainers were also given information

ELMONT, N.Y. -- Attorneys for trainer Linda Rice argued Tuesday that she did not receive an unfair advantage over other trainers by receiving the names and past performances of the horses entered in races in which she was considering entering because there is evidence that other trainers were also given the same information.

Further, Rice’s attorneys sought to have the case brought by the New York State Gaming Commission against her dropped because they believe she did not violate any explicit rule in regards to receiving this information.

The request to dismiss the case made by Andy Turro, Rice’s attorney, was immediately rejected by hearing office Clark Petschek.

“I find that there is sufficient evidence in the record that the commission has established a prima facie case,” Petschek said.

The Gaming Commission alleges that Rice committed corrupt and improper acts and practices in relation to racing by receiving the past performances of horses that were entered in a race she was planning to enter or was being asked by the racing office to consider entering. She was allegedly given this information, mostly by racing clerk Jose Morales Jr., over a three-year period beginning with the 2011-12 Aqueduct winter meet through March 2015.

Further, the commission alleges that Rice was paying substantial amounts of money for this information. The Commission alleges and has testimony to support that Morales was given thousands of dollars.

The request to dismiss the charges came at the conclusion of the fourth day of testimony in the case in which Braulio Baeza Jr., the Gaming Commission steward now but the NYRA steward back then, was the only witness to testify over nearly eight hours.

The bulk of the testimony Tuesday focused on approximately 74 e-mails that were sent to Rice by Morales Rice over a three-month period -- Oct. 9, 2013, through Jan. 2, 2014 -- which covered approximately 70 races. According to Turro, Rice only entered horses in 23 of those races and she only had three winners from the races in question.

Most of the time, Rice was sent the past performances of horses that had been entered in races between 10:30 and 11 a.m. on entry day. On several occasions, Turro demonstrated how the make-up of those races changed dramatically by the time entries closed. Turro showed there were races where the top three finishers were horses not included in the past performances Rice had been given

According to Rick Goodell, the Gaming Commission attorney, the names of 565 horses were provided to Rice in those e-mails.

Baeza had been familiar with the e-mails because in 2016 he and John Clyne, a NYRA security official, were asked to decipher the e-mails by the Queens district attorney’s office. Ultimately, the Queens DA did not pursue criminal charges against Rice.

“It’s not so much what she did with the e-mails, it’s that she received the e-mails,” Baeza said. “To me, that’s an improper act. It’s information not readily available to all the trainers.”

Turro tried to show that other trainers were indeed getting that information, albeit not via e-mail.

Turro had a sworn statement from trainer David Donk, who said when the racing office was attempting to hustle horses into races that were light on entries, if he was walking through the racing office at the time, he would be shown a computer screen with horses names on it.

Turro also had a sworn statement from a former NYRA racing department official, who requested anonymity, that she would provide information to trainers about horses in race to try and entice them to enter.

In neither of those statements, however, was it mentioned that past performances were given to other trainers.

Goodell argued that while the e-mails showed that Rice was given the past performances of more than 500 horses, he said that only covered a three-month period of what is alleged to have occurred over three years.

“When everybody else is submitting their horses in confidence, to be given the names of all the horses already in the race and to do so over a course of three years, thousands of names of horses -- we saw over 500 in just the e-mail over the course of three months -- is clearly something a reasonable person in the industry would recognize is an improper act,” Goodell argued.

Goodell, citing Commission rule 4042.1 (f), said the Commission can impose punishment on a licensed individual “if any person be guilty of any improper, corrupt or fraudulent act or practice in relation to racing, or shall conspire with any other person to commit or shall assist in the commission of any such act or practice.”

Baeza noted that while there was no specific rule regarding animal cruelty in the books in 2001, the Commission used rule 4042.1 (f) to revoke the license of owner Ernie Paragallo, who had been brought up on charges of animal cruelty.

Baeza was the last of nine witnesses called by the Commission, which concluded its case on Tuesday.

Rice is expected to testify in her own defense when the case resumes on Wednesday.