Horse racing vet Tim Brennan, who works for trainer Willie Mullins, cleared of passing on confidential information
- Tim Brennan faced corruption charges, but was cleared by disciplinary panel
- The charges related to information about trainer Willie Mullins’ horse Faugheen
- Brennan has worked for Mullins as a vet for more than 10 years
- The charges were dismissed by the defence as ‘complete fantasy’
A BHA disciplinary panel has cleared a vet who works for trainer Willie Mullins of corruption charges.
Tim Brennan, who has worked for Mullins for 10 years, had been accused of passing on confidential inside information concerning the withdrawal of injured 2016 Champion Hurdle favourite Faugheen.
The BHA had claimed that this information had been used by Brennan’s brother Michael to cheat at betting when he laid Faugheen on betting exchange Betfair.
Tim Brennan works for trainer Willie Mullins (pictured) and was cleared of corruption charges
But a case which relied heavily on timelines linking phone calls and bets were struck was dismissed as ‘complete fantasy’ by Brennan’s defence.
During the hearing it emerged that Brennan’s daughter was seriously ill on the day he was supposed to be conspiring with his brother while several other possible links to the information about Faugheen also existed.
A statement released by Brennan’s solicitor said: ‘This inquiry has been extremely stressful for the Brennan family but Tim has, from the outset, been resolute in his determination to clear his name.’
Brennan was cleared of passing on information in 2016 about champion horse Faugheen
Questions must be asked about the BHA’s judgment in bringing this case. It’s case was largely based on circumstantial evidence and inference and seemed to lack of appreciation of how a racing stable operates.
But the BHA defended its action and said: ‘The BHA has a duty to protect the integrity of our sport and the interests of the betting public. That means we will investigate and act where we become aware of suspicious betting activity. Those who lose money in such circumstances would expect nothing less, and we owe it to them to pursue these cases.’
That is true. But you must also be able to assess your evidence and its strength ahead of a potential prosecution.
There were more holes in the BHA’s case than there are holes at Carnoustie.