Total Nightmare: Bell's Supreme Court Anguish

WHEN Andrew Bell secured his greyhound training licence back in 1991, he never could have imagined it would one day see him in the NSW Supreme Court, but that's where he found himself on Wednesday.

Courtroom 8a was the scene as Bell, cutting a forlorn figure, and wife Debbie, watched on with both hope and trepidation as more than six-hours of legal toing and froing passed by.

Judge Natalie Adams will decide the fate of the 2020 NSW Trainer of the Year in respect to a positive swab returned at Dapto in December, 2021, when Bell's greyhound King Reed won a lowly grade 297m event.

Mentally drained and on the verge of financial ruin, Bell's Supreme Court appearance on Wednesday is the latest chapter in what has been described as a never ending nightmare for the Werombi conditioner.

Judge Adams has reserved the decision and that may be months from being handed down.

Only adding to Bell's misery is that at the opposing end of the legal spectrum is the Greyhound Welfare & Integrity Commission (GWIC), the regulator of the very industry he loves and given 30 years of his life to.

The King Reed swab returned trace elements of methamphetamine and metabolites amphetamine and 4-hydroxyamphetamine and, as a result, Bell was interim-suspended, given the drugs in question are permanently banned substances with the absence of any threshold levels. 

A stay of proceedings was later granted to allow Bell to continue operating before GWIC handed the trainer a 16-month disqualification, down from a starting penalty guideline of two-years.

Following that decision, Bell took his plight to the Racing Appeals Tribunal (RAT), where Judge David Armati handed down a 20-page finding which made a determination, for a variety of reasons, to adjust Bell's penalty to a six-week disqualification, wholly suspended.

Until recently, decisions handed down by RAT have remained as the umpires verdict, but GWIC, growing increasingly frustrated with a raft of their decisions being overturned on appeal, decided recently to send a message.

That message was to take three cases to the NSW Supreme Court in a bid to have the veracity of the decisions delivered by RAT rigorously tested.

In the lead-up to the Supreme Court action, it's been communicated to Bell by GWIC that the move isn't personal in nature, with the regulatory body challenging RAT more so than they are the participant.

But that was of little solace for Bell on Wednesday, forced to watch on as legal representatives of GWIC worked feverishly towards establishing a case which would see him return to the sidelines and, given the financial consequences, walk away from the industry for good.

Already in the hole for hundreds of thousands, not to mention the immeasurable mental anguish and loss of business, it's hard to fully quantify the damage this drawn out saga has caused Bell.

And while the resources of GWIC may be endless via industry funding, the financing of Bell's prolonged legal fight has been left solely on his shoulders, while fellow participants “have handed the hat around” to help where possible also.

During Wednesday's hearing, GWIC legal counsel argued a denial in procedural fairness while deeming the final decision "irrational".

At the heart of the legal argument was evidence tendered by respected veterinarians Dr. Derek Major and Dr. Steve Karamatic for each party.

Much is unknown about this case – including how the drug traces became present in the dog's system – what could be agreed upon is that given the minute levels of drug(s) detected, exposure was by way of contamination and not performance enhancing or by administration.

Further evidence suggested, on the balance of probability, the contamination occurred post race as well.

Bell's Supreme Court decision clearly has significant personal impact yet it has capacity to resonate even greater across the broader industry.

If GWIC is successful, how or why will a participant ever move to appeal a decision in the future armed with the knowledge that the regulatory body has the power (and resources) to take Supreme Court action?

Even if the action against Bell is not ‘personal', the husband and wife team  unwittingly find themselves in the cross-hairs … with the mounting legal bills apace.

For Bell, who has rugged up thousands of runners in recent years for two blemishes across a 30-year career, his fate will likely be known in eight or so weeks.

On Thursday, he was back working his 100-plus dogs with the aim to win races this weekend.

Just like he's done for the past 30 years but with a heavy heart and grave uncertainty.