upon reading how the i.h.r.b. reached their verdict.

​These are relevant facts: Mr Hanlon offered false and misleading to investigating I.H.R.B. officials.
Failure of a veterinary surgeon retained by Mr. Hanlon to complete an entry in the passport of the deceased animal regarding the previous administration of a medical product prohibited in a food-producing animal.
Mr. Hanlon’s conduct was also referred to.
Mr. Hanlon had misled the I.H.R.B. officials in the early stages of the investigation in relation to the issue of who had attempted to secure the covering of the deceased animal with a tarpaulin and who drove the horsebox and when the tarpaulin had been recovered after the incident.
Mr. Hanlon was in breach on the basis he remained responsible for checking and ensuring the relevant sections of a passport are updated, even when a veterinary surgeon was retained for the purpose.
The horse in question was found to have died during the night in a ‘private paddock’. I am not certain whether ‘private paddock’ refers to somewhere outside of Hanlon’s premises or just a paddock away from the stable area. The age or sex of the horse was not mentioned.
Reading the official report on the I.H.R.B. website I was surprised to find little to be critical about. The ‘little’ was this: although the buck should always stop with the trainer, and there is no doubt Hanlon was guilty as charged; a trainer operates in a world of practicalities. Yes, the rules are there for good reason and should be adhered to at all times. The truth though is this; a horse carcass is not easy to handle. It is almost impossible to transport a dead horse in an enclosed lorry, for instance, and a fore-end loader or tractor is necessary for the lifting the body on to a trailer. For most people, certainly non-farming people, this is an unpleasant and undignified operation. If, as he stated, Hanlon was waiting most of the day for someone to arrive with a tractor, while in the mean time he was extremely busy with the business of training the horses under his care, to anyone with knowledge of a busy work environment, it is understandable, due to time constraints, if the loading of the carcass onto the trailer was carried out in a haphazard and hasty fashion, with Hanlon leaving the covering of the deceased animal with a tarpaulin left to his staff.
Hanlon will have learned much from this incident. He is a larger-than-life character and will be chastened to be in the spotlight for failings on both his part and on the reliability of his staff to undertake not to act in a manner that undermines his reputation.
It must be said that this case was not an animal welfare issue. When the I.H.R.B. officials inspected the stables and the horses they found no fault, neither with paperwork nor the condition of the horses.
The problem I have, having now read the official report, is that Hanlon’s case was not heard in isolation as it was clear by statements from the referral committee that a television documentary aired days before regarding animal welfare across not only Ireland but Europe, in which Hanlon appeared positively, pushed them to, perhaps, be more severe in their sentencing than they might have if the television documentary had not appeared so close to the enquiry.
Also, and here I repeat myself, compared to the Mahon case, which involved animal cruelty that sickened and appalled, in which a prison sentence would have been appropriate, the verdict was a 3-year suspension of a trainers’ licence, though not banned from the sport as he was allowed to seek work in the industry. 3-years was a soft suspension, as Hanlon’s 10-months, with, perhaps, five-months suspended, was harsh.
Luke Comer only received a 12-month suspension after being found grossly negligent, with skeletal equine remains found on his land and no records of which horses had perished. The fact he offered to donate £20,000 to Ireland’s equivalent of our R.o.R. a mitigating factor in his lenient punishment, I suggest.
Having read the official report, although I respect the sentiments of the committee, I remain convinced that Hanlon’s punishment is disproportionate to the offence and by making a mountain out of a molehill, the I.H.R.A. are equally bringing the sport into disrepute. The 2,000 euro fine and a six-month suspended sentence would have served a better purpose. Hanlon would still be guilty as charged, he would have received a hard rap over the knuckles and learned a valued lesson.