Pages Navigation Menu

ON-LINE MAGAZINE & WEB SITE - SCROLL DOWN FOR NEWS

Most Recent Articles

☛ AQHA Amateur Ranch Riding World Champ disqualified for drug violations

Posted by on Apr 20, 2018 in BREAKING NEWS, COW HORSE NEWS, CUTTING NEWS, HORSE ORGANIZATIONS, MAJOR EVENTS, WHO, WHAT & WHERE | 0 comments

AQHA 2017 AMATEUR RANCH RIDING WORLD CHAMPION SARAH MCKIBBEN DISQUALIFIED FOR DRUG VIOLATION

 

SHE AND HUSBAND MOZAUN MCKIBBEN SUSPENDED AND FINED FOR DRUG VIOLATIONS AT AQHA WORLD SHOW

 

 

By Glory Ann Kurtz
April 20, 2018

Mozaun McKibben

Following a recent meeting of the AQHA Executive Committee, it was announced that disciplinary action had been taken against Mozaun McKibben and his wife Sarah, as a result of four horses testing positive for Guanabenz at the 2017 Lucas Oil AQHA World Championship Show held Nov. 2-18 in Oklahoma City. Guanabenz is a depressant of the cardiovascular system and is a forbidden drug per AQHA Rule VIO401.2. At the World Show, each world champion is drug tested and additional horses are tested based on random drawings that are selected months before each event.

 

Mozaun McKibben, 53, from Cooke County, Texas, was suspended from membership in the AQHA for 18 months, on probation for five years after his suspension, fined $10,000, and evocation of his status as an AQHA Professional Horseman, when four horses he owned, trained and/or exhibited were found positive for drugs during the 2017 AQHA World Show, held Nov. 2-18, 2017 in Oklahoma City, Okla.

 

McKibben’s wife Sarah, who was named the 2017 AQHA Amateur Ranch Riding L3 Champion, was stripped of her title and also suspended from the AQHA for 12 months, fined $3,000 and put on probation for five years following the end of her 12-month suspension.

2-AQHA: AQHA Disciplinary Actions

 

Ironically, the disciplinary action was taken less than a year after Mozaun was booked on June 28, 2017 for Burglary of Habitation, after which he bonded out with a $5,000 bond. Other court records show that he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in 1998.

3-Mozaun Arrest – Cooke County, TX

4-Click for Penalties for burglary>> 

5-McKibben History

 

THE HORSES INVOLVED:

Samples were taken from the following horses following their classes with positive drug tests being returned on His Royal Cat and Wimpy Tejano, shown in the Jr. Ranch Riding L3 Preliminaries on Nov. 4, with Mozaun McKibben being the responsible party, as the owner, trainer and exhibitor; Wimpys Shining Jac, in the Senior Ranch Riding L3 Finals, Nov. 6, with Mozaun McKibben as trainer and exhibitor and Chex Are Cashin shown Nov. 7 in the Amateur Ranch Riding L3 Finals, with Mozaun McKibben as trainer and Sarah McKibben as the rider.

 

Sarah McKibben was also the responsible party at the time in question for His Royal Cat (as owner), Wimpys Shining Jac (as owner) and Chex Are Cashin (as owner and exhibitor)

 

AQHA RECORDS ADJUSTED:

AQHA has stated they have adjusted its records to reflect the above disqualifications and is notifying those exhibitors whose horses moved up in the placings as a result of such disqualifications. Notification to associations who afford reciprocity to AQHA medication disciplinary has been taken.

 

However, I have been told that within a few days of Chex Are Cashin’s stripped title, he was sold for well over $100,000.

 

DRUG-TESTING PROTOCALS:

While writing this article, I reached out to Rick Dennis, who has done drug testing for many Fortune 500 companies and has lectured before Congressional sub-committee in Washington D.C. on drugs of abuse in the private sector. He has also co-owned a drug-testing company.

 

Rick, who has written many legal as well as interesting horse articles for AllAboutCutting.com, responded to me with an article entitled “Drug Testing Protocols.”

 

Rick’s conclusion to the drug problem is that a company or an association should implement a “Split Sample Collection and Testing” process which is the fairest system ever devised. It not only affords the requiring agency of the assurance that the test results are accurate as well as affording the donor every legal opportunity to challenge the positive test results prior to receiving disciplinary action in lieu of a positive test result. It also insulates the requiring agency against liability and defamation lawsuits due to a positive test result and any disciplinary action imposed thereafter. Following is his article:

BACKGROUND:

The Managing Member of the WIND RIVER COMPANY LLC – Richard E. “Rick” Dennis has been an entrepreneur in the private security sector since January 28, 1984. Rick’s been involved in the private sector employee drug and alcohol testing industry ever since its inception, in 1987.  His expertise in the drug testing field is expansive and includes: Being one of the owners and operators of the first employee drug testing laboratory in Louisiana – “Certified Lab, Inc.”

 

Also, Rick’s written drug and alcohol testing policies for Fortune 500 Companies such as: Exxon Company, USA, Mobile Oil Company, Campbell Soup, Kerr McGee Corporation, Dupont, Marathon Oil Company, and Atlantic Richfield to name a few. Further, Rick’s lectured before a Congressional sub-committee in Washington D.C. on drugs of abuse in the private sector.

 

According to Rick, in 1987 the Federal Government initiated designing drug and alcohol testing protocols for Federal Workplace Drug testing of specific Department of Transportation worker categories, (e.g. – Department of Aviation, Federal Highway Administration, Oil & Gas Transmission Pipelines, and the Marine Industry, etc.  Hearings were held on the design and implementation of the new Federal Drug and Alcohol Testing rules and regulations and each specific category was published in the Federal Register.

 

SPECIMEN COLLECTION PROTOCOLS – DRUGS OF ABUSE: Urine Specimens were initially selected for drugs of abuse testing, due to the fact urine samples were determined to be a better conductor for drug testing results versus blood samples.  However, this protocol was expanded to include blood, saliva, and hair testing. Essentially, the protocols included a format for the collection of the specimen, the design of a chain of custody form to track the collection, shipping, transportation, testing, and storage of the collected specimen.

 

LABORATORY TESTING PROTOCOLS: 

 The National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) designed the laboratory certification and testing standards for testing and confirmation of submitted samples, as well as initial and confirmation testing levels, classifications of drugs tested for, testing procedures, and requirements.  Two positive laboratory tests are required in order to report a specimen sample as being positive for prohibitive drug(s), (e.g. an initial positive test result has to be confirmed by a positive confirmation test result).

 

SPLIT-SAMPLE COLLECTION: 

 In order for the testing procedures and subsequent results thereafter to be certified and authenticated, NIDA designed and implemented the “Split Sample Collection and Analysis Process” whereby two samples were made using one specimen collection.  Sample (A) and Sample (B) couldn’t be made using two separate collections.  Sample (A) would be the primary sample for initial analysis and confirmation, and sample (B) would be frozen and used in the event of a donor challenge to the positive result of Sample (A).

 

In the event of a donor challenge to the positive test result of Sample (A), the donor is afforded the opportunity to challenge the positive test result of Sample (A) at another testing laboratory by testing Sample (B). However, the NIDA retesting protocols specifically states the second testing laboratory must meet “the same laboratory testing standards and certifications as the initial testing laboratory”. 

 

Further, a “Chain-Of-Custody” log must be completed relative to the transportation, analysis, storage, and certification of Sample (B).  In the event the two sample results are positive, then the sample is deemed positive.  In the event there are two conflicting sample results, (e.g., one positive and one negative), a negative test result is afforded to the benefit of the donor due to conflicting results.

 

MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER:

 Federal 49,CFR, Part 40 requirements include a Medical Review Officer as a liaison between the testing laboratory and the donor.  The duty of the Medical Review Officer is to certify that all sample collection, transportation, storage, testing, and test result communications have been adhered to.  The Medical Review Officers other duties includes monitoring and ordering the testing of Sample (B) in the event of a donor challenge.

 

CONCLUSION:

 It’s Rick’s opinion, that the Split-Sample Collection and Testing process is the fairest system ever devised.  It affords the requiring agency of the assurance that the test results are accurate, as well as affording the donor every legal opportunity to challenge the positive test results prior to receiving disciplinary action in lieu of a positive test result.  Also, the split sample specimen collection and analysis procedure insulates the requiring agency against liability and defamation lawsuits due to a positive test result and any disciplinary action imposed thereafter.

Read More