What is expected of a noble trainer when the horse’s owner – who is also the horse’s veterinarian – secretly administers the forbidden thing and then misleads the trainer about what happened?
The new Federal Trade Commission of Fairmont Park-based trainer Vance Childers offers the usual answer: The trainer can be expected to ask the warehouse employees what the veterinarian does, requesting treatment records, and systems in place to monitor veterinary treatment rather than relying on what the veterinarian says.
Advertisement
The veterinary wife of Dr. Donald McCrosky is listed as the owner of two swords, Tigger Attack and Childersattack, which tested on the Integrity and Safety Authority’s permitted threshold for Horseracing in the banned substance testosterone in October 2024. McCrosky later admitted to injecting Tigger Attack with testosterone, and from the time of the Recognizance, parts of Crosky’s agreement.
The team also determined that Childers was “not involved in or knew anything about” the management of the Tigger Attack before the Horse Integrity & Safety Unit – the enforcement arm of HISA – notified him in the affirmative. HISA, proceeding through the FTC, acknowledged that McCrosky “intentionally misled Instructor Childers about the substances covered by his horses.”
McCrosky was separately suspended for 16 years and fined $250,000 for eight anti-doping violations, including violations involving the Tigger Attack and Childersattack.
However, Administrative Law Judge Jay Himes found that, as a trainer, Childers bore some responsibility for the violations because he did not adequately monitor the care of McCrosky’s horses.
Advertisement
Under HISA’s Anti-Doping and Medication Regulations, trainers have a personal and non-delegable duty to ensure that prohibited substances are not present in horses. It is also necessary that veterinarians maintain adequate vigilance and systems designed to ensure their compliance with the rules.
Himes Childers did not find several steps that could give him more information about McCrosky’s handling of the horses. Without evidence, Himes wrote, Childers had his brother or others at his barn involved in the care of McCrosky or other veterinarians. Nor did the troopers ask Childer to testify as to which substances McCrosky administered, how often he administered them, or why.
This is particularly relevant in the case of Tigger Attack. According to the Himes trial, McCrosky told investigators that he administered the testosterone after his fiancé told him the horse was not eating well. The boy testified that he would wait for the guards to warn him when one of the horses was signaling that something was going to happen.
Himes also found no evidence that Childers ever asked to see McCrosky’s handling records for Tigger Attack, Childersattack, or any other horses McCrosky handled at his barn. If McCrosky had failed or refused to provide, Himes wrote that he “certainly would have been warned of the storm.”
Advertisement
The children argued that those expectations were neglected as a central problem.
“The only source of information that the veterinarian was managing was the veterinarian, who actually responded to inquiries with misinformation,” the statement said.
“Mr. Childers was not so helpless,” replied Himes.
Himes showed Childers’ own testimony about his relationship with McCrosky. The children testified that when asked about treatments, McCrosky gave vague answers, describing what he was administering as a “vitamin” or a “building block.”
The boys testified that he was a young, inexperienced trainer when he took over his grandfather’s business in 2020, and McCrosky’s credit for his veterinary experience felt that he did little to challenge him. “I couldn’t challenge him,” Childers testified. “I’ve always been very grateful for the opportunity that I really love to eat it.”
Advertisement
Himes, however, pointed out that Childers continued to run the race and the race, not knowing what McCrosky was going to do for them. When asked if he was “pretty dangerous to do for both horse and human good,” Childers agreed that he did.
Himes found that Childers did not show that he had established a system of ensuring veterinary care in accordance with HISA regulations or adequately monitored and escalated McCrosky’s work.
Himes found the mitigating circumstances sufficient to reduce Childer’s period of ineligibility from 46 months to 20 months. The judge acknowledged his “lack of an appropriate length of ineligibility”, but found nothing exceptional enough to reduce it yet. The judge’s $30,000 fines and disqualifications for the two horses’ October 2024 results remained in place.
This story was first published by Paulick Report on Sep 30 2026, when it first appeared in the News section Add the Paulck Report as Preferred Source by clicking here.