Westport TC 9 March 2012 – R 1
ID: JCA11217
Meet Title:
Westport TC - 9 March 2012
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2012/03/09
Race Number:
R1
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
Penalty:
Mr Reedy was fined the sum of $250.
Charge:
Careless Driving
Facts:
Following the running of Race 1, Gibson Appliances/West Coast Messenger Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S P Renault, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr J R Reedy, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that, as the driver of WILL HE RULE in the race, with approximately 1,000 metres remaining he shifted his position when not entitled to do so causing himself to become awkwardly positioned and strike the sulky wheel of MICK MURPHY (R T May) causing his horse to break.
Mr Reedy was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 864 provides as follows:
(3) No horseman in any race shall drive:-
(b) carelessly.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Renault went straight to the video replays of the incident with approximately 1,000 metres to run. He pointed out Mr Reedy driving WILL HE RULE following MICK MURPHY (R T May). Following Mr Reedy was CHLOE McGUIRE (L D McCormick). All three horses were racing in the one-out line. He then pointed out the head of WILL HE RULE turned inwards and, at that point, the horse got on the inside of MICK MURPHY. In the meantime, Mr McCormick had angled down to the markers inside Mr Reedy, who was then in between Mr May and Mr McCormick.
Mr Renault said that it was the Stewards’ submission that, by steering his horse down to the inside, Mr Reedy had become awkwardly placed. His horse struck the wheel of MICK MURPHY and galloped and lost its chance in the race. Instead of doing his best to pull out of the gap, Mr Reedy had steered into it and had struck his horse with the whip when between runners, which a prudent driver would not have done so. When he realised that Mr McCormick was on his inner, Mr Reedy had attempted to pull out but was in an awkward position and his horse struck a wheel, Mr Renault said.
Mr Renault confirmed, when questioned by the Committee that Mr McCormick was established on the marker line prior to the incident and that Mr May was in the one-out line.
Mr Renault submitted that Mr Reedy had driven carelessly.
Mr Reedy stated that his horse was hanging in on the bend. Mr McCormick improving his horse on the inside made his horse go harder. Mr May was pushing his, Mr Reedy’s, horse off with his hand. The horse went into the gap and, Mr Reedy said, he tried to get him out of the gap. The horse was already inside Mr May’s wheel when the Stewards alleged that he was steering him down.
The horse had previously received warnings regarding his racing manners. He has a tendency to get his head round and he is difficult to control, Mr Reedy said. Mr Renault confirmed that the horse had received one warning, three starts ago.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee listened to the evidence and submissions of both parties and carefully viewed the video replays of the incident with approximately 1,000 metres to race that were shown to the hearing.
The Committee found that, at that point, Mr Reedy was on the back of MICK MURPHY (R T May) and on Mr Reedy’s back was CHLOE MAGUIRE (L D McCormick). Mr McCormick then legitimately moved down to take up a position on the marker line and was established on the inside of Mr Reedy. Mr May remained in the one-out line.
In the meantime, Mr Reedy had allowed himself to get in between Mr McCormick and Mr May where there was insufficient room, as a result of which his horse struck a wheel and broke. The allegation of the Stipendiary Stewards was that Mr Reedy had attempted to go into the gap. Mr Renault pointed out that the head of WILL HE RULE was turned inwards at that point and that Mr Reedy had struck the horse with the whip.
Mr Reedy’s explanation was that his horse had been hanging and had then ducked in. He claimed that he been unable to do anything about it. The horse had displayed wayward tendencies previously.
The Committee preferred the evidence of the Stewards which was, in the Committee’s view, borne out by the video replays. It was of the view that, notwithstanding that Mr Reedy’s horse was hanging, he had the opportunity to restrain the horse onto Mr May’s back but, instead, he either allowed it to or he attempted to take a gap on the inside of Mr May which was no longer there – that position having been taken up by Mr McCormick. Whether Mr Reedy allowed the horse to attempt to take the gap or whether Mr Reedy steered the horse into the gap, either course of action was culpable and Mr Reedy’s driving, therefore, fell short of the standard expected of a reasonable and prudent driver.
We therefore find that Mr Reedy drove carelessly.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Renault told the Committee that Mr Reedy has a clear record. He is not a regular driver, having had no previous drives this season and 2 drives in each of the 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 seasons.
Mr Renault referred to the Penalty Guide which recommended a starting point for penalty for a breach of the Rule of a fine of $400 or 8 drives. A suspension was not appropriate having regard to the frequency with which Mr Reedy drives, Mr Renault submitted. He submitted that an appropriate fine would be one in the vicinity of $300.
Mr Reedy submitted that there should be no penalty. He did not accept that he had driven carelessly, he said.
Reasons for Penalty:
Mr Reedy had denied the breach so no discount could be given to him for admitting the breach. However, the Committee took into account that Mr Reedy drives very infrequently. His record was clear but he has had only 4 previous drives in over 2 ½ seasons. Therefore, little account could be taken of his clear record.
However, for the particular breach, the Committee was satisfied that a fine somewhat less that that submitted by Mr Renault was appropriate. The Committee looked at the database of penalties for other breaches of the Rule in cases where the breach was denied but the driver had a clear record. The Committee had particular regard, in this case, to Mr Reedy’s lack of recent race driving.
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 11fdfc1ee6f754792ea1cbb73c694e3c
informantnumber: A5156
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 12/03/2012
hearing_title: Westport TC 9 March 2012 - R 1
charge:
Careless Driving
facts:
Following the running of Race 1, Gibson Appliances/West Coast Messenger Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S P Renault, against Licensed Open Horseman, Mr J R Reedy, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) in that, as the driver of WILL HE RULE in the race, with approximately 1,000 metres remaining he shifted his position when not entitled to do so causing himself to become awkwardly positioned and strike the sulky wheel of MICK MURPHY (R T May) causing his horse to break.
Mr Reedy was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 864 provides as follows:
(3) No horseman in any race shall drive:-
(b) carelessly.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Renault went straight to the video replays of the incident with approximately 1,000 metres to run. He pointed out Mr Reedy driving WILL HE RULE following MICK MURPHY (R T May). Following Mr Reedy was CHLOE McGUIRE (L D McCormick). All three horses were racing in the one-out line. He then pointed out the head of WILL HE RULE turned inwards and, at that point, the horse got on the inside of MICK MURPHY. In the meantime, Mr McCormick had angled down to the markers inside Mr Reedy, who was then in between Mr May and Mr McCormick.
Mr Renault said that it was the Stewards’ submission that, by steering his horse down to the inside, Mr Reedy had become awkwardly placed. His horse struck the wheel of MICK MURPHY and galloped and lost its chance in the race. Instead of doing his best to pull out of the gap, Mr Reedy had steered into it and had struck his horse with the whip when between runners, which a prudent driver would not have done so. When he realised that Mr McCormick was on his inner, Mr Reedy had attempted to pull out but was in an awkward position and his horse struck a wheel, Mr Renault said.
Mr Renault confirmed, when questioned by the Committee that Mr McCormick was established on the marker line prior to the incident and that Mr May was in the one-out line.
Mr Renault submitted that Mr Reedy had driven carelessly.
Mr Reedy stated that his horse was hanging in on the bend. Mr McCormick improving his horse on the inside made his horse go harder. Mr May was pushing his, Mr Reedy’s, horse off with his hand. The horse went into the gap and, Mr Reedy said, he tried to get him out of the gap. The horse was already inside Mr May’s wheel when the Stewards alleged that he was steering him down.
The horse had previously received warnings regarding his racing manners. He has a tendency to get his head round and he is difficult to control, Mr Reedy said. Mr Renault confirmed that the horse had received one warning, three starts ago.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee listened to the evidence and submissions of both parties and carefully viewed the video replays of the incident with approximately 1,000 metres to race that were shown to the hearing.
The Committee found that, at that point, Mr Reedy was on the back of MICK MURPHY (R T May) and on Mr Reedy’s back was CHLOE MAGUIRE (L D McCormick). Mr McCormick then legitimately moved down to take up a position on the marker line and was established on the inside of Mr Reedy. Mr May remained in the one-out line.
In the meantime, Mr Reedy had allowed himself to get in between Mr McCormick and Mr May where there was insufficient room, as a result of which his horse struck a wheel and broke. The allegation of the Stipendiary Stewards was that Mr Reedy had attempted to go into the gap. Mr Renault pointed out that the head of WILL HE RULE was turned inwards at that point and that Mr Reedy had struck the horse with the whip.
Mr Reedy’s explanation was that his horse had been hanging and had then ducked in. He claimed that he been unable to do anything about it. The horse had displayed wayward tendencies previously.
The Committee preferred the evidence of the Stewards which was, in the Committee’s view, borne out by the video replays. It was of the view that, notwithstanding that Mr Reedy’s horse was hanging, he had the opportunity to restrain the horse onto Mr May’s back but, instead, he either allowed it to or he attempted to take a gap on the inside of Mr May which was no longer there – that position having been taken up by Mr McCormick. Whether Mr Reedy allowed the horse to attempt to take the gap or whether Mr Reedy steered the horse into the gap, either course of action was culpable and Mr Reedy’s driving, therefore, fell short of the standard expected of a reasonable and prudent driver.
We therefore find that Mr Reedy drove carelessly.
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Renault told the Committee that Mr Reedy has a clear record. He is not a regular driver, having had no previous drives this season and 2 drives in each of the 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 seasons.
Mr Renault referred to the Penalty Guide which recommended a starting point for penalty for a breach of the Rule of a fine of $400 or 8 drives. A suspension was not appropriate having regard to the frequency with which Mr Reedy drives, Mr Renault submitted. He submitted that an appropriate fine would be one in the vicinity of $300.
Mr Reedy submitted that there should be no penalty. He did not accept that he had driven carelessly, he said.
reasonsforpenalty:
Mr Reedy had denied the breach so no discount could be given to him for admitting the breach. However, the Committee took into account that Mr Reedy drives very infrequently. His record was clear but he has had only 4 previous drives in over 2 ½ seasons. Therefore, little account could be taken of his clear record.
However, for the particular breach, the Committee was satisfied that a fine somewhat less that that submitted by Mr Renault was appropriate. The Committee looked at the database of penalties for other breaches of the Rule in cases where the breach was denied but the driver had a clear record. The Committee had particular regard, in this case, to Mr Reedy’s lack of recent race driving.
penalty:
Mr Reedy was fined the sum of $250.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(3)(b)
Informant: S P Renault - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: J R Reedy - Licensed Open Horseman
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: c8ae784954832d151f8e2020a2cb03a6
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 0b128c2c819afc8855f93951e2348a62
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 09/03/2012
meet_title: Westport TC - 9 March 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: westport-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: SChing
meet_pm2: none
name: Westport TC