Rangiora HRC 1 April 2012 – R 7
ID: JCA11823
Meet Title:
Rangiora HRC - 1 April 2012
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
KHales
Race Date:
2012/04/01
Race Number:
R7
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
Penalty:
Miss Edmonds was fined the sum of $200.
Charge:
Excessive use of the whip.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 7, Cecil Hanna Memorial Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S W Wallis, against Licensed Junior Driver, Miss A D Edmonds, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (2) (a) in that, as the driver of TE RAUPARAHA in the race, she “used her whip in an excessive manner”.
Miss Edmonds was present at the hearing of the information and she indicated that she denied the breach. She was assisted by Licensed Open Driver, Mr A M Butt.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(2) No horseman shall during any race:-
(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Wallis said that the Stewards were alleging that Miss Edmonds had used her whip 20-21 times in the home straight, upon entering the passing lane. Mr Butt submitted that there was no number of permissible strikes specified in either the Rule or the Guidelines. In this instance, Miss Edmonds had not used “hard hits” and the strikes were frequently broken up with pauses. Furthermore, Miss Edmonds’ horse had been beaten by the “closest of noses” (TE RAUPARAHA finished in 2nd placing), Mr Butt said.
Mr Wallis then showed a video replay of the final 400 metres of the race. He pointed out Miss Edmonds in the trail upon entering the home straight. She commenced to use her whip once in the passing lane. Mr Butt submitted, on Miss Edmonds’ behalf, that he could count no more than 18 or 19 strikes.
Miss Edmonds submitted that she had broken up her use of the whip, and she referred to the very narrow margin. She said that TE RAUPARAHA is a horse that responded well to urging. She pointed out what she claimed were pauses in her use of the whip but admitted that they were very brief.
Mr Wallis agreed that the strikes were not hard but said that the Stewards were concerned purely with the number of strikes – 20 or 21, he alleged.
Reasons for Decision:
The Guidelines regarding use of the whip provide that “excessive” simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip was used. The Guidelines further state that no horseman shall use his or her whip continuously at any time and that there must be distinct pauses or acceptable alternative actions.
Miss Edmonds’ defence, in this case, was based principally on the number of strikes being less than the number allowed by Stewards – said to be 20. At the hearing, the number of strikes was counted and it was agreed that it was approximately 20 in this case. The Guidelines do not specify a permitted number of strikes but state that “excessive” simply means “too much”.
As a Judicial Committee, we have to look at each case on its own particular facts and decide whether the whip use was “too much” and whether it was continuous or whether there were distinct pauses or acceptable alternative actions.
In this case, we found that the use of the whip was too much, regardless of the exact number of strikes, and for all intents and purposes was continuous with no discernible pauses or acceptable alternative actions.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Wallis informed the Committee that Miss Edmonds had been fined the sum of $200 in December 2011 for a breach of the Rule (20 strikes). Having regard to the fact that Miss Edmonds is a junior driver and to the number of strikes, a fine of $200 was appropriate, Mr Wallis submitted.
Miss Edmonds asked the Committee to take into account that she was a junior driver with limited financial means.
Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee took into account, in determining penalty, Miss Edmonds’ junior driver status and, also, that the number of strikes was right on the threshold at which the Stewards prosecute breaches of the Rule. The Committee did not put any weight on Miss Edmonds’ breach of the Rule in December last year. The narrow margin by which her horse was beaten does not ever excuse excessive use of the whip, but the Committee was able to appreciate the point that Miss Edmonds made. She was made aware, by the Committee, of the fact that it is not an excuse or justification.
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: 27f0434224c5961bab160ae0b9a64b08
informantnumber: A5615
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 29/03/2012
hearing_title: Rangiora HRC 1 April 2012 - R 7
charge:
Excessive use of the whip.
facts:
Following the running of Race 7, Cecil Hanna Memorial Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S W Wallis, against Licensed Junior Driver, Miss A D Edmonds, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (2) (a) in that, as the driver of TE RAUPARAHA in the race, she “used her whip in an excessive manner”.
Miss Edmonds was present at the hearing of the information and she indicated that she denied the breach. She was assisted by Licensed Open Driver, Mr A M Butt.
Rule 869 provides as follows:
(2) No horseman shall during any race:-
(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Wallis said that the Stewards were alleging that Miss Edmonds had used her whip 20-21 times in the home straight, upon entering the passing lane. Mr Butt submitted that there was no number of permissible strikes specified in either the Rule or the Guidelines. In this instance, Miss Edmonds had not used “hard hits” and the strikes were frequently broken up with pauses. Furthermore, Miss Edmonds’ horse had been beaten by the “closest of noses” (TE RAUPARAHA finished in 2nd placing), Mr Butt said.
Mr Wallis then showed a video replay of the final 400 metres of the race. He pointed out Miss Edmonds in the trail upon entering the home straight. She commenced to use her whip once in the passing lane. Mr Butt submitted, on Miss Edmonds’ behalf, that he could count no more than 18 or 19 strikes.
Miss Edmonds submitted that she had broken up her use of the whip, and she referred to the very narrow margin. She said that TE RAUPARAHA is a horse that responded well to urging. She pointed out what she claimed were pauses in her use of the whip but admitted that they were very brief.
Mr Wallis agreed that the strikes were not hard but said that the Stewards were concerned purely with the number of strikes – 20 or 21, he alleged.
reasonsfordecision:
The Guidelines regarding use of the whip provide that “excessive” simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip was used. The Guidelines further state that no horseman shall use his or her whip continuously at any time and that there must be distinct pauses or acceptable alternative actions.
Miss Edmonds’ defence, in this case, was based principally on the number of strikes being less than the number allowed by Stewards – said to be 20. At the hearing, the number of strikes was counted and it was agreed that it was approximately 20 in this case. The Guidelines do not specify a permitted number of strikes but state that “excessive” simply means “too much”.
As a Judicial Committee, we have to look at each case on its own particular facts and decide whether the whip use was “too much” and whether it was continuous or whether there were distinct pauses or acceptable alternative actions.
In this case, we found that the use of the whip was too much, regardless of the exact number of strikes, and for all intents and purposes was continuous with no discernible pauses or acceptable alternative actions.
Decision:
The charge was found proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Wallis informed the Committee that Miss Edmonds had been fined the sum of $200 in December 2011 for a breach of the Rule (20 strikes). Having regard to the fact that Miss Edmonds is a junior driver and to the number of strikes, a fine of $200 was appropriate, Mr Wallis submitted.
Miss Edmonds asked the Committee to take into account that she was a junior driver with limited financial means.
reasonsforpenalty:
The Committee took into account, in determining penalty, Miss Edmonds’ junior driver status and, also, that the number of strikes was right on the threshold at which the Stewards prosecute breaches of the Rule. The Committee did not put any weight on Miss Edmonds’ breach of the Rule in December last year. The narrow margin by which her horse was beaten does not ever excuse excessive use of the whip, but the Committee was able to appreciate the point that Miss Edmonds made. She was made aware, by the Committee, of the fact that it is not an excuse or justification.
penalty:
Miss Edmonds was fined the sum of $200.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(2)(a)
Informant: S W Wallis, Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: A D Edmonds, Licensed Junior Driver
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 746eb9c0821b7a4e98a362d41336ea9e
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R7
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: e79b209041f6664fb08a2922dcbb2eb0
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 01/04/2012
meet_title: Rangiora HRC - 1 April 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: rangiora-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: KHales
meet_pm2: none
name: Rangiora HRC