Franklin TC 8 July 2011 – R 10
ID: JCA13629
Meet Title:
Franklin TC - 8 July 2011
Meet Chair:
BScott
Meet Committee Member 1:
AGodsalve
Race Date:
2011/07/08
Race Number:
R 10
Decision:
The charge is accordingly dismissed.
Charge:
An Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead against Horseman Mr MW McKendry alleging that Mr McKendry drove PAY ME BRO carelessly when crossing over and into the lead with 1600 metres to run when insufficiently clear causing interference to LISHARRY (Driver K Blakemore).
Mr McKendry was present at the hearing and he advised this Committee that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 869(3)(b) states:
“No Horseman in any race shall drive carelessly.”
Facts:
Mr Muirhead gave evidence and said that he watched the race from the Stipendiary Steward’s position on the fifth floor of the main stand and he said that with a little over 1600 metres to go Ms Blakemore was in the lead with LISHARRY and Mr McKendry improved along side her to lead. He said that when Mr McKendry took the lead the front legs of LISHARRY were still inside the line of Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel and as a result of the movement LISHARRY was checked and it galloped and then galloped for approximately 90 metres before it settled and then ran on to finish 2nd.. Mr Muirhead said that from his observation it appeared that there was contact between LIZHARRY’s front legs and Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel.
Mr Muirhead then demonstrated the incident by use of the video films and he said that they showed that Ms Blakemore wanted to retain the lead but then when she was unable to she conceded. Mr Muirhead relied on the Back Straight head on film and said that this showed that Mr McKendry had cramped Ms Blakemore up for room and had made contact and broke.
Mr Muirhead said that it was not Ms Blakemore’s job to get out of the way of Mr McKendry but rather the duty was on him to cross to the lead without causing any interference.
Mr McKendry in cross examination referred Mr Muirhead to a different view of the incident and asked him if that proved that there was no contact. Mr Muirhead said that that camera angle did not show the true picture and that he was relying on the Back Straight camera.
Mr McKendry asked Mr Muirhead if Ms Blakemore caused the incident and Mr Muirhead said no.
Mr Muirhead then called Ms Blakemore to give evidence and when asked why she broke she said that she hit Mr McKendry’s wheel. She said that she had been told to lead and when Mr McKendry came along she had chased her horse up and possibly shouldn’t have because when Mr McKendry continued on and she had to restrain her horse. She said that she did not have much room when Mr McKendry crossed over and as a result of running out of room she hit his wheel. Ms Blakemore was shown the films of the incident and asked by Mr Muirhead if she had enough room and she said no not really. She did say again that there was contact and that she hit Mr McKendry’s wheel.
Ms Blakemore in answer to cross examination from Mr McKendry said that her horse was a funny little horse and any little thing that happens in the race can put him off. She said he pulled quite hard when he galloped and she had been chasing him up to keep the lead. She said that she was pulling back to give Mr McKendry the lead when the incident happened.
Mr McKendry directed her to the view of the incident that he preferred and asked Ms Blakemore if that showed that she had hit his wheel. She said that that film clearly showed that she didn’t hit his wheel. She also said that it might have been her fault that she hit Mr McKendry’s wheel because she was having some difficulty in restraining her horse.
Mr McKendry asked Ms Blakemore about the side on view of the incident and asked if her front legs were inside Mr McKendry’s sulky when the incident happened. She thought that they might have been inside but she did say that her horse went rough.
Mr McKendry asked Ms Blakemore that if she had been driving any other horse in similar circumstances would it have broken and she said probably not and that her horse was a funny little horse.
Mr Muirhead by way of re-examination referred Ms Blakemore to the side on camera and asked if that showed that at the time of her horse breaking that it’s front legs were inside Mr McKendry’s sulky. Ms Blakemore was not sure. Mr Muirhead referred Ms Blakemore to the Back straight Head On film and asked her how much room she had between her and the marker line and she said that she was not sure.
In answer to questions from the Committee Ms Blakemore said that she had not been in this position before with LISHARRY. She was also asked why she was chasing her horse up if she was running out of room and she said that she had chased it up because she was told to retain the lead if possible but then when Mr McKendry was along side her he told her that he would give her the lead back so she restrained her horse. Ms Blakemore also advised the Committee that when she appeared to be running out of room she did not call out to Mr McKendry. In answer to a further question from the Committee about contact, Ms Blakemore said she was pretty sure she had hit Mr McKendry’s wheel and that it was her fault but that looking at the films she was now not so sure that contact had been made. She did however think that she had made contact with the side of Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel.
Mr McKendry then gave evidence and his evidence was essentially that when he was taking the lead he told Ms Blakemore that he would give the lead back to her. He told her to come back around him and he said he had no reason whatsoever to squeeze her up. He said that her horse was a tricky little horse and that Ms Blakemore had a problem with it when she was restraining it. Mr McKendry said that his sulky was in front of Ms Blakemore’s horse when it broke and he stated quite clearly that there was no contact.
Mr McKendry also referred to the films and he said that the camera that he was referring to in his evidence clearly showed that there was no contact. He also said that the other cameras, although showed different angles of the incident, did show that he was in front of Ms Blakemore’s horse when it broke.
In answer to questions from Mr Muirhead, Mr McKendry again said that Ms Blakemore had a problem with her horse and that it shouldn’t have broken. He said that there was no contact. Mr Muirhead asked Mr McKendry that if Ms Blakemore had plenty of room then how come her horse broke. Mr McKendry again pointed to the fact that it was a tricky little horse and when being restrained it had put in a rough one and had broken. Mr McKendry also said that he was in front for a couple of strides before he heard Ms Blakemore’s horse go rough and then break
Submissions for Decision:
As above
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee has watched the films numerous times. We have several different angles and we have viewed them all. Mr Muirhead preferred one angle and Mr McKendry another. We have listened to the evidence put before us and also the sometimes spirited debate between Messrs Muirhead and McKendry concerning the various films shown to us.
Ms Blakemore tells us that her instructions were to stay in front if possible but that after discussion with Mr McKendry she conceded the front on the basis that she was going to be able to go around Mr McKendry and take the front again. Her horse naturally did not respond too kindly to being restrained and it may well have put in a rough step or two and then broken. Ms Blakemore has told us that her horse is a funny little horse. Ms Blakemore also said that she thought she had made contact with Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel but on viewing the films she was not sure whether she did or not.
Mr McKendry was of the view that there was no contact at all, that Ms Blakemore’s problems were caused by her horse not taking too kindly to be restrained and that he was going to give Ms Blakemore the lead back and therefore had no reason at all to squeeze her up. Mr McKendry was of the view that he was in front when Ms Blakemore’s horse broke and he said that his viewing of the films supported that.
Mr Muirhead relied on not only his own evidence but also the films and Ms Blakemore’s evidence. He believed that Ms Blakemore’s horses front legs were up inside Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel and that Mr McKendry came in and did not give Ms Blakemore sufficient room and that there was contact and that is the reason why Ms Blakemore’s horse broke.
The Committee is faced with conflicting evidence. In the Committee’s view the evidence is inconclusive and not sufficient to uphold a charge under Rule 869(3)(b). There is a considerable doubt in the Committee’s mind as to whether the charge has been proven and any doubt must go in favour of Mr McKendry.
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: 4ff3191e3eed9407b97a0c863a62bfc6
informantnumber: 66811
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 0
decisiondate: 06/07/2011
hearing_title: Franklin TC 8 July 2011 - R 10
charge:
An Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead against Horseman Mr MW McKendry alleging that Mr McKendry drove PAY ME BRO carelessly when crossing over and into the lead with 1600 metres to run when insufficiently clear causing interference to LISHARRY (Driver K Blakemore).
Mr McKendry was present at the hearing and he advised this Committee that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 869(3)(b) states:
“No Horseman in any race shall drive carelessly.”
facts:
Mr Muirhead gave evidence and said that he watched the race from the Stipendiary Steward’s position on the fifth floor of the main stand and he said that with a little over 1600 metres to go Ms Blakemore was in the lead with LISHARRY and Mr McKendry improved along side her to lead. He said that when Mr McKendry took the lead the front legs of LISHARRY were still inside the line of Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel and as a result of the movement LISHARRY was checked and it galloped and then galloped for approximately 90 metres before it settled and then ran on to finish 2nd.. Mr Muirhead said that from his observation it appeared that there was contact between LIZHARRY’s front legs and Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel.
Mr Muirhead then demonstrated the incident by use of the video films and he said that they showed that Ms Blakemore wanted to retain the lead but then when she was unable to she conceded. Mr Muirhead relied on the Back Straight head on film and said that this showed that Mr McKendry had cramped Ms Blakemore up for room and had made contact and broke.
Mr Muirhead said that it was not Ms Blakemore’s job to get out of the way of Mr McKendry but rather the duty was on him to cross to the lead without causing any interference.
Mr McKendry in cross examination referred Mr Muirhead to a different view of the incident and asked him if that proved that there was no contact. Mr Muirhead said that that camera angle did not show the true picture and that he was relying on the Back Straight camera.
Mr McKendry asked Mr Muirhead if Ms Blakemore caused the incident and Mr Muirhead said no.
Mr Muirhead then called Ms Blakemore to give evidence and when asked why she broke she said that she hit Mr McKendry’s wheel. She said that she had been told to lead and when Mr McKendry came along she had chased her horse up and possibly shouldn’t have because when Mr McKendry continued on and she had to restrain her horse. She said that she did not have much room when Mr McKendry crossed over and as a result of running out of room she hit his wheel. Ms Blakemore was shown the films of the incident and asked by Mr Muirhead if she had enough room and she said no not really. She did say again that there was contact and that she hit Mr McKendry’s wheel.
Ms Blakemore in answer to cross examination from Mr McKendry said that her horse was a funny little horse and any little thing that happens in the race can put him off. She said he pulled quite hard when he galloped and she had been chasing him up to keep the lead. She said that she was pulling back to give Mr McKendry the lead when the incident happened.
Mr McKendry directed her to the view of the incident that he preferred and asked Ms Blakemore if that showed that she had hit his wheel. She said that that film clearly showed that she didn’t hit his wheel. She also said that it might have been her fault that she hit Mr McKendry’s wheel because she was having some difficulty in restraining her horse.
Mr McKendry asked Ms Blakemore about the side on view of the incident and asked if her front legs were inside Mr McKendry’s sulky when the incident happened. She thought that they might have been inside but she did say that her horse went rough.
Mr McKendry asked Ms Blakemore that if she had been driving any other horse in similar circumstances would it have broken and she said probably not and that her horse was a funny little horse.
Mr Muirhead by way of re-examination referred Ms Blakemore to the side on camera and asked if that showed that at the time of her horse breaking that it’s front legs were inside Mr McKendry’s sulky. Ms Blakemore was not sure. Mr Muirhead referred Ms Blakemore to the Back straight Head On film and asked her how much room she had between her and the marker line and she said that she was not sure.
In answer to questions from the Committee Ms Blakemore said that she had not been in this position before with LISHARRY. She was also asked why she was chasing her horse up if she was running out of room and she said that she had chased it up because she was told to retain the lead if possible but then when Mr McKendry was along side her he told her that he would give her the lead back so she restrained her horse. Ms Blakemore also advised the Committee that when she appeared to be running out of room she did not call out to Mr McKendry. In answer to a further question from the Committee about contact, Ms Blakemore said she was pretty sure she had hit Mr McKendry’s wheel and that it was her fault but that looking at the films she was now not so sure that contact had been made. She did however think that she had made contact with the side of Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel.
Mr McKendry then gave evidence and his evidence was essentially that when he was taking the lead he told Ms Blakemore that he would give the lead back to her. He told her to come back around him and he said he had no reason whatsoever to squeeze her up. He said that her horse was a tricky little horse and that Ms Blakemore had a problem with it when she was restraining it. Mr McKendry said that his sulky was in front of Ms Blakemore’s horse when it broke and he stated quite clearly that there was no contact.
Mr McKendry also referred to the films and he said that the camera that he was referring to in his evidence clearly showed that there was no contact. He also said that the other cameras, although showed different angles of the incident, did show that he was in front of Ms Blakemore’s horse when it broke.
In answer to questions from Mr Muirhead, Mr McKendry again said that Ms Blakemore had a problem with her horse and that it shouldn’t have broken. He said that there was no contact. Mr Muirhead asked Mr McKendry that if Ms Blakemore had plenty of room then how come her horse broke. Mr McKendry again pointed to the fact that it was a tricky little horse and when being restrained it had put in a rough one and had broken. Mr McKendry also said that he was in front for a couple of strides before he heard Ms Blakemore’s horse go rough and then break
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
As above
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee has watched the films numerous times. We have several different angles and we have viewed them all. Mr Muirhead preferred one angle and Mr McKendry another. We have listened to the evidence put before us and also the sometimes spirited debate between Messrs Muirhead and McKendry concerning the various films shown to us.
Ms Blakemore tells us that her instructions were to stay in front if possible but that after discussion with Mr McKendry she conceded the front on the basis that she was going to be able to go around Mr McKendry and take the front again. Her horse naturally did not respond too kindly to being restrained and it may well have put in a rough step or two and then broken. Ms Blakemore has told us that her horse is a funny little horse. Ms Blakemore also said that she thought she had made contact with Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel but on viewing the films she was not sure whether she did or not.
Mr McKendry was of the view that there was no contact at all, that Ms Blakemore’s problems were caused by her horse not taking too kindly to be restrained and that he was going to give Ms Blakemore the lead back and therefore had no reason at all to squeeze her up. Mr McKendry was of the view that he was in front when Ms Blakemore’s horse broke and he said that his viewing of the films supported that.
Mr Muirhead relied on not only his own evidence but also the films and Ms Blakemore’s evidence. He believed that Ms Blakemore’s horses front legs were up inside Mr McKendry’s sulky wheel and that Mr McKendry came in and did not give Ms Blakemore sufficient room and that there was contact and that is the reason why Ms Blakemore’s horse broke.
The Committee is faced with conflicting evidence. In the Committee’s view the evidence is inconclusive and not sufficient to uphold a charge under Rule 869(3)(b). There is a considerable doubt in the Committee’s mind as to whether the charge has been proven and any doubt must go in favour of Mr McKendry.
Decision:
The charge is accordingly dismissed.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(3)(b)
Informant: Mr JM Muirhead - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr MW McKendry - Licensed Open Horseman
Otherperson: Ms K Blakemore - Driver of LISHARRY
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 8b3d8689d6bcab09b8d9eb069ad07586
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 10
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: bbbebba32703912e7971b01a9f6ac7ba
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 08/07/2011
meet_title: Franklin TC - 8 July 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: franklin-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: BScott
meet_pm1: AGodsalve
meet_pm2: none
name: Franklin TC