Manawatu HRC 10 February 2011 – R 1
ID: JCA14129
Meet Title:
Manawatu HRC - 10 February 2011
Meet Chair:
TCastles
Meet Committee Member 1:
NMcCutcheon
Race Date:
2011/02/10
Race Number:
R1
Decision:
Mr. Hansen, in coming to our decision to impose a period of suspension for this offence, we have carefully considered the evidence placed before us.
Penalty:
Mr. Hansen you are suspended from race driving from today the 10th of February 2011 until the 10th of April 2011 (2 calendar months).
Charge:
Alledged breach of rule 869 (3) (a)
Facts:
Mr. G. Hansen did not admit a breach of rule 869 (3) (a) in that as the driver of Sparkle N Glitter he drove incompetently over the initial 1000m of the race electing to remain three wide.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr. Taumanu took the committee through the available films and pointed out that Mr. Hansen drew 6 off the front line, went back after the start and elected to race 3 wide and made no attempt to cross or drop back. The horse gradually gave ground finished last by 98 lengths and was 10/10 in the betting. He strongly believed the drive of Mr. Hansen was not up the standard required.
Mr. Hansen told the committee he started fast, coasted on the outside and then in his words was hung out to dry. He confirmed he did give his horse an easy drive, it was on the bit and he was coasting along. He didn’t have the opportunity to run the horse at workouts and was relying on race days to get the horse fit.
Mr. Taumanu asked if he believed his horse wasn’t fit to race to which Mr. Hansen told the committee he wasn’t sure. Mr. Taumanu pointed out that public money was invested on his drive and it was important that the public could invest in confidence.
The hearing was adjourned at 6:58. At the resumption of the hearing, two options were given to Mr. Hansen. It was pointed out to him the seriousness of the offence and the periods of suspension handed down to other drivers under this rule if the charge is found proven. The first option was for the charge to be adjourned to a later date for Mr. Hansen to take legal representation and the hearing to be held at a time and place suitable to all parties. The other option was for Mr. Hansen to call witnesses on his behalf and the hearing to proceed.
After consideration, Mr. Hansen was adamant he wanted the matter settled today and the hearing was adjourned for him to secure a witness. At the reconvened hearing, Mr. Hansen informed the committee Mr. J. Abertnethy would be called as a witness.
The films were shown to Mr. Abernethy and he asked to have discussions with Mr. Hansen. This was agreed to. Upon the resumption of the hearing, Mr. Hansen informed the committee he wished to change his plea to one of admittance of the breach. The hearing then continued with the charge being admittance.
Reasons for Decision:
As the breach was admitted the charged was found to be proved.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr. Taumanu asked for a period of suspension of 3 months. He believed the drive was incompetent and the horse was given no chance to be competitive. He agreed Mr. Hansen does not drive often, but this is no excuse for a bad drive.
Mr. Hansen told the committee he has been driving for 54 years and this is his first charge under this rule. He has 18 horses in his stable and two are qualified. He hoped to be able to drive those. He still believes strongly he was hung out to dry but after discussions with Mr. Abernethy he did agree to change his plea.
Reasons for Penalty:
Similar offences under this rule, and there are not many, have used 3 months as a starting point. We have decided to discount that period for two reasons. Firstly your record under this rule, your length of time driving and being involved with horses. Secondly your agreement, after discussions with Mr. Abernethy, to change your plea.
It is vitally important that the betting public have confidence when they invest on a race that horses and their drivers perform at a standard that is satisfactory to all concerned. Mr. Hansen we are of the opinion that in this particular incident that standard was sadly lacking.
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: 9b80aa2f9af383b06b7cf171412bb148
informantnumber: 69131
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 09/02/2011
hearing_title: Manawatu HRC 10 February 2011 - R 1
charge:
Alledged breach of rule 869 (3) (a)
facts:
Mr. G. Hansen did not admit a breach of rule 869 (3) (a) in that as the driver of Sparkle N Glitter he drove incompetently over the initial 1000m of the race electing to remain three wide.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr. Taumanu took the committee through the available films and pointed out that Mr. Hansen drew 6 off the front line, went back after the start and elected to race 3 wide and made no attempt to cross or drop back. The horse gradually gave ground finished last by 98 lengths and was 10/10 in the betting. He strongly believed the drive of Mr. Hansen was not up the standard required.
Mr. Hansen told the committee he started fast, coasted on the outside and then in his words was hung out to dry. He confirmed he did give his horse an easy drive, it was on the bit and he was coasting along. He didn’t have the opportunity to run the horse at workouts and was relying on race days to get the horse fit.
Mr. Taumanu asked if he believed his horse wasn’t fit to race to which Mr. Hansen told the committee he wasn’t sure. Mr. Taumanu pointed out that public money was invested on his drive and it was important that the public could invest in confidence.
The hearing was adjourned at 6:58. At the resumption of the hearing, two options were given to Mr. Hansen. It was pointed out to him the seriousness of the offence and the periods of suspension handed down to other drivers under this rule if the charge is found proven. The first option was for the charge to be adjourned to a later date for Mr. Hansen to take legal representation and the hearing to be held at a time and place suitable to all parties. The other option was for Mr. Hansen to call witnesses on his behalf and the hearing to proceed.
After consideration, Mr. Hansen was adamant he wanted the matter settled today and the hearing was adjourned for him to secure a witness. At the reconvened hearing, Mr. Hansen informed the committee Mr. J. Abertnethy would be called as a witness.
The films were shown to Mr. Abernethy and he asked to have discussions with Mr. Hansen. This was agreed to. Upon the resumption of the hearing, Mr. Hansen informed the committee he wished to change his plea to one of admittance of the breach. The hearing then continued with the charge being admittance.
reasonsfordecision:
As the breach was admitted the charged was found to be proved.
Decision:
Mr. Hansen, in coming to our decision to impose a period of suspension for this offence, we have carefully considered the evidence placed before us.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr. Taumanu asked for a period of suspension of 3 months. He believed the drive was incompetent and the horse was given no chance to be competitive. He agreed Mr. Hansen does not drive often, but this is no excuse for a bad drive.
Mr. Hansen told the committee he has been driving for 54 years and this is his first charge under this rule. He has 18 horses in his stable and two are qualified. He hoped to be able to drive those. He still believes strongly he was hung out to dry but after discussions with Mr. Abernethy he did agree to change his plea.
reasonsforpenalty:
Similar offences under this rule, and there are not many, have used 3 months as a starting point. We have decided to discount that period for two reasons. Firstly your record under this rule, your length of time driving and being involved with horses. Secondly your agreement, after discussions with Mr. Abernethy, to change your plea.
It is vitally important that the betting public have confidence when they invest on a race that horses and their drivers perform at a standard that is satisfactory to all concerned. Mr. Hansen we are of the opinion that in this particular incident that standard was sadly lacking.
penalty:
Mr. Hansen you are suspended from race driving from today the 10th of February 2011 until the 10th of April 2011 (2 calendar months).
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869 (3) (a)
Informant: T. Taumanu
JockeysandTrainer: G. Hansen
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 5bf5364bc918996a062bbecf3c2b30a6
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: ee92d11a7fc06211739a3836b7bfdb34
meet_expapproval: approved
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 10/02/2011
meet_title: Manawatu HRC - 10 February 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km: [{"Comment": [], "MemberRole": "Chair ", "MemberID": "TCastles", "Member": "", "OtherExpenses": "0", "KMs": "206", "Total": "127.72", "kmprice": 127.72, "Approved": "on"}]
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: manawatu-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: TCastles
meet_pm1: NMcCutcheon
meet_pm2: none
name: Manawatu HRC