Non Raceday Inquiry – RIU v A Lauder 10 February 2013 – Decision dated 12 February 2013
ID: JCA14302
Decision:
Non Raceday Inquiry
RIU v Aditi Lauder
10 February 2013
Held at Counties Racecourse
Judicial Committee: A Godsalve, Chairman - A Dooley, Committee Member
Rule: 656(3)
Informant: Mr B Oliver-Racing Integrity Unit
Respondent: Ms A Lauder, Licensed Trackwork Rider
Also Present: Mr L Molloy, assisting Ms Lauder, Ms P Kinsey: Racing Integrity Unit (Registrar)
Charge:
On the 29th day of January 2013, at Byerley Park Training Center 2013, having been required by a Racing Investigator to supply a sample of your urine in accordance with Rule 656(3) of the New Zealand Rules of Racing, you had urine which was found, upon analysis, to contain the controlled drug Cannabis as defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and thereby committed a breach of the said Rule 656(3) AND THAT you are thereby liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon you pursuant to the provisions of Rule 803 of the said Rules.
Rule: 656(3) “A rider who, having been required by a Stipendiary Steward or Investigator to supply a sample of his blood, breath, urine ,saliva or sweat(or more than one thereof )in accordance with this Rule, must not have blood, breath, urine, saliva or sweat (whichever is the subject of the applicable sample)which is found upon analysis to contain any controlled drug as defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 or other illicit substance or diuretic and/or its metabolites, artifacts or isomers”.
Ms Lauder acknowledged that she had received a copy of the charge and the relevant rules. The charge and rule were read to the hearing and Ms Lauder told the Committee she understood them and that she admitted the charge.
Accordingly we find the charge proved.
Summary by Mr B Oliver:
On Tuesday the 29th day of January 2013, officials from the Racing Integrity Unit conducted routine drug testing at the Byerley Park Training Center in Pukekohe.
The defendant Ms Aditi Lauder, also known as Dee Lauder, was one of the people randomly selected for testing and was served the appropriate notice by a Stipendiary Steward. Ms Lauder provided the required urine sample at 8.10am. The sample was tested on site by accredited New Zealand Drug Detection Agency staff and indicated that the sample was positive to tetrahydrocannabinol-(Cannabis).
Ms Lauder was spoken to and freely admitted being a social cannabis user. She said her use was infrequent and she had smoked cannabis at a barbeque two days before the testing. She voluntarily agreed to stop riding trackwork from that date until the result could be confirmed by the ESR.
The sample was forwarded to the ESR who confirmed that 66 nanograms was present in the sample which is at the lower end of the scale.
A stand down notice and a copy of the ESR Certificate in accordance with Rule 657(1)(a) were given to Ms Lauder on the 1st February 2013 as provided in Rule 911(1)(c).
Ms Lauder was totally co operative during the process and freely acknowledged her use of cannabis and that she had let herself down by breaching the rule.
She is a 29 year old woman who has not previously been in any trouble within or outside the Racing Industry. She has about 7 years of experience in the equine industry.
Mr Oliver submitted a copy of the ESR report and a copy of an Authority to Prosecute from the Operations Manager of the RIU.
Submissions by Ms A Lauder:
Ms Lauder stated that she had no comment to make and was happy for any submissions on the circumstances and penalty to be made by Mr Molloy on her behalf.
Submissions by Mr L Molloy:
Mr Molloy commenced his submissions by stating that he was a licensed trainer and a passionate racing person. He told the Committee that Ms Lauder was employed as a part-time Trackworker by Mr and Mrs Hapeta at their stables adjacent to the Byerley Park Training Center. He said that he personally had recently sent 5 young horses to the Hapetas to be ‘broken in’ and was aware that they had a number of other yearlings to be handled from other clients. He said that Ms Lauder had been called in at short notice to help in the mornings at the Hapeta stables, and that her role was to ride the ‘lead’ pony to aid in keeping the younger horses calm and give them some guidance. He added that it was extremely difficult for trainers to find reliable, dependable staff, and that it would cost the Hapetas considerable amounts to try to replace Ms Lauder if she could not work for them.
In reply to a question from the Committee, Ms Lauder confirmed that her employers did not have their own training tracks and depended on Byerley Park facilities.
Mr Molloy continued by saying he had known Ms Lauder for a number of years and that she was a hard worker and not a ‘classic’ drug taker. He said that she was a registered plasterer and gibboard ‘stopper’ and that she and her husband were also involved in property development. However he added that her husband was presently incapacitated with a back injury and dependant on Ms Lauder for income.
Moving to the likely penalty to be imposed on Ms Lauder, Mr Molloy asked the Committee to show a slightly ‘paternal’ approach. He said that the amount of cannabis involved in the sample was at the very bottom of the scale of seriousness and was not a serious drug such as methamphetamine. He said Ms Lauder had been at a barbeque when cannabis had been handed around and she had given in to peer pressure. He said that a period of suspension would have repercussions for Ms Lauder and her husband, and also her employers. He suggested a ‘community minded’ penalty could be considered and made the following proposals to the Committee:
(a) That the Committee impose a period of suspension on Ms Lauder, say 2 months if recent penalties were followed, which would be ‘suspended’ for a period of 6 months and imposed if she offended again within that time, or
(b) A fine of $1 and a one day stand down, followed by voluntary work by Ms Lauder at the Riding for Disabled establishment for say, 20 days.
Mr Molloy added that, in his opinion, the racing industry needed to change the way lower level offenders were dealt with. He knew they had to be punished but felt a ‘community approach’ could be constructive and that it could help to retain people within the industry if this was adopted.
Submissions on Penalty by Mr B Oliver:
New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing has been drug testing industry participants since 1995 and since that time there has been a growing awareness that there is an absolute obligation on those riding horses to present themselves free of the influences of any drug.
All riders are aware of the policy and the consequences should they not comply. The testing is conducted for two reasons, the need to maintain a healthy and safe workplace, and secondly to maintain the integrity of the industry.
Historical penalties for breaches of the industry drug laws show some divergence. The type of drug , the situation and the amount of the drug in the system add to this divergence.
On this occasion Ms Lauder has presented herself at the Byerley Park Training Center to ride track work while the drug cannabis was within her body. Cannabis is a class C drug and the amount within her system was in the low range.
It is submitted that a period of three months suspension, and the cost of the analysis of $172.21 (to the RIU) should be imposed.
Decision and Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee has accepted the admission by Ms Lauder. We have carefully considered all the submissions and the evidence presented.
The mitigating factors in assessing the appropriate penalty are:
The relatively low level of the positive sample;
The immediate acknowledgement by Ms Lauder that she had smoked cannabis in the previous days;
The immediate offer to stand-down from her role as a licensed track rider;
Ms Lauder's clear record regarding previous breaches of this or any rule.
The aggravating factors we take into account are:
The integrity of the racing industry is paramount and the industry has made it abundantly clear that drugs of any type will not be tolerated;
The safety of horses and riders is vitally important.
Penalty:
While the Committee appreciated Mr Molloy’s submissions on penalties we have to say that the jurisdiction we operate under does not allow us the opportunity to consider any type of ‘suspended’ sentence. Any penalty imposed must reflect a realistic punishment, and should show consistency with similar cases. As Ms Lauder’s license was voluntarily withdrawn on 29 January 2013 this Committee formally re-instates that license as of the date of this hearing, 10 February 2013. Taking into account all of the above we are satisfied that an appropriate penalty in this case is a period of suspension of Ms Lauders license for a period of 6 weeks. This suspension is to take effect as of 29 January and conclude on 12 March 2013, both dates being inclusive.
The Committee makes a ruling that Ms Lauder pays to the RIU the costs of the ESR analysis, being $172.21.
Since this hearing was conducted on a race-day there has been no application for JCA costs and therefore no such order is made.
A Godsalve A Dooley
Chairman Committee Member
12 February 2013
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 19/02/2013
Publish Date: 19/02/2013
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: 71f289501eb7a398f3f1a2969be29524
informantnumber: A2214
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 19/02/2013
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry - RIU v A Lauder 10 February 2013 - Decision dated 12 February 2013
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Non Raceday Inquiry
RIU v Aditi Lauder
10 February 2013
Held at Counties Racecourse
Judicial Committee: A Godsalve, Chairman - A Dooley, Committee Member
Rule: 656(3)
Informant: Mr B Oliver-Racing Integrity Unit
Respondent: Ms A Lauder, Licensed Trackwork Rider
Also Present: Mr L Molloy, assisting Ms Lauder, Ms P Kinsey: Racing Integrity Unit (Registrar)
Charge:
On the 29th day of January 2013, at Byerley Park Training Center 2013, having been required by a Racing Investigator to supply a sample of your urine in accordance with Rule 656(3) of the New Zealand Rules of Racing, you had urine which was found, upon analysis, to contain the controlled drug Cannabis as defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and thereby committed a breach of the said Rule 656(3) AND THAT you are thereby liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon you pursuant to the provisions of Rule 803 of the said Rules.
Rule: 656(3) “A rider who, having been required by a Stipendiary Steward or Investigator to supply a sample of his blood, breath, urine ,saliva or sweat(or more than one thereof )in accordance with this Rule, must not have blood, breath, urine, saliva or sweat (whichever is the subject of the applicable sample)which is found upon analysis to contain any controlled drug as defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 or other illicit substance or diuretic and/or its metabolites, artifacts or isomers”.
Ms Lauder acknowledged that she had received a copy of the charge and the relevant rules. The charge and rule were read to the hearing and Ms Lauder told the Committee she understood them and that she admitted the charge.
Accordingly we find the charge proved.
Summary by Mr B Oliver:
On Tuesday the 29th day of January 2013, officials from the Racing Integrity Unit conducted routine drug testing at the Byerley Park Training Center in Pukekohe.
The defendant Ms Aditi Lauder, also known as Dee Lauder, was one of the people randomly selected for testing and was served the appropriate notice by a Stipendiary Steward. Ms Lauder provided the required urine sample at 8.10am. The sample was tested on site by accredited New Zealand Drug Detection Agency staff and indicated that the sample was positive to tetrahydrocannabinol-(Cannabis).
Ms Lauder was spoken to and freely admitted being a social cannabis user. She said her use was infrequent and she had smoked cannabis at a barbeque two days before the testing. She voluntarily agreed to stop riding trackwork from that date until the result could be confirmed by the ESR.
The sample was forwarded to the ESR who confirmed that 66 nanograms was present in the sample which is at the lower end of the scale.
A stand down notice and a copy of the ESR Certificate in accordance with Rule 657(1)(a) were given to Ms Lauder on the 1st February 2013 as provided in Rule 911(1)(c).
Ms Lauder was totally co operative during the process and freely acknowledged her use of cannabis and that she had let herself down by breaching the rule.
She is a 29 year old woman who has not previously been in any trouble within or outside the Racing Industry. She has about 7 years of experience in the equine industry.
Mr Oliver submitted a copy of the ESR report and a copy of an Authority to Prosecute from the Operations Manager of the RIU.
Submissions by Ms A Lauder:
Ms Lauder stated that she had no comment to make and was happy for any submissions on the circumstances and penalty to be made by Mr Molloy on her behalf.
Submissions by Mr L Molloy:
Mr Molloy commenced his submissions by stating that he was a licensed trainer and a passionate racing person. He told the Committee that Ms Lauder was employed as a part-time Trackworker by Mr and Mrs Hapeta at their stables adjacent to the Byerley Park Training Center. He said that he personally had recently sent 5 young horses to the Hapetas to be ‘broken in’ and was aware that they had a number of other yearlings to be handled from other clients. He said that Ms Lauder had been called in at short notice to help in the mornings at the Hapeta stables, and that her role was to ride the ‘lead’ pony to aid in keeping the younger horses calm and give them some guidance. He added that it was extremely difficult for trainers to find reliable, dependable staff, and that it would cost the Hapetas considerable amounts to try to replace Ms Lauder if she could not work for them.
In reply to a question from the Committee, Ms Lauder confirmed that her employers did not have their own training tracks and depended on Byerley Park facilities.
Mr Molloy continued by saying he had known Ms Lauder for a number of years and that she was a hard worker and not a ‘classic’ drug taker. He said that she was a registered plasterer and gibboard ‘stopper’ and that she and her husband were also involved in property development. However he added that her husband was presently incapacitated with a back injury and dependant on Ms Lauder for income.
Moving to the likely penalty to be imposed on Ms Lauder, Mr Molloy asked the Committee to show a slightly ‘paternal’ approach. He said that the amount of cannabis involved in the sample was at the very bottom of the scale of seriousness and was not a serious drug such as methamphetamine. He said Ms Lauder had been at a barbeque when cannabis had been handed around and she had given in to peer pressure. He said that a period of suspension would have repercussions for Ms Lauder and her husband, and also her employers. He suggested a ‘community minded’ penalty could be considered and made the following proposals to the Committee:
(a) That the Committee impose a period of suspension on Ms Lauder, say 2 months if recent penalties were followed, which would be ‘suspended’ for a period of 6 months and imposed if she offended again within that time, or
(b) A fine of $1 and a one day stand down, followed by voluntary work by Ms Lauder at the Riding for Disabled establishment for say, 20 days.
Mr Molloy added that, in his opinion, the racing industry needed to change the way lower level offenders were dealt with. He knew they had to be punished but felt a ‘community approach’ could be constructive and that it could help to retain people within the industry if this was adopted.
Submissions on Penalty by Mr B Oliver:
New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing has been drug testing industry participants since 1995 and since that time there has been a growing awareness that there is an absolute obligation on those riding horses to present themselves free of the influences of any drug.
All riders are aware of the policy and the consequences should they not comply. The testing is conducted for two reasons, the need to maintain a healthy and safe workplace, and secondly to maintain the integrity of the industry.
Historical penalties for breaches of the industry drug laws show some divergence. The type of drug , the situation and the amount of the drug in the system add to this divergence.
On this occasion Ms Lauder has presented herself at the Byerley Park Training Center to ride track work while the drug cannabis was within her body. Cannabis is a class C drug and the amount within her system was in the low range.
It is submitted that a period of three months suspension, and the cost of the analysis of $172.21 (to the RIU) should be imposed.
Decision and Reasons for Penalty:
The Committee has accepted the admission by Ms Lauder. We have carefully considered all the submissions and the evidence presented.
The mitigating factors in assessing the appropriate penalty are:
The relatively low level of the positive sample;
The immediate acknowledgement by Ms Lauder that she had smoked cannabis in the previous days;
The immediate offer to stand-down from her role as a licensed track rider;
Ms Lauder's clear record regarding previous breaches of this or any rule.
The aggravating factors we take into account are:
The integrity of the racing industry is paramount and the industry has made it abundantly clear that drugs of any type will not be tolerated;
The safety of horses and riders is vitally important.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
While the Committee appreciated Mr Molloy’s submissions on penalties we have to say that the jurisdiction we operate under does not allow us the opportunity to consider any type of ‘suspended’ sentence. Any penalty imposed must reflect a realistic punishment, and should show consistency with similar cases. As Ms Lauder’s license was voluntarily withdrawn on 29 January 2013 this Committee formally re-instates that license as of the date of this hearing, 10 February 2013. Taking into account all of the above we are satisfied that an appropriate penalty in this case is a period of suspension of Ms Lauders license for a period of 6 weeks. This suspension is to take effect as of 29 January and conclude on 12 March 2013, both dates being inclusive.
The Committee makes a ruling that Ms Lauder pays to the RIU the costs of the ESR analysis, being $172.21.
Since this hearing was conducted on a race-day there has been no application for JCA costs and therefore no such order is made.
A Godsalve A Dooley
Chairman Committee Member
12 February 2013
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules: 656(3)
Informant: Mr BJ Oliver - RIU Assistant Investigator
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr L Molloy - assisting Ms Lauder, Ms P Kinsey - Registrar
Respondent: Ms A Lauder - Licensed Track Rider
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: