Non Raceday Inquiry – NZGRA v AJ Speight 13 April 2011 – Decision

hearingid: 8e4d370e75676a654053383a6c843252

informantnumber: 68919

horsename:

hearing_racingtype:

startdate: no date provided

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: 14/04/2011

hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry - NZGRA v AJ Speight 13 April 2011 - Decision

charge:

facts:

appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

NON RACEDAY INQUIRY
HELD AT WANGANUI RACE COURSE ON WEDNESDAY 13 APRIL 2011

Between New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association (Informant NZGRA)

And Alesha Jennifer Speight – Owner/trainer (Defendant)

Judicial Committee: T.W. Castles – Chairman, I. Smith – Committee Member

Rules: 87.1 (1) (3) – Admitted

NZGRA was represented by Mr. R. Carmichael

The defendant (Miss Speight) represented herself and had as an assistant Ms Denby

The Charge:

On the 12th Day of January 2011, Alesha Jennifer Speight was the trainer and the person being in charge of the greyhound JAYDEN’S COURAGE which was presented for and raced in race eight at a meeting conducted by the Wanganui Greyhound Racing Club when the said greyhound was found to have had administered to it a drug named Caffeine being an offence under the provisions of rules 87.1 and 87.3 and punishable pursuant to rules 87.4 and 89.1 of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association.

The charge was read and Miss Speight confirmed that she understood the rule and had the information fully explained to her and reiterated that she did admit the breach of the rule. As the charge was deemed proven, a summary of facts and submissions on penalty were called for.

Submissions:
Mr Carmichael informed the committee that Miss Speight was a licensed greyhound trainer under the rules of NZGRA. She was the trainer and person in charge of the greyhound JAYDEN’S COURAGE which was correctly entered and started in and won race eight on the 12th of January 2011 at Wanganui.

JAYDEN’S COURAGE was selected as a post race swab. Miss Speight was present and signed the relevant swab card. JAYDEN’S COURAGE was 5/5 in the betting and had fair form.

All samples for the meeting were packed in accordance with the regulations and forwarded to the racing laboratory where they were received on the 18th of January 2011 all seals intact. On the 26th of January it was reported that JAYDEN’S COURAGE sample had tested positive to Caffeine. A copy of the certificate was produced. Caffeine is a Xanthine Alkaloid, compounds that act as a nervous system stimulant.

Miss Speight was interviewed at her property on the 29th of January 2011. She said JAYDEN’S COURAGE had been off colour and scouring. She had been giving a small quantity of a product by another trainer called Techtonic and told to administer 4mls up to two or three days before racing.

Miss Speight said she did not know Techtonic contained Caffeine and did not seek out professional help before using the product.

Mr Carmichael informed the tribunal that Miss Speight had only been training for about 3 months at the time; she readily admitted using Techtonic and accepted the word of another industry participant. He accepted that the drug was not administered with the intention of affecting its performance and that is why she is charged with a breach of the Drug Negligence provisions in the rules rather than a more serious charge.

In reply to a question from the tribunal, Mr Carmichael agreed there were differing lengths of withholding times after the administration of some drugs in various publications, but also stated it was Miss Speight’s responsibility as a licensed trainer to check those withholding times out.

Miss Speight accepted Mr Carmichael’s summary of the facts as correct but did comment that she accepted in good faith the product from a fellow greyhound trainer who she believed was experienced and would have informed her of any problems that could have arisen. She now concedes that she was mistaken

Submissions on Penalty:
Mr Carmichael submitted that in seeking to use this product without seeking professional advice amounts to serious negligence. He believed that her lack of experience in the industry was a mitigating factor. She did use the product given to her in good faith by another trainer. She erroneously accepted that the withholding time was 48 hours that advice was based upon a report published in an Australian Veterinarian manual. He confirmed again that the withholding periods did differ in a number of publications.

Mr Carmichael asked for, depending on personal circumstances, a fine in the order of $1,500 or a period of disqualification. He used as an example NZGRA and B where a fine of $1,500 was imposed which he felt best mirrored the circumstance involved in this matter.

Miss Speight believed that a monetary penalty should best reflect the breach. She has not been training long and was determined to put this behind her. Her number of dogs in the kennel was building up and in a short period of time she has had 3 winners and a number of placings. After being charged she had set aside some finances in the advent a fine was imposed.

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

Decision on Penalty:
Miss Speight, in coming to our decision to impose a monetary penalty for this breach we have taken into account your admittance of the breach and the forthright way you have approached this charge.

You have been totally co-operative during the investigations and your obvious remorse has been reflected in your comments today. However, as a professional greyhound trainer even for a short period you have responsibilities that go with the job.

The administering of a substance such as caffeine which affects the nervous system is a serious charge and one that must be answered in the strongest of terms. This tribunal accepts that in administering the product Techtonic you relied on advice from a fellow trainer without considering the consequences. We are sure that you have learnt from that experience. We have carefully considered the submissions of Mr Carmichael and believe that a fine best reflects the circumstances of this breach.

In coming to our decision we have also studied other breaches and believe that any lowering of the suggested figure of $1,500 from Mr Carmichael would send the wrong signals to the industry, Miss Speight you are fined the sum of $1,500.

The matter of costs was then addressed. Mr Carmichael submitted because the charge investigations and hearing were part of other work undertaken by him no request for costs would be applied for. The tribunal believed however that costs of $500 be paid to the JCA.

Rule 87.4 provides the mandatory requirement that a greyhound presented to race with a drug in its system shall be disqualified. This tribunal orders that JAYDEN’S COURAGE be disqualified from race 8 at Wanganui on January 12th 2011 and that placings be amended accordingly.

hearing_type: Non-race day

Rules: 871.1(1)(3)

Informant: Mr R Carmichael - Racecourse Inspector

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent: Ms Denby - Assistant to Miss Speight

Respondent: Miss JA Speight

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: