Marlborough HRC 17 January 2020 – R 4 – Chair, Mr T Utikere
ID: JCA16987
Meet Title:
Marlborough HRC - 17 January 2020
Meet Chair:
TUtikere
Meet Committee Member 1:
DAnderson
Meet Committee Member 2:
LYong
Race Date:
2020/01/17
Race Number:
R4
Decision:
We find the charge proved.
Penalty:
Miss Thornley is suspended from the close of racing on 19 January until the close of racing on 1 February 2020. The three Meetings being Motukarara (26th), Addington (31st) and Geraldine (1st ).
Facts:
Following the running of Race 4 (SPEIGHTS MOBILE PACE 1850m) Information A13152 was filed with the Judicial Committee. It alleged a breach of Rule 869(3)(b), specifically that “G Thornley (SA FACT) drove carelessly racing into the first bend when allowing her runner to strike the sulky wheel of JAKE, and break, checking trailing runners.”
Rule 869(3) states: “No horseman in any race shall drive:-...(b) carelessly”.
Miss Thornley, assisted by Senior Horseman Mr Craig Thornley, confirmed that she understood the Rule and denied the breach.
Submissions for Decision:
Using the side-on film, Mr S Renault pointed out SA FACT which had drawn number 14 in the second line. He explained that the horse had raced keenly soon after dispatch from the 1850 metres, and that Miss Thornley had slapped the horse to go forward, on to the back of Mr R Close (JAKE). Her horse had then made contact with Mr Close’s wheel and broke. Mr Renault alleged that Miss Thornley had been chasing her horse with the reins to go forward and allowed her horse to get too close to the horse in front of her. As a result of her own horse breaking, she had checked two horses (PERAKI SEELSTER and LEI MISS). The head-on film identified that she was in a position behind Mr Close and that she had chased her runner up, with stewards noting there was no difference with the horse’s racing manners at the time. They submitted that getting right on Mr Close’s wheel had caused her to be careless on this occasion. The back straight film was also played during the hearing. In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Renault confirmed that Mr Close had not reported any issues with his tyre to stewards as a result of what had happened.
Miss Thornley had no questions for Mr Renault. Using the head-on film, Mr Thornley asked Mr Renault whether SA FACT was observed to have ‘ducked in’, prior to the incident, to which he replied that it had. To clarify Mr Renault said the horse had ducked in at the same time Miss Thornley had sought to go forward.
Mr Thornley identified that the trainer had made gear changes for the horse from when it last raced at Westport. It had raced with half blinds and a shadow roll for the first time during this meeting and the films showed that the horse was running in and out, panicking and was trying to duck around. He used the films to illustrate that the horse had ‘dived’ prior to the incident, and that Miss Thornley had tried to correct it but that it hadn’t responded and had ducked in. In response to a question from Mr Williams, Mr Thornley explained that Miss Thornley had driven up four strides after SA FACT had ducked in and that the horse was likely to have gear changes for the second day. He also explained that Miss Thornley was a comparatively inexperienced driver who he accepted had slapped her horse up in order to get it up there. Miss Thornley said that the horse was being difficult and that it wouldn’t move near the start.
In summary, the RIU submitted that SA FACT was racing in a tractable manner and whilst it was hanging a bit, Miss Thornley continued to slap it forward, causing it to break and cause interference to two other runners.
Mr Thornley re-iterated that 20 metres prior to the incident Miss Thornley had slapped the horse once, that it was 10-15 strides back and with the new gear the horse had simply panicked.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee must be satisfied that the Respondent did not exercise the required duty of care expected of similar drivers in similar circumstances. We have reviewed the relevant films and we are satisfied that Miss Thornley struck the wheel of Mr Close, which is evident on the films. She did so, free of any interference. What we would expect of a similar driver in the same circumstances is to maintain responsibility for the horse and to steer SA FACT after taking a hold. Instead Miss Thornley gave the horse a slap, moved up closer to JAKE and then gave the horse another slap, causing it to make contact with Close’s wheel. This becomes even more important as Miss Thornley was aware that the horse’s manner may have been an issue in the lead up to this incident. Her actions and carelessness has caused her own horse to break, and caused significant consequences to others in the field.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Williams identified Miss Thornley as having had 31 drives this season with 5 drives in the last season, describing her as being in the early stages of her career. He identified no previous breaches and submitted that the RIU believed the carelessness sat at the low to mid range. As the JCA Penalty Guidelines identified a starting point of a six drive suspension or a fine of $300, he submitted a fine of not less than $300. In the event a suspension was entertained, he submitted a three meetings suspension as appropriate.
Miss Thornley sought a suspension and identified upcoming drives she would have within the Canterbury region.
Reasons for Penalty:
The JCA Penalty Guide identifies a starting point of a six drive suspension or a $300 fine for this breach of the careless driving rule that involves the hitting of a wheel. Miss Thornley, whilst inexperienced, should have executed more care in the lead up to this incident. Her actions have resulted in a significant check to two other runners, which lead us to place the carelessness at the mid-range. We consider a period of suspension as appropriate and adopt a six drives starting point for the purposes of penalty. In mitigation we apply credit for her good record under the Rule. We consider a five drives suspension as an adequate end result. We are satisfied that the upcoming three meetings at Motukarara, Addington and Geraldine would equate to a five drives suspension. This is also based on the concurrence of this view from Miss Thornley herself.
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: bd88d319d6440ad7e50e46bbd39701fe
informantnumber: A13152
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Careless Driving
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 17/01/2020
hearing_title: Marlborough HRC 17 January 2020 - R 4 - Chair, Mr T Utikere
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 4 (SPEIGHTS MOBILE PACE 1850m) Information A13152 was filed with the Judicial Committee. It alleged a breach of Rule 869(3)(b), specifically that “G Thornley (SA FACT) drove carelessly racing into the first bend when allowing her runner to strike the sulky wheel of JAKE, and break, checking trailing runners.”
Rule 869(3) states: “No horseman in any race shall drive:-...(b) carelessly”.
Miss Thornley, assisted by Senior Horseman Mr Craig Thornley, confirmed that she understood the Rule and denied the breach.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Using the side-on film, Mr S Renault pointed out SA FACT which had drawn number 14 in the second line. He explained that the horse had raced keenly soon after dispatch from the 1850 metres, and that Miss Thornley had slapped the horse to go forward, on to the back of Mr R Close (JAKE). Her horse had then made contact with Mr Close’s wheel and broke. Mr Renault alleged that Miss Thornley had been chasing her horse with the reins to go forward and allowed her horse to get too close to the horse in front of her. As a result of her own horse breaking, she had checked two horses (PERAKI SEELSTER and LEI MISS). The head-on film identified that she was in a position behind Mr Close and that she had chased her runner up, with stewards noting there was no difference with the horse’s racing manners at the time. They submitted that getting right on Mr Close’s wheel had caused her to be careless on this occasion. The back straight film was also played during the hearing. In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Renault confirmed that Mr Close had not reported any issues with his tyre to stewards as a result of what had happened.
Miss Thornley had no questions for Mr Renault. Using the head-on film, Mr Thornley asked Mr Renault whether SA FACT was observed to have ‘ducked in’, prior to the incident, to which he replied that it had. To clarify Mr Renault said the horse had ducked in at the same time Miss Thornley had sought to go forward.
Mr Thornley identified that the trainer had made gear changes for the horse from when it last raced at Westport. It had raced with half blinds and a shadow roll for the first time during this meeting and the films showed that the horse was running in and out, panicking and was trying to duck around. He used the films to illustrate that the horse had ‘dived’ prior to the incident, and that Miss Thornley had tried to correct it but that it hadn’t responded and had ducked in. In response to a question from Mr Williams, Mr Thornley explained that Miss Thornley had driven up four strides after SA FACT had ducked in and that the horse was likely to have gear changes for the second day. He also explained that Miss Thornley was a comparatively inexperienced driver who he accepted had slapped her horse up in order to get it up there. Miss Thornley said that the horse was being difficult and that it wouldn’t move near the start.
In summary, the RIU submitted that SA FACT was racing in a tractable manner and whilst it was hanging a bit, Miss Thornley continued to slap it forward, causing it to break and cause interference to two other runners.
Mr Thornley re-iterated that 20 metres prior to the incident Miss Thornley had slapped the horse once, that it was 10-15 strides back and with the new gear the horse had simply panicked.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee must be satisfied that the Respondent did not exercise the required duty of care expected of similar drivers in similar circumstances. We have reviewed the relevant films and we are satisfied that Miss Thornley struck the wheel of Mr Close, which is evident on the films. She did so, free of any interference. What we would expect of a similar driver in the same circumstances is to maintain responsibility for the horse and to steer SA FACT after taking a hold. Instead Miss Thornley gave the horse a slap, moved up closer to JAKE and then gave the horse another slap, causing it to make contact with Close’s wheel. This becomes even more important as Miss Thornley was aware that the horse’s manner may have been an issue in the lead up to this incident. Her actions and carelessness has caused her own horse to break, and caused significant consequences to others in the field.
Decision:
We find the charge proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Williams identified Miss Thornley as having had 31 drives this season with 5 drives in the last season, describing her as being in the early stages of her career. He identified no previous breaches and submitted that the RIU believed the carelessness sat at the low to mid range. As the JCA Penalty Guidelines identified a starting point of a six drive suspension or a fine of $300, he submitted a fine of not less than $300. In the event a suspension was entertained, he submitted a three meetings suspension as appropriate.
Miss Thornley sought a suspension and identified upcoming drives she would have within the Canterbury region.
reasonsforpenalty:
The JCA Penalty Guide identifies a starting point of a six drive suspension or a $300 fine for this breach of the careless driving rule that involves the hitting of a wheel. Miss Thornley, whilst inexperienced, should have executed more care in the lead up to this incident. Her actions have resulted in a significant check to two other runners, which lead us to place the carelessness at the mid-range. We consider a period of suspension as appropriate and adopt a six drives starting point for the purposes of penalty. In mitigation we apply credit for her good record under the Rule. We consider a five drives suspension as an adequate end result. We are satisfied that the upcoming three meetings at Motukarara, Addington and Geraldine would equate to a five drives suspension. This is also based on the concurrence of this view from Miss Thornley herself.
penalty:
Miss Thornley is suspended from the close of racing on 19 January until the close of racing on 1 February 2020. The three Meetings being Motukarara (26th), Addington (31st) and Geraldine (1st ).
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: Rule 869(3)(b)
Informant: Mr P Williams - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Miss G Thornley - Junior Driver
Otherperson: Mr S Renault - Stipendiary Steward, Mr C Thornley - Open Horseman assisting Miss Thornley
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: c570b38e44059183a48eae959c83c590
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 1f02d1f4463dd1e0502b2f3252fa54df
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 17/01/2020
meet_title: Marlborough HRC - 17 January 2020
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: marlborough-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: TUtikere
meet_pm1: DAnderson
meet_pm2: LYong
name: Marlborough HRC