Archive Decision

This decision has been migrated from the JCA website. Information is accurate but formatting may differ from contemporary decisions. Please contact us for any further enquiries.

Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v L M Vaughan – Penalty Decision dated 12 November 2014

ID: JCA18121

Hearing Type:
Non-race day

Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Thoroughbred Rules of Racing

IN THE MATTER of Information No. A3326

BETWEEN J M McLAUGHLIN, Stipendiary Steward for the Racing Integrity Unit

Informant

AND LISA M VAUGHAN of Invercargill, Holder of Permit to Train

Respondent

Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman - S C Ching, Committee Member

Present: Mr J M McLaughlin, the Informant

Date of Hearing: 12 November 2014

Date of Decision: 12 November 2014

PENALTY DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

The Charge

[1] Information No. A3326 alleges that on the 11th day of November 2014 Miss Vaughan committed a breach of Rule 610 (2) (a) in that she “rode trackwork without wearing a body protector”.

[2] The information was served on Miss Vaughan at the meeting of Canterbury Jockey Club at Riccarton Park, Christchurch, on 12th November 2014 and was heard on that date. Miss Vaughan had signed the Statement by the Respondent at the foot of the Information indicating that she admitted the breach of the Rule. She had also endorsed on the information form and signed “I do not wish to appear”.

[3] The breach was found proved.

The Rule

[4] Rule 610 of the Rules of New Zealand Thoroughbred Rules of Racing provides as follows:

(2) A Rider shall, when mounted on a horse, wear:

(a) a properly fastened body protector of a type and standard approved by NZTR, which shall be in a satisfactory condition and shall have attached to it a manufacturer’s label that states that it complies with the relevant type and standard approved by NZTR.

Submissions of the Informant

[5] Mr McLaughlin said that he had attended trackwork on 11th November 2014 at Riccarton Racecourse. He said that he had observed Miss Vaughan come off the track having worked a horse and it was obvious to the naked eye that she was not wearing a body protector.

[6] He followed her to her stables and asked her if she was wearing a vest. She replied that she was not and explained to Mr McLaughlin that she had at one time been injured while wearing a vest and, for that reason, no longer wears one.

[7] Mr McLaughlin said that he asked Miss Vaughan if she was aware of the Rule that required a vest to be worn and she replied that she was. This was not the first time that Miss Vaughan had been spoken to by Stewards concerning the particular Rule, he said.

Informant’s Penalty Submissions

[8] Mr McLaughlin submitted that the breach could be dealt with by way of a fine in the range of $200-300.

[9] Mr McLaughlin referred to a number of previous penalties for breaches of the Rule. He said that the most recent charge against a trainer in Canterbury had resulted in a fine of $300.00 in September 2012. In 2010, another trainer had been fined $375.00 for riding trackwork without a vest.

Reasons for Penalty

[10] Miss Vaughan was entitled to credit for her admission of the breach and her previous clear record. However, the Committee noted that Miss Vaughan had previously been spoken to by Stewards in relation to not wearing a vest. That evinces an attitude of defiance on Miss Vaughan’s part when it comes to wearing a body protector, notwithstanding that the Rule exists for the protection of riders.

[11] The fine that we intend to impose, therefore, has a deterrent element with a view to deterring Miss Vaughan from breaching the Rule in the future.

[12] We intend to fix a penalty at the top of the range submitted by Mr McLaughlin.

Penalty

[13] Miss Vaughan is fined the sum of $300.00.

 

R G McKENZIE               S C CHING

Chairman                           Committee Member

Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION

Decision Date: 12/11/2014

Publish Date: 12/11/2014

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: f03a1f595646749db1a3161fd022c13f


informantnumber:


horsename:


hearing_racingtype:


startdate: no date provided


newcharge:


plea:


penaltyrequired:


decisiondate: 12/11/2014


hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v L M Vaughan - Penalty Decision dated 12 November 2014


charge:


facts:


appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION


isappeal:


submissionsfordecision:


reasonsfordecision:


Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Thoroughbred Rules of Racing

IN THE MATTER of Information No. A3326

BETWEEN J M McLAUGHLIN, Stipendiary Steward for the Racing Integrity Unit

Informant

AND LISA M VAUGHAN of Invercargill, Holder of Permit to Train

Respondent

Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman - S C Ching, Committee Member

Present: Mr J M McLaughlin, the Informant

Date of Hearing: 12 November 2014

Date of Decision: 12 November 2014

PENALTY DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

The Charge

[1] Information No. A3326 alleges that on the 11th day of November 2014 Miss Vaughan committed a breach of Rule 610 (2) (a) in that she “rode trackwork without wearing a body protector”.

[2] The information was served on Miss Vaughan at the meeting of Canterbury Jockey Club at Riccarton Park, Christchurch, on 12th November 2014 and was heard on that date. Miss Vaughan had signed the Statement by the Respondent at the foot of the Information indicating that she admitted the breach of the Rule. She had also endorsed on the information form and signed “I do not wish to appear”.

[3] The breach was found proved.

The Rule

[4] Rule 610 of the Rules of New Zealand Thoroughbred Rules of Racing provides as follows:

(2) A Rider shall, when mounted on a horse, wear:

(a) a properly fastened body protector of a type and standard approved by NZTR, which shall be in a satisfactory condition and shall have attached to it a manufacturer’s label that states that it complies with the relevant type and standard approved by NZTR.

Submissions of the Informant

[5] Mr McLaughlin said that he had attended trackwork on 11th November 2014 at Riccarton Racecourse. He said that he had observed Miss Vaughan come off the track having worked a horse and it was obvious to the naked eye that she was not wearing a body protector.

[6] He followed her to her stables and asked her if she was wearing a vest. She replied that she was not and explained to Mr McLaughlin that she had at one time been injured while wearing a vest and, for that reason, no longer wears one.

[7] Mr McLaughlin said that he asked Miss Vaughan if she was aware of the Rule that required a vest to be worn and she replied that she was. This was not the first time that Miss Vaughan had been spoken to by Stewards concerning the particular Rule, he said.

Informant’s Penalty Submissions

[8] Mr McLaughlin submitted that the breach could be dealt with by way of a fine in the range of $200-300.

[9] Mr McLaughlin referred to a number of previous penalties for breaches of the Rule. He said that the most recent charge against a trainer in Canterbury had resulted in a fine of $300.00 in September 2012. In 2010, another trainer had been fined $375.00 for riding trackwork without a vest.

Reasons for Penalty

[10] Miss Vaughan was entitled to credit for her admission of the breach and her previous clear record. However, the Committee noted that Miss Vaughan had previously been spoken to by Stewards in relation to not wearing a vest. That evinces an attitude of defiance on Miss Vaughan’s part when it comes to wearing a body protector, notwithstanding that the Rule exists for the protection of riders.

[11] The fine that we intend to impose, therefore, has a deterrent element with a view to deterring Miss Vaughan from breaching the Rule in the future.

[12] We intend to fix a penalty at the top of the range submitted by Mr McLaughlin.

Penalty

[13] Miss Vaughan is fined the sum of $300.00.

 

R G McKENZIE               S C CHING

Chairman                           Committee Member


sumissionsforpenalty:


reasonsforpenalty:


penalty:


hearing_type: Non-race day


Rules:


Informant:


JockeysandTrainer:


Otherperson:


PersonPresent:


Respondent:


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: