Taranaki JC – 14 February 2009 –

hearingid: 0820671c5a53f258f309d015e8bf9217

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 14/02/2009

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Taranaki JC - 14 February 2009 -

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

The information alleges that M Walker weighted in .75kg light on RUN LIKE AL in Race 2.

The information alleges that M Walker weighted in .75kg light on RUN LIKE AL in Race 2.

Mr Walker was present at the hearing and admitted the breach.

The rule was read and Mr Walker acknowledged he understood same.

The facts as outlined by Mr Goodwin were as follows:

The horse RUN LIKE AL had been placed 4^th by the judge in Race 2 and when Mr Walker weighted in he was .75kg light, the horse was subsequently disqualified.  The stake for 4^th was $1850.00.  The Stipendiary Stewards had checked with the CLERK OF SCALES that the scales had been properly calibrated and this was confirmed.

Mr Walker told the Committee he would have been the last rider to weigh out and handed his saddle etc straight to a stable representative to saddle the horse, when asked he stated he did not change any clothing or gear prior to mounting the horse, everything to him appeared to be in order and he weighed in with the same gear he weighed out with, he also stated he would never accuse anyone of tampering with his saddle etc.

Mr Goodwin for his part could give no explanation as to why Mr Walker had weighed in light.

The Committee were of the opinion that there was no deliberate act on Mr Walker’s part to gain an advantage, but the bottom line is in the Committee view that the breach of this rule is one of strict liability in other words liability without fault. 

The Committee believe it is not necessary for the Stewards to show that the jockey was at fault, the facts in this particular case speak for themselves, the jockey (M Walker) weighed in .75kg light and is therefore in breach of the rule which he has admitted.

The Committee were mindful that Mr Goodwin in his submissions as to penalty asked them to take into account Mr Walker’s admission of the breach and that it was his first offence under this rule and that he felt a monetary penalty of between $1000 and $1500 would be appropriate.

The Committee when arriving at a penalty took into account that the connections of the horse had lost 4^th money of $1850.00 and any penalty must reflect disapproval and a message to others that they view such a breach i.e. weighing in light as not minor, and a monetary penalty of $1250.00 was imposed.

BP Holland

Chair

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

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: