NZ Metro TC – 7 October 2005 – Race 9

This Information was lodged on 7 October 2005 and the matter was heard on 14 October 2005.

Following the running of Race 9, the Wyatt & Wilson Print Superstars 4YO Championship, an Information was laid by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott alleging that Mr A. M Butt committed a breach of Rule 869(7A)(a) and (b). The information reads as follows.

"I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 869(7A(a) and (b) in that A. M. Butt allowed Dudinka's Cullen to shift inside at least 4 track markers rounding the home turn."

Rules 869(7A), so far as it is relevant, reads as follows.

Mr Butt had indicated on the information that he did not admit this breach and he confirmed this at the hearing. There had been a previous hearing on 7 October 2005 dealing with a protest against the first placing of "Dudinka's Cullen", and the parties agreed that the evidence heard in that case would be the basis of this hearing.

Mr Escott said that this charge was lodged on the grounds that Mr Butt had allowed his horse to strike the track markers as described in the information.

Mr Butt called Mr R. Sharpe to give evidence. R Sharpe had driven "Fake Chance" in this race. Mr Sharpe said that he had been following "Dudinka's Cullen" when the field came around the final bend. He said that he believed that "House Master" had moved inwards and caused "Dudinka's Cullen" to move inside the track markers.

Mr Escott cross-examined Mr Sharpe and the videos were also used.

Mr Butt gave evidence consistent with the evidence he had given at the protest hearing. Mr Butt summarised his defence as follows.

--
--
• Why would he, being an experienced driver, apparently let his horse run over the markers without reason when he knew it would mean disqualification.
--
• That it was clear from the videos that Mr Holmes had moved in at least half a cart between the 400 metre and the 250 metres, and that this movement was significant.
--
• That Mr Escott said that he drove his horse inwards, but that there was no evidence of this at all.

Mr Escott also summed up his case and said that the markers had already

been struck by the time that Mr Holmes moved in slightly

We then adjourned to consider our decision.

On returning to the Enquiry Room we gave the following oral decision.

"It was agreed that the evidence from the protest hearing on 7 October

2005 would form the basis for this hearing.

Mr Butt gave further evidence and made extensive use of the video coverage of this incident. Mr Butt also called Mr R. Sharpe (driver of "Fake Chance" in this race) to give evidence in support of his evidence that "House Master" had caused him to move inside the markers.

We are satisfied that Mr Butt raised nothing new in his evidence. We are satisfied that "Dudinka's Cullen" moved inside the markers well before there was any tightening from "House Master". By the time that "House Master" did move in slightly the damage had been done.

We therefore find that the defence provided for in Rule 869(7A) has not been made out. That is to say we are satisfied that there was no evidence the breach was attributable to the behaviour of Mr Butt's own horse, or any other horse or driver. We therefore find that the charge has been proved."

Penalty: Mr Escott advised that Mr Butt had no previous relevant convictions. Mr Escott said that this was a $40,000-00 race on a Premier night and that the breach was at the higher end of the scale of seriousness. A fine of $750-00 was recommended.

Mr Butt asked that it be taken into consideration that this was his first offence for this type of breach. He also said that he still believed that there were some contributing factors. Mr Butt said that he would prefer a fine but that the fine recommended was too high.

We retired to consider our decision.

On returning to the Enquiry Room we gave the following oral decision on penalty.

"We have had a look at previous penalties for a breach of this particular Rule and find that fines of between $200-00 to $250-00 are the usual fines, in what we presume are normal circumstances. This was a Group 2 race worth $40,000-00 and we must take into account the status of the race and the stake payable. We are satisfied that a fine of $650-00 should be imposed in this case."