Auckland RC 10 December 2014 – R 5 (heard on 14 December 2014 at Ellerslie)

hearingid: 4a67ad976ae4f93ad977fe32acc3f216

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 10/12/2014

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Auckland RC 10 December 2014 - R 5 (heard on 14 December 2014 at Ellerslie)

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Informant: Mr M Williamson - Stipendiary Steward
Respondent: Mr L Magorrian - Apprentice Rider
Information No: A3562
Rule No: 649(1)(a) – Omission with respect to weight
Race: 5
Judicial Committee: G Jones, Chairman - R Seabrook, Committee Member
Plea: Admitted
Person's Present: Mr K Clotworthy (supporting Mr Magorrian), Stipendiary Stewards Mr J Oatham, Mr W Robinson and Mr A Coles.

Evidence

This is an adjourned hearing arising from the running of race 5, the Barfoot & Thompson Twilight, at the Auckland Racing Club on 10 December 2014. An Information was filed pursuant to Rule 649 (1) (a) by Stipendiary Steward Mr M Williamson, alleging that Mr Magorrian attempted to weigh out for FLUROLITE without a body protector.

This charge was heard at Auckland Racing Club meeting on 14 December 2014.

Mr Magorrian acknowledged that he understood the nature of the charge, the requirements of the rule and he confirmed his admission of the breach. Mr Magorrian was assisted at the hearing by his employer Mr K Clotworthy.

Rule 649(1) (a) provides: A Rider must not:

(a) do or permit any wrongful act or omission with respect to weight or weighing;

Stipendiary Steward Mr Oatham advised the Committee that Mr Magorrian presented himself to weigh out for race number 5 at the Auckland Racing Club meeting on 10 December 2014 without his body protector. He said that Mr Magorrian's carded weight was 55 kg and with his allowable apprentice claim of 2 kg this was reduced to 53 kg. He said allowing for the vest weight of 1 kg Mr Magorrian needed to be 54 kg on weight out. The Clerk of the Scales, Mr R Sanders who was officiating when Mr Magorrian weighed out noticed that Mr Magorrian was not wearing a vest. When questioned Mr Magorrian told Mr Sanders that he was wearing a vest but this transpired to be incorrect.

As a result Mr Magorrian was instructed to put his vest on and re-weigh. He was found be 54.4 kg and officially claimed 1 ¾ kg as opposed to the allowable 2 kg.

Mr Oatham advised the Committee that it was the Stewards' view Mr Magorrian's actions were deliberate.

Mr Clotworthy said that on the night concerned he was standing at the scales when Mr Magorrian weighed out for race 5. He said that he did not hear Mr Sanders ask Mr Magorrian if he was wearing a vest. He added that Mr Magorrian's accent was difficult to understand and he also at times had difficulty in understanding questions put to him. He said that Mr Magorrian had taken his vest off after the previous race and simply forgot to put it back on before he weighed out. Mr Clotworthy advised the Committee that he had been advised by Stewards on the day that the breach was minor and he is surprised that the matter is now viewed as a deliberate act. In support of this he noted that Mr Magorrian weighed out only point 3 over the allowable weight, which he believed was within the allowable tolerance.

Decision

As Mr Magorrian admitted the breach we find the charge proved.

Submissions for Penalty

Mr Oatham produced Mr Magorrian’s record which showed no previous breaches under this particular rule in the last 12 months, but added his overall record included a number of breaches of other rules (10 previous).

Mr Oatham confirmed to the Committee that Stewards did discuss the matter with Mr Clotworthy and Mr Magorrian on the day of the breach and indicated that it was at the low end. In submitting an appropriate penalty for the Committee to consider he said previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule ranged from a $300 fine to a 5 week suspension. He said that although Stewards don’t accept this was a mistake on Mr Magorrian's part, they were prepared to acknowledge the breach was at the low end of the scale, but any further breaches by Mr Magorrian would be viewed very seriously. He submitted the matter could properly be dealt with by way of fine as opposed to suspension.

Mr Clotworthy submitted that it could not be said that Mr Magorrian cheated as in his opinion it was a genuine mistake and a minor breach. Mr Clotworthy acknowledged that Mr Magorrian is on notice that he can’t afford to make a mistake like this in the future.

Reasons For Penalty

In assessing penalty the Committee has taken into account the overall circumstances of the breach itself as well as the particular circumstances relating to Mr Magorrian. The Committee also considered penalties handed out for similar breaches and are mindful of the fact that breaches of similar culpability should, as a general rule attract broadly similar penalties. The JCA Penalty Guidelines do not provide a starting point for a breach of this particular rule as penalties are generally fact dependant. This is reflected in the limited number of breaches of this rule over the past two years or so where penalties have ranged from a $150 fine (RIU v M 21.07.13) to a 5 weeks suspension (RIU v T 31/08/2013).

The Committee is not totally convinced that Mr Magorrian deliberately intended to deceive, but we do prefer Mr Sanders' version of the discussion held at the scales concerning whether or not he was wearing a vest. We believe on balance it more likely than not, Mr Magorrian may have said to Mr Sanders that he was wearing a vest. We now know as a matter of fact that was an incorrect statement.

The Committee believes that the weight advantage to be gained by weighing out without the vest was minimal. This is supported by the weight that Mr Magorrian weighed out at. On that basis the Committee is of the view there does not appear to have been anything to be gained by deception. That situation may well have been different had there been evidence presented that Mr Magorrian struggled to make his carded weight inclusive of the 2 kg allowance.

We acknowledge Mr Maggorian's good record in relation to this particularly rule, but we also note that his overall record during the past 12 months is bordering on poor and is certainly below average. We do give credit for admitting the breach.

Having taken into account and considered all submissions the Committee has determined that this matter be best dealt with by way of a fine.

Penalty

We impose a fine of $400.

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 649(1)(a)

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: