Methven TC – 14 October 2007 – Race 2
ID: JCA19586
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Methven TC - 14 October 2007
Race Date:
2007/10/14
Race Number:
Race 2
Decision:
Following the running of Race 2 an information was lodged by the Stipendiary Stewards under Rules 864 (2) (d) and 864 (3) alleging that Mr McClelland the driver of Prince Lochie in race 2 failed to report to the Stipendiary Stewards that the removable hood on Prince Lochie had malfunctioned
--
DECISION & REASON
--Following the running of Race 2 an information was lodged by the Stipendiary Stewards under Rules 864 (2) (d) and 864 (3) alleging that Mr McClelland the driver of Prince Lochie in race 2 failed to report to the Stipendiary Stewards that the removable hood on Prince Lochie had malfunctioned and that on his return to the birdcage he did not advise the Stipendiary Stewards that the removable hood had not been activated.
----Rule 864 (2) provides: Every horseman, owner, trainer and assistant thereof of a horse shall with regard to that horse ensure that: -
--- --
- all gear is correctly applied and/or affixed so as not to malfunction or come adrift. --
--
Rule 864 (3) provides: A horseman shall, if any of his horse’s gear is broken, lost, damaged, not activated, tampered with or has malfunctioned during a race, on returning to the assembly area, report the matter to a Stipendiary Steward, forthwith.
--
At the outset of the hearings Mr Williams indicated that it was the Stipendiary Stewards view that Mr McClelland had attempted to activate the removable hood but it had malfunctioned and further that he did not report the situation to the Stipendiary Stewards as required by the rules.
Mr N McIntyre, Stipendiary Steward, said that he was situated in the box at the top of the home straight and he observed Mr McClelland attempting to improve his horse. He said that after watching the video of the run home he noticed that Mr McClelland had reached down with his left hand to activate what he thought was a removable hood but that the hood had remained in place and was still in place at the finish of the race. He also asked the Committee to note the movement of Prince Lochie’s head at that time which in his view supported the evidence he had given.
----In response to a question from Mr McClelland, Mr McIntyre, agreed that the horse wore both removable hood and blinds and that he could not be certain as to which of the cords Mr McClelland attempted to pull.
----Mr McClelland, for his part, said that the horse wore both a removable hood and removable blinds and that the action observed by Mr McIntyre was him activating the removable blinds and he had not attempted to activate the removable hood. He said that both apparatuses were correctly applied, separately controlled and that he had identifications on the cords so that he knew which one he was activating and on this occasion it was the blinds. He also said that he pulled the blinds initially as that tended to make the horse run straight and because he could not, in his view, improve his position, he did not activate the removable hood. He also said that the movement of Prince Lochie’s head was due to the blinds pulled.
----Mr McClelland accepted that he did not report to the Stipendiary Stewards his failure to activate the removable hood and acknowledged that both Mr McIntyre and Mr Williams were in the birdcage near his horse after the race and it was not until he was later approached by Stipendiary Stewards that he realised his mistake in not advising the Stipendiary Stewards of the non activation of the removable hood.
----In respect of the charge under Rule 864 (2) (d) the Committee accepts what Mr McClelland has said that the removable hood was correctly applied and did not malfunction and, accordingly, that charge is not found proven.
----In respect of the charge under Rule 864 (3) in view of Mr McClelland’s admittance of the breach in the evidence given that charge is found proven.
----The Stipendiary Stewards advised that Mr McClelland had not previously appeared before a Judicial Committee over the last 12 months and recommended the standard fine for this type of offence. Mr McClelland, for his part, accepted that the standard fine was appropriate and, accordingly, the Committee imposes a fine of $100.00.
--…………………………
--B Coombes
--CHAIRMAN
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: 4227e1634613c1d265f54f3c63dcae71
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 14/10/2007
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Methven TC - 14 October 2007 - Race 2
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of Race 2 an information was lodged by the Stipendiary Stewards under Rules 864 (2) (d) and 864 (3) alleging that Mr McClelland the driver of Prince Lochie in race 2 failed to report to the Stipendiary Stewards that the removable hood on Prince Lochie had malfunctioned
--
DECISION & REASON
--Following the running of Race 2 an information was lodged by the Stipendiary Stewards under Rules 864 (2) (d) and 864 (3) alleging that Mr McClelland the driver of Prince Lochie in race 2 failed to report to the Stipendiary Stewards that the removable hood on Prince Lochie had malfunctioned and that on his return to the birdcage he did not advise the Stipendiary Stewards that the removable hood had not been activated.
----Rule 864 (2)
provides: Every horseman, owner, trainer and assistant thereof of a horse shall with regard to that horse ensure that: ---- --
- all gear is correctly applied and/or affixed so as not to malfunction or come adrift. --
--
Rule 864 (3)
provides: A horseman shall, if any of his horse’s gear is broken, lost, damaged, not activated, tampered with or has malfunctioned during a race, on returning to the assembly area, report the matter to a Stipendiary Steward, forthwith.--
At the outset of the hearings Mr Williams indicated that it was the Stipendiary Stewards view that Mr McClelland had attempted to activate the removable hood but it had malfunctioned and further that he did not report the situation to the Stipendiary Stewards as required by the rules.
Mr N McIntyre, Stipendiary Steward, said that he was situated in the box at the top of the home straight and he observed Mr McClelland attempting to improve his horse. He said that after watching the video of the run home he noticed that Mr McClelland had reached down with his left hand to activate what he thought was a removable hood but that the hood had remained in place and was still in place at the finish of the race. He also asked the Committee to note the movement of Prince Lochie’s head at that time which in his view supported the evidence he had given.
----In response to a question from Mr McClelland, Mr McIntyre, agreed that the horse wore both removable hood and blinds and that he could not be certain as to which of the cords Mr McClelland attempted to pull.
----Mr McClelland, for his part, said that the horse wore both a removable hood and removable blinds and that the action observed by Mr McIntyre was him activating the removable blinds and he had not attempted to activate the removable hood. He said that both apparatuses were correctly applied, separately controlled and that he had identifications on the cords so that he knew which one he was activating and on this occasion it was the blinds. He also said that he pulled the blinds initially as that tended to make the horse run straight and because he could not, in his view, improve his position, he did not activate the removable hood. He also said that the movement of Prince Lochie’s head was due to the blinds pulled.
----Mr McClelland accepted that he did not report to the Stipendiary Stewards his failure to activate the removable hood and acknowledged that both Mr McIntyre and Mr Williams were in the birdcage near his horse after the race and it was not until he was later approached by Stipendiary Stewards that he realised his mistake in not advising the Stipendiary Stewards of the non activation of the removable hood.
----In respect of the charge under Rule 864 (2) (d) the Committee accepts what Mr McClelland has said that the removable hood was correctly applied and did not malfunction and, accordingly, that charge is not found proven.
----In respect of the charge under Rule 864 (3) in view of Mr McClelland’s admittance of the breach in the evidence given that charge is found proven.
----The Stipendiary Stewards advised that Mr McClelland had not previously appeared before a Judicial Committee over the last 12 months and recommended the standard fine for this type of offence. Mr McClelland, for his part, accepted that the standard fine was appropriate and, accordingly, the Committee imposes a fine of $100.00.
--…………………………
--B Coombes
--CHAIRMAN
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 864.2, 864.3, 864.2.d
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: ebd5cc0beb0d77983e428a3b8163bb59
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 84ef493ec6d0c6b0a28cfde918d49c38
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 14/10/2007
meet_title: Methven TC - 14 October 2007
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: methven-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Methven TC