Canterbury JC – 22 September 2007 – Race 9
ID: JCA19820
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Canterbury JC - 22 September 2007
Race Date:
2007/09/22
Race Number:
Race 9
Decision:
Following the running of the Canterbury Belle Stakes at the Canterbury Jockey Club's meeting on Saturday 22nd September 2007, a charge of careless riding pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing was preferred against Mr CW Johnson
Following the running of the Canterbury Belle Stakes at the Canterbury Jockey Club's meeting on Saturday 22nd September 2007, a charge of careless riding pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing was preferred against Mr CW Johnson.
----Mr Johnson did not admit the charge that was preferred against him.
----The information alleged that C Johnson "DREAM BYDAY" allowed his mount to shift ground inwards when not sufficiently clear, causing interference to ?LOVE ON THE ROCKS", T Newton, "LADY SAKURA", J Bullard and "OXFORD AUNT", S Fieldes, near the 800m mark.
----Mr Ching called evidence from the three riders referred to above. All were consistent in their evidence, in that they said they received pressure from the outside in varying degrees. Ms Newton, in particular, said she was "travelling up" after having received interference from another horse when Mr Johnson came across and "squeezed her out completely". She said that there was definite contact, and that Mr Johnson was only slightly ahead of her when he came across.
----In reply, Mr Johnson said that he was concerned about the erratic racing nature of Mr S Collins' mount, "CROSSWORD" and that his horse had overreacted by moving across in the way that it did, and that he felt that Ms Newton had also overreacted, and that they were only together for a couple of strides.
----We have studied the video coverage carefully, and taken careful consideration of the oral evidence. We find, as a fact, that "CROSSWORD" was racing in the clear and that Mr Johnson was at least one to two lengths behind "CROSSWORD" and was in that position for possibly between six and eight strides. His action then in moving across, we consider was a deliberate angling across, and caused interference as alleged. Clearly Mr Johnson was not his own length and another length clear when he moved inwards. On that basis, we are left in no doubt that Mr Johnson's riding was careless and the charge is proved accordingly.
----INTERIM PENALTY DECISION
----Mr Johnson, this is an interim penalty decision only. I will be doing a more detailed decision which will appear on the Judicial Control Authority's website n due course.
----We have given careful consideration to the question of penalty. We acknowledge that you have a lot or rides on an annual basis, but you do have four prior convictions for careless riding in the last twelve months, and that is an aggravating feature. It is also important that we give careful consideration to the degree of carelessness, and in this case we agree with Mr Ching that the degree of carelessness was at the higher end of the scale, and this must be reflected in the penalty.
----We are going to impose a six day suspension, which accordingly to our calculations will mean that you will be out now from the conclusion of racing today until the conclusion of racing on 4 October. Accordingly to the calendar, you would normally be able to be engaged to ride at Te Aroha, Manawatu, Ashburton, Auckland or Taranaki, Avondale on 3 October and Woodville-Pahiatua Tour on 4 October 2007. So that will mean you will be able to ride at the Kelt.
----EXPANDED PENALTY DECISION
----On race day, we informed the hearing that we would deliver a more detailed decision with regard to penalty.
----In imposing a penalty of a suspension of six riding days, we took into account a number of factors. Having viewed the video coverage of the incident, several times, we reached the conclusion that Mr Johnson's carelessness was at the higher end of the scale. Mr Johnson stated that his horse had "overreacted" and we can only assume that he was referring to the way in which his horse travelled when he made the decision to go on the inside of "CROSSWORD". Mr Johnson also said that Ms Newton overreacted.
----That is not our interpretation of the incident on the basis of the video coverage. We find Mr Johnson's explanation about his horse having "overreacted" somewhat disingenuous. Mr Johnson told us that he made a decision to go on the inside of "CROSSWORD", but the plain and simple fact of the matter is that at the time that he made that decision, he was barely, as Ms Newton said, ahead of Ms Newton. He most certainly was not his own length and another horse length clear before making the inward movement.
----"CROSSWORD" did race erratically for a time, but by the time Mr Johnson made his move, "CROSSWORD" had settled and was racing in the clear.
----We found Ms Newton's evidence quite compelling in that she said that as a consequence of Mr Johnson's actions, she was "squeezed right out" and with a consequential flow-on effect to Mr Bullard and Mr Fields. Thus, we had no hesitation in agreeing with Mr Ching, that the carelessness was at the higher end of the scale. That in itself must therefore attract a reasonably significant penalty.
----We are in no doubt that the safety of three other riders, and Ms Newton in particular, was significantly compromised by Mr Johnson's actions.
----This is Mr Johnson's fifth appearance before a Judicial Panel in the past 12 months or so for careless riding. It is a recognised sentencing principle that repeat offending attracts higher penalties. We have not overlooked the fact that Mr Johnson rides throughout New Zealand, and in the past couple of seasons, has ridden in a significant number of races. However, that really does not assist Mr Johnson as riding is not on a percentage basis in terms of the need for a rider to take due care at all times.
----We are also bound to take into consideration the provisions of Rule 1122(2) and observe, in particular, that this was a Listed Stakes race for a stake of $55,000.
----In all the circumstances, a suspension of six riding days is considered appropriate by this Judicial Committee.
----KG Hales
--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: 371680df198bf1aaf7dcb6f144945234
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 22/09/2007
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 22 September 2007 - Race 9
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of the Canterbury Belle Stakes at the Canterbury Jockey Club's meeting on Saturday 22nd September 2007, a charge of careless riding pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing was preferred against Mr CW Johnson
Following the running of the Canterbury Belle Stakes at the Canterbury Jockey Club's meeting on Saturday 22nd September 2007, a charge of careless riding pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing was preferred against Mr CW Johnson.
----Mr Johnson did not admit the charge that was preferred against him.
----The information alleged that C Johnson "DREAM BYDAY" allowed his mount to shift ground inwards when not sufficiently clear, causing interference to ?LOVE ON THE ROCKS", T Newton, "LADY SAKURA", J Bullard and "OXFORD AUNT", S Fieldes, near the 800m mark.
----Mr Ching called evidence from the three riders referred to above. All were consistent in their evidence, in that they said they received pressure from the outside in varying degrees. Ms Newton, in particular, said she was "travelling up" after having received interference from another horse when Mr Johnson came across and "squeezed her out completely". She said that there was definite contact, and that Mr Johnson was only slightly ahead of her when he came across.
----In reply, Mr Johnson said that he was concerned about the erratic racing nature of Mr S Collins' mount, "CROSSWORD" and that his horse had overreacted by moving across in the way that it did, and that he felt that Ms Newton had also overreacted, and that they were only together for a couple of strides.
----We have studied the video coverage carefully, and taken careful consideration of the oral evidence. We find, as a fact, that "CROSSWORD" was racing in the clear and that Mr Johnson was at least one to two lengths behind "CROSSWORD" and was in that position for possibly between six and eight strides. His action then in moving across, we consider was a deliberate angling across, and caused interference as alleged. Clearly Mr Johnson was not his own length and another length clear when he moved inwards. On that basis, we are left in no doubt that Mr Johnson's riding was careless and the charge is proved accordingly.
----INTERIM PENALTY DECISION
----Mr Johnson, this is an interim penalty decision only. I will be doing a more detailed decision which will appear on the Judicial Control Authority's website n due course.
----We have given careful consideration to the question of penalty. We acknowledge that you have a lot or rides on an annual basis, but you do have four prior convictions for careless riding in the last twelve months, and that is an aggravating feature. It is also important that we give careful consideration to the degree of carelessness, and in this case we agree with Mr Ching that the degree of carelessness was at the higher end of the scale, and this must be reflected in the penalty.
----We are going to impose a six day suspension, which accordingly to our calculations will mean that you will be out now from the conclusion of racing today until the conclusion of racing on 4 October. Accordingly to the calendar, you would normally be able to be engaged to ride at Te Aroha, Manawatu, Ashburton, Auckland or Taranaki, Avondale on 3 October and Woodville-Pahiatua Tour on 4 October 2007. So that will mean you will be able to ride at the Kelt.
----EXPANDED PENALTY DECISION
----On race day, we informed the hearing that we would deliver a more detailed decision with regard to penalty.
----In imposing a penalty of a suspension of six riding days, we took into account a number of factors. Having viewed the video coverage of the incident, several times, we reached the conclusion that Mr Johnson's carelessness was at the higher end of the scale. Mr Johnson stated that his horse had "overreacted" and we can only assume that he was referring to the way in which his horse travelled when he made the decision to go on the inside of "CROSSWORD". Mr Johnson also said that Ms Newton overreacted.
----That is not our interpretation of the incident on the basis of the video coverage. We find Mr Johnson's explanation about his horse having "overreacted" somewhat disingenuous. Mr Johnson told us that he made a decision to go on the inside of "CROSSWORD", but the plain and simple fact of the matter is that at the time that he made that decision, he was barely, as Ms Newton said, ahead of Ms Newton. He most certainly was not his own length and another horse length clear before making the inward movement.
----"CROSSWORD" did race erratically for a time, but by the time Mr Johnson made his move, "CROSSWORD" had settled and was racing in the clear.
----We found Ms Newton's evidence quite compelling in that she said that as a consequence of Mr Johnson's actions, she was "squeezed right out" and with a consequential flow-on effect to Mr Bullard and Mr Fields. Thus, we had no hesitation in agreeing with Mr Ching, that the carelessness was at the higher end of the scale. That in itself must therefore attract a reasonably significant penalty.
----We are in no doubt that the safety of three other riders, and Ms Newton in particular, was significantly compromised by Mr Johnson's actions.
----This is Mr Johnson's fifth appearance before a Judicial Panel in the past 12 months or so for careless riding. It is a recognised sentencing principle that repeat offending attracts higher penalties. We have not overlooked the fact that Mr Johnson rides throughout New Zealand, and in the past couple of seasons, has ridden in a significant number of races. However, that really does not assist Mr Johnson as riding is not on a percentage basis in terms of the need for a rider to take due care at all times.
----We are also bound to take into consideration the provisions of Rule 1122(2) and observe, in particular, that this was a Listed Stakes race for a stake of $55,000.
----In all the circumstances, a suspension of six riding days is considered appropriate by this Judicial Committee.
----KG Hales
--Chairman
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 871.1.d, 1122.2
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e328e434d6554a8240910184435b380f
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: b9ed726f9ab636e680039ff12fe790e3
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 22/09/2007
meet_title: Canterbury JC - 22 September 2007
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: canterbury-jc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Canterbury JC