Non Raceday Inquiry NZTR V KI Rae 5 January 2010 – decision
ID: JCA19848
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Decision:
IN THE MATTER OF THE NEW ZEALAND RULES OF RACING BETWEEN:
--INFORMANT: NEW ZEALAND THOROUGHBRED RACING
--DEFENDANT: Mr KI and Mrs LM Rae LICENSED TRAINERS
--HEARING: RUAKAKA RACE COURSE 5 JANUARY 2010 at 4.30 pm
--JUDICIAL COMMITTEE: RM SEABROOK (Chairman), DC JOHNSTONE
--PRESENT: Mr A COLES NZTR
Mr K RAE TRAINER
Miss SA MOORE NZTR
The Defendant, Kenneth Ivan Rae, appeared before the JCA on a charge filed against him by the Informant, Mr AR Coles. The details of the charge are set out below and come pursuant to Information number 6053 and Rule 404(2).
--The defendant who appeared on his own behalf acknowledged receipt of the documents relating to the charge. He informed the Committee he understood the nature of the charge and hearing. The defendant entered a guilty plea to the charge.
--Mr Coles produced to the enquiry a written authority to file the information from the Chief Executive of NZTR. This authority comes pursuant to Rule 1103 (4) (D).
--The charge reads as follows:
--THAT being the holder of a Class A trainer’s license, issued pursuant to the provisions of Rule 303, of the NZ Rules of Racing, K & L Rae did enter an unnamed horse, a 2 y.o. filly by BLACK MINNALOUSE out of CAMILLA in a trial to be held by the Avondale Jockey Club, on Tuesday 8th December 2009, AND THAT they did present with intent to start another horse, an unnamed 2 y.o. filly by CAPTAIN RIO out of BIRDINHAND in such trial, AND they did thereby commit a breach of the Third Appendix (Regulations for Trials) and Rule 404 (2) of the NZ Rules of Racing, AND THAT they are liable to such penalty or penalties that may be imposed upon them pursuant to Rule 803 of the said Rules.
--
IN THE MATTER OF THE NEW ZEALAND RULES OF RACING BETWEEN:
--INFORMANT: NEW ZEALAND THOROUGHBRED RACING
--DEFENDANT: Mr KI and Mrs LM Rae LICENSED TRAINERS
--HEARING: RUAKAKA RACE COURSE 5 JANUARY 2010 at 4.30 pm
--JUDICIAL COMMITTEE: RM SEABROOK (Chairman), DC JOHNSTONE
--PRESENT: Mr A COLES NZTR
Mr K RAE TRAINER
Miss SA MOORE NZTR
The Defendant, Kenneth Ivan Rae, appeared before the JCA on a charge filed against him by the Informant, Mr AR Coles. The details of the charge are set out below and come pursuant to Information number 6053 and Rule 404(2).
--The defendant who appeared on his own behalf acknowledged receipt of the documents relating to the charge. He informed the Committee he understood the nature of the charge and hearing. The defendant entered a guilty plea to the charge.
--Mr Coles produced to the enquiry a written authority to file the information from the Chief Executive of NZTR. This authority comes pursuant to Rule 1103 (4) (D).
--The charge reads as follows:
--THAT being the holder of a Class A trainer’s license, issued pursuant to the provisions of Rule 303, of the NZ Rules of Racing, K & L Rae did enter an unnamed horse, a 2 y.o. filly by BLACK MINNALOUSE out of CAMILLA in a trial to be held by the Avondale Jockey Club, on Tuesday 8th December 2009, AND THAT they did present with intent to start another horse, an unnamed 2 y.o. filly by CAPTAIN RIO out of BIRDINHAND in such trial, AND they did thereby commit a breach of the Third Appendix (Regulations for Trials) and Rule 404 (2) of the NZ Rules of Racing, AND THAT they are liable to such penalty or penalties that may be imposed upon them pursuant to Rule 803 of the said Rules.
--SUMMARY OF FACTS:
--On Monday 7th December 2009, entries were taken by the Bureau at New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR), for trials to be held by the Avondale Jockey Club on Tuesday 8th December 2009.
--The trials programme shows an entry was received and the horse a 2 y.o. filly by BLACK MINNALOUSHE – CAMILLA was to run in Heat No. 3.
--It is a matter of record at NZTR that this 2 y.o. filly is trained by the partnership of Ken and his wife Lisa Rae of Ruakaka.
--Officials at the trials on 8th December, physically and/or electronically inspected all horses.
--During the inspection of horses to run in Heat No 3 it was found that the 2 y.o. presented to run in the trial under the training of the Raes, did not match the brands and marking, and also the electronic reading of the micro-chip.
--Once this discrepancy in the identification was discovered, Mrs Rae, who was leading the horse, also recognised she was holding the wrong horse.
--The 2 y.o. filly, BLACK MINNALOUSHE – CAMILLA had not been brought to the trials.
--The filly the Raes had present with intent to trial was by CAPTAIN RIO – BIRDINHAND. It had been well publicised that trainers are required to identify each and all horses that come into their control for the purposes of training, trialling and racing under the Rules of Racing.
--Mr Rae shortly thereafter said by way of explanation that there must have been a mix up when the horse was sent from the owner’s property at Java Lodge, located alongside the Ruakaka Racecourse. While this is very possible, it is for this very reason that all trainers are required to carefully identify horses that come into their care and control.
--It is accepted by NZTR that the presentation of the wrong horse at the trials was not something that was done with intent and has not therefore been dealt with as a serious racing offence.
--It is however gross negligence and the second occasion in which Mr Rae has been charged with presenting the wrong horse to compete in a race/trial under the Rules of Racing.
--PENALTY SUBMISSIONS
--Mr Coles on behalf of NZTR submitted there is an expected responsibility on ALL trainers to identify ALL horses that come under their care and control.
--As alluded to in the Summary of Facts, Mr Rae has previously been charged with a breach of what was then Rule 411, which related to taking the wrong horse to the races.
--On 1 October 2008, at a meeting of the Avondale Jockey Club, Mr Rae presented the wrong horse, which necessitated a late scratching, for which he was charged and fined the sum of $2000 on the day.
--NZTR did not accept the explanation given by Mr Rae and it was submitted Mr Rae can claim no relief by way of penalty by simply claiming he believed the wrong horse had been sent from the owner’s property to his adjacent training establishment.
--The Rule provides that a breach of this nature may be dealt with as a Serious Racing Offence. It was submitted by NZTR that it accepts Mr and Mrs Rae were negligent in failing to identify the horse they believed was MINNALOUSHE – CAMILLA, when in fact it was not. NZTR records reveal the horse presented on the day of the trials is not yet in the stables of the Rae’s.
--This is a strict liability offence and to their credit the Mr and Mrs Rae have from the outset acknowledged their mistake.
--The aggravating factor is that Mr Rae has a previous breach at a race meeting for presenting the wrong horse.
--NZTR submitted that in normal circumstances a breach of this nature which occurs at the trials, has warranted Judicial Committees in the past imposing a penalty of approximately $500.
--It was submitted by NZTR that because it is not the first occasion of offending of this nature for Mr Rae, and hence the consequence of training partnership must accept that this cannot be treated as a first offence Accordingly, a starting point for this breach, coming on top of a breach of a similar nature, on a race day should be somewhere between $1000 and $2000. It was accepted that Mr and Mrs Rae are entitled to credit for their co-operation with NZTR field staff, and their guilty plea.
--It was submitted a fine is appropriate, and that such a fine should be in the range of $800 - $1200.
--COSTS:
--On the question of costs, these have been kept to a minimum with the entering of a guilty plea, but none the less NZTR submitted that there were costs incurred in preparing a matter such as this for prosecution. Costs for NZTR are sought at $300.00, plus costs incurred by the Judicial Control Authority.
--PENALTY
--The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions.
--Mitigating factors in this charge are Mr Rae’s guilty plea and his full co-operation with NZTR. Since being notified of his breach of Rule 404 (2) we are satisfied there was no intent or malice on Mr Rae’s part to deceive officials by the wrongful entry of a horse at a trial meeting. This was really a case of a trainer neglecting his responsibilities in not inspecting the brands of new stable entrants. However it was still a case of gross negligence on the Raes part. In this case if the mistaken identity of this horse had not been detected by NZTR Officials and indeed it had started and won the trial, the repercussions could have been far reaching. Integrity and public perception of the racing industry is so important and this type of breach does nothing to enhance that.
--Another aggravating factor is that Mr Rae has incurred a penalty previously under what was Rule 411, when he was found guilty of entering the wrong horse in a race at Avondale in 2008.
--After due consideration of all the above facts, we impose a fine of $1000.00. As this was heard on a race day there be no award of costs.
--Richard Seabrook
Chairman
Decision Date: 01/01/2001
Publish Date: 01/01/2001
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: 3d3450d4e35fff701c1205588d491ae2
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 01/01/2001
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry NZTR V KI Rae 5 January 2010 - decision
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
IN THE MATTER OF THE NEW ZEALAND RULES OF RACING BETWEEN:
--INFORMANT: NEW ZEALAND THOROUGHBRED RACING
--DEFENDANT: Mr KI and Mrs LM Rae LICENSED TRAINERS
--HEARING: RUAKAKA RACE COURSE 5 JANUARY 2010 at 4.30 pm
--JUDICIAL COMMITTEE: RM SEABROOK (Chairman), DC JOHNSTONE
--PRESENT: Mr A COLES NZTR
Mr K RAE TRAINER
Miss SA MOORE NZTR
The Defendant, Kenneth Ivan Rae, appeared before the JCA on a charge filed against him by the Informant, Mr AR Coles. The details of the charge are set out below and come pursuant to Information number 6053 and Rule 404(2).
--The defendant who appeared on his own behalf acknowledged receipt of the documents relating to the charge. He informed the Committee he understood the nature of the charge and hearing. The defendant entered a guilty plea to the charge.
--Mr Coles produced to the enquiry a written authority to file the information from the Chief Executive of NZTR. This authority comes pursuant to Rule 1103 (4) (D).
--The charge reads as follows:
--THAT being the holder of a Class A trainer’s license, issued pursuant to the provisions of Rule 303, of the NZ Rules of Racing, K & L Rae did enter an unnamed horse, a 2 y.o. filly by BLACK MINNALOUSE out of CAMILLA in a trial to be held by the Avondale Jockey Club, on Tuesday 8th December 2009, AND THAT they did present with intent to start another horse, an unnamed 2 y.o. filly by CAPTAIN RIO out of BIRDINHAND in such trial, AND they did thereby commit a breach of the Third Appendix (Regulations for Trials) and Rule 404 (2) of the NZ Rules of Racing, AND THAT they are liable to such penalty or penalties that may be imposed upon them pursuant to Rule 803 of the said Rules.
--
IN THE MATTER OF THE NEW ZEALAND RULES OF RACING BETWEEN:
--INFORMANT: NEW ZEALAND THOROUGHBRED RACING
--DEFENDANT: Mr KI and Mrs LM Rae LICENSED TRAINERS
--HEARING: RUAKAKA RACE COURSE 5 JANUARY 2010 at 4.30 pm
--JUDICIAL COMMITTEE: RM SEABROOK (Chairman), DC JOHNSTONE
--PRESENT: Mr A COLES NZTR
Mr K RAE TRAINER
Miss SA MOORE NZTR
The Defendant, Kenneth Ivan Rae, appeared before the JCA on a charge filed against him by the Informant, Mr AR Coles. The details of the charge are set out below and come pursuant to Information number 6053 and Rule 404(2).
--The defendant who appeared on his own behalf acknowledged receipt of the documents relating to the charge. He informed the Committee he understood the nature of the charge and hearing. The defendant entered a guilty plea to the charge.
--Mr Coles produced to the enquiry a written authority to file the information from the Chief Executive of NZTR. This authority comes pursuant to Rule 1103 (4) (D).
--The charge reads as follows:
--THAT being the holder of a Class A trainer’s license, issued pursuant to the provisions of Rule 303, of the NZ Rules of Racing, K & L Rae did enter an unnamed horse, a 2 y.o. filly by BLACK MINNALOUSE out of CAMILLA in a trial to be held by the Avondale Jockey Club, on Tuesday 8th December 2009, AND THAT they did present with intent to start another horse, an unnamed 2 y.o. filly by CAPTAIN RIO out of BIRDINHAND in such trial, AND they did thereby commit a breach of the Third Appendix (Regulations for Trials) and Rule 404 (2) of the NZ Rules of Racing, AND THAT they are liable to such penalty or penalties that may be imposed upon them pursuant to Rule 803 of the said Rules.
--SUMMARY OF FACTS:
--On Monday 7th December 2009, entries were taken by the Bureau at New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR), for trials to be held by the Avondale Jockey Club on Tuesday 8th December 2009.
--The trials programme shows an entry was received and the horse a 2 y.o. filly by BLACK MINNALOUSHE – CAMILLA was to run in Heat No. 3.
--It is a matter of record at NZTR that this 2 y.o. filly is trained by the partnership of Ken and his wife Lisa Rae of Ruakaka.
--Officials at the trials on 8th December, physically and/or electronically inspected all horses.
--During the inspection of horses to run in Heat No 3 it was found that the 2 y.o. presented to run in the trial under the training of the Raes, did not match the brands and marking, and also the electronic reading of the micro-chip.
--Once this discrepancy in the identification was discovered, Mrs Rae, who was leading the horse, also recognised she was holding the wrong horse.
--The 2 y.o. filly, BLACK MINNALOUSHE – CAMILLA had not been brought to the trials.
--The filly the Raes had present with intent to trial was by CAPTAIN RIO – BIRDINHAND. It had been well publicised that trainers are required to identify each and all horses that come into their control for the purposes of training, trialling and racing under the Rules of Racing.
--Mr Rae shortly thereafter said by way of explanation that there must have been a mix up when the horse was sent from the owner’s property at Java Lodge, located alongside the Ruakaka Racecourse. While this is very possible, it is for this very reason that all trainers are required to carefully identify horses that come into their care and control.
--It is accepted by NZTR that the presentation of the wrong horse at the trials was not something that was done with intent and has not therefore been dealt with as a serious racing offence.
--It is however gross negligence and the second occasion in which Mr Rae has been charged with presenting the wrong horse to compete in a race/trial under the Rules of Racing.
--PENALTY SUBMISSIONS
--Mr Coles on behalf of NZTR submitted there is an expected responsibility on ALL trainers to identify ALL horses that come under their care and control.
--As alluded to in the Summary of Facts, Mr Rae has previously been charged with a breach of what was then Rule 411, which related to taking the wrong horse to the races.
--On 1 October 2008, at a meeting of the Avondale Jockey Club, Mr Rae presented the wrong horse, which necessitated a late scratching, for which he was charged and fined the sum of $2000 on the day.
--NZTR did not accept the explanation given by Mr Rae and it was submitted Mr Rae can claim no relief by way of penalty by simply claiming he believed the wrong horse had been sent from the owner’s property to his adjacent training establishment.
--The Rule provides that a breach of this nature may be dealt with as a Serious Racing Offence. It was submitted by NZTR that it accepts Mr and Mrs Rae were negligent in failing to identify the horse they believed was MINNALOUSHE – CAMILLA, when in fact it was not. NZTR records reveal the horse presented on the day of the trials is not yet in the stables of the Rae’s.
--This is a strict liability offence and to their credit the Mr and Mrs Rae have from the outset acknowledged their mistake.
--The aggravating factor is that Mr Rae has a previous breach at a race meeting for presenting the wrong horse.
--NZTR submitted that in normal circumstances a breach of this nature which occurs at the trials, has warranted Judicial Committees in the past imposing a penalty of approximately $500.
--It was submitted by NZTR that because it is not the first occasion of offending of this nature for Mr Rae, and hence the consequence of training partnership must accept that this cannot be treated as a first offence Accordingly, a starting point for this breach, coming on top of a breach of a similar nature, on a race day should be somewhere between $1000 and $2000. It was accepted that Mr and Mrs Rae are entitled to credit for their co-operation with NZTR field staff, and their guilty plea.
--It was submitted a fine is appropriate, and that such a fine should be in the range of $800 - $1200.
--COSTS:
--On the question of costs, these have been kept to a minimum with the entering of a guilty plea, but none the less NZTR submitted that there were costs incurred in preparing a matter such as this for prosecution. Costs for NZTR are sought at $300.00, plus costs incurred by the Judicial Control Authority.
--PENALTY
--The Committee carefully considered all evidence and submissions.
--Mitigating factors in this charge are Mr Rae’s guilty plea and his full co-operation with NZTR. Since being notified of his breach of Rule 404 (2) we are satisfied there was no intent or malice on Mr Rae’s part to deceive officials by the wrongful entry of a horse at a trial meeting. This was really a case of a trainer neglecting his responsibilities in not inspecting the brands of new stable entrants. However it was still a case of gross negligence on the Raes part. In this case if the mistaken identity of this horse had not been detected by NZTR Officials and indeed it had started and won the trial, the repercussions could have been far reaching. Integrity and public perception of the racing industry is so important and this type of breach does nothing to enhance that.
--Another aggravating factor is that Mr Rae has incurred a penalty previously under what was Rule 411, when he was found guilty of entering the wrong horse in a race at Avondale in 2008.
--After due consideration of all the above facts, we impose a fine of $1000.00. As this was heard on a race day there be no award of costs.
--Richard Seabrook
Chairman
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 404.2, 1103.4.d
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: