Archive Decision

This decision has been migrated from the JCA website. Information is accurate but formatting may differ from contemporary decisions. Please contact us for any further enquiries.

Non-Raceday Inquiry – D Bothamley 30 Sept 08

ID: JCA19871

Hearing Type:
Old Hearing

Rules:
1003.1

Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing

Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

--

                                                                                               

--

                                                                                                BETWEEN      C J GEORGE, Chief Stipendiary

--

 Steward for New Zealand                     Thoroughbred Racing

--

                                      Informant

--

AND                 DANIEL R BOTHAMLEY of

--

                            Christchurch, Licensed Jockey

--

                                                               Defendant

--

 

--

Date of Hearing:                   30 September 2008

--

Venue:                                      Riccarton Racecourse, Riccarton Park, Christchurch.

--

Judicial Committee:             R G McKenzie (Chairman)

--

                                                    J M Phelan

--

Present:                                    C J George (the Informant)

--

                                                    D R Bothamley (the Defendant)

--

                                                    J Tannahill (Counsel for Mr Bothamley)

--

                                                    R D Scott (Hearing Clerk)

--

Date of Decision:                  9 October 2008

--

 


--

DECISION AND REASONS OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

 


--

Information No. 6808 alleges as follows:

--

“That on the 20th day of July 2008 at the race meeting at Timaru Racecourse conducted by the South Canterbury Racing Club, being a Licensed Jockey within the meaning of Rule 303 of the New Zealand Rules of Racing [Mr Bothamley] did misconduct [himself] within the meaning of Rule 304 of the said Rules in that [he] did assault Apprentice Jockey Hayden James Hooper and behave in an obscene and disorderly manner in the male jockeys room and that [he is] therefore liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon [him] pursuant to Rule 1003 of the said Rules”.



BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

--

                                                                                               

--

                                                                                                BETWEEN      C J GEORGE, Chief Stipendiary

--

 Steward for New Zealand                     Thoroughbred Racing

--

                                      Informant

--

AND                 DANIEL R BOTHAMLEY of

--

                            Christchurch, Licensed Jockey

--

                                                               Defendant

--

 

--

Date of Hearing:                   30 September 2008

--

Venue:                                      Riccarton Racecourse, Riccarton Park, Christchurch.

--

Judicial Committee:             R G McKenzie (Chairman)

--

                                                    J M Phelan

--

Present:                                    C J George (the Informant)

--

                                                    D R Bothamley (the Defendant)

--

                                                    J Tannahill (Counsel for Mr Bothamley)

--

                                                    R D Scott (Hearing Clerk)

--

Date of Decision:                  9 October 2008

--

 


--

DECISION AND REASONS OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

 


--

Information No. 6808 alleges as follows:

--

“That on the 20th day of July 2008 at the race meeting at Timaru Racecourse conducted by the South Canterbury Racing Club, being a Licensed Jockey within the meaning of Rule 303 of the New Zealand Rules of Racing [Mr Bothamley] did misconduct [himself] within the meaning of Rule 304 of the said Rules in that [he] did assault Apprentice Jockey Hayden James Hooper and behave in an obscene and disorderly manner in the male jockeys room and that [he is] therefore liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon [him] pursuant to Rule 1003 of the said Rules”.

--

 

--

Rule 304 provides as follows:

--

Every holder of any licence or certificate or registration mentioned in [Rule 303] and every owner, owner-trainer, stablehand, unlicensed apprentice, racing manager or official or employee of any Club who misconducts himself in any way commits a breach of these Rules.

--

 

--

PRELIMINARY MATTER

--

At the outset of the hearing, prior to Mr Bothamley’s pleading to the charge, Mr Tannahill sought leave to make submissions in relation to a preliminary issue of a legal nature. Mr Tannahill said that, on the date of the alleged offence, there was an incident in a race involving Mr Bothamley and apprentice jockey, Hayden Hooper. Following that race, in the jockeys’ room, a further incident took place between the same persons as a result of which Mr Bothamley was taken into the Stewards’ room and issued with a formal warning for misconduct under Rule 304. He referred to the Stewards’ Report for the meeting where it was recorded, in respect of Race 4, that “D Bothamley was issued with a warning under Rule 304 in regard to misconduct in the jockeys’room”.  

--

 

--

Mr Tannahill submitted that Mr Bothamley was “severely spoken to” on the day by the Stewards and issued with the warning. When he left the racecourse that day, Mr Bothamley was “quite contrite” and realised he had misconducted himself in the incident with Hayden Hooper. It was also reported in the media that Mr Bothamley had been dealt with – it was made public and was further made public when it was subsequently reported that he had been charged with misconduct and was to appear before a Judicial Committee.

--

 

--

Mr Tannahill submitted that Mr Bothamley now found himself in a position where he was”charged again”, but this time before a Judicial Committee. He referred to Section 26 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 which deals with “double jeopardy” but conceded that the Section is limited to criminal proceedings. However, he submitted, there are penal provisions in the Rules of Racing in respect of misconduct. Mr Bothamley had been dealt with in having been formally warned – he now found himself charged with the same matter before a Judicial Committee. The rule against “double jeopardy” means that there should not be repeated attempts to find a person guilty of an offence on which he has already been dealt with.

--

 

--

In the present case, although Mr Bothamley had not been fined or suspended, he finds himself in the position where the same facts upon which he admitted the offence are those before the Committee. The matter could and should have been fully investigated and disposed of on the day. He has already suffered “humiliation” arising out of his conduct on the day, Mr Tannahill submitted.

--

 

--

In response, Mr George stated that the Stewards became aware of the incident on the day, investigated that incident and, subsequently, issued a warning to Mr Bothamley. He submitted that under the New Zealand Rules of Racing a warning does not constitute a general penalty. A warning is merely part of the Stewards’ internal process and is not a penalty as such. On the day, the Stewards were not privy to all of the evidence to be presented to this Committee as a result of statements subsequently taken from a number of riders. Some days after the incident, Mr George had received a verbal complaint from a senior jockey concerning Mr Bothamley’s conduct, as a result of which he obtained statements from other jockeys who were present and it was as a result of this further evidence that Mr Bothamley was later charged. Had the Stewards had all of this evidence available to them on the day, they certainly would not have issued a mere warning.

--

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: 4200f9732f671ddc78cbdb3424afbda9


informantnumber:


horsename:


hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing


startdate: 01/01/2001


newcharge:


plea:


penaltyrequired:


decisiondate: no date provided


hearing_title: Non-Raceday Inquiry - D Bothamley 30 Sept 08


charge:


facts:


appealdecision:


isappeal:


submissionsfordecision:


reasonsfordecision:


Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

--

                                                                                               

--

                                                                                                BETWEEN      C J GEORGE, Chief Stipendiary

--

 Steward for New Zealand                     Thoroughbred Racing

--

                                      Informant

--

AND                 DANIEL R BOTHAMLEY of

--

                            Christchurch, Licensed Jockey

--

                                                               Defendant

--

 

--

Date of Hearing:                   30 September 2008

--

Venue:                                      Riccarton Racecourse, Riccarton Park, Christchurch.

--

Judicial Committee:             R G McKenzie (Chairman)

--

                                                    J M Phelan

--

Present:                                    C J George (the Informant)

--

                                                    D R Bothamley (the Defendant)

--

                                                    J Tannahill (Counsel for Mr Bothamley)

--

                                                    R D Scott (Hearing Clerk)

--

Date of Decision:                  9 October 2008

--

 


--

DECISION AND REASONS OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

 


--

Information No. 6808 alleges as follows:

--

“That on the 20th day of July 2008 at the race meeting at Timaru Racecourse conducted by the South Canterbury Racing Club, being a Licensed Jockey within the meaning of Rule 303 of the New Zealand Rules of Racing [Mr Bothamley] did misconduct [himself] within the meaning of Rule 304 of the said Rules in that [he] did assault Apprentice Jockey Hayden James Hooper and behave in an obscene and disorderly manner in the male jockeys room and that [he is] therefore liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon [him] pursuant to Rule 1003 of the said Rules”.



BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

--

                                                                                               

--

                                                                                                BETWEEN      C J GEORGE, Chief Stipendiary

--

 Steward for New Zealand                     Thoroughbred Racing

--

                                      Informant

--

AND                 DANIEL R BOTHAMLEY of

--

                            Christchurch, Licensed Jockey

--

                                                               Defendant

--

 

--

Date of Hearing:                   30 September 2008

--

Venue:                                      Riccarton Racecourse, Riccarton Park, Christchurch.

--

Judicial Committee:             R G McKenzie (Chairman)

--

                                                    J M Phelan

--

Present:                                    C J George (the Informant)

--

                                                    D R Bothamley (the Defendant)

--

                                                    J Tannahill (Counsel for Mr Bothamley)

--

                                                    R D Scott (Hearing Clerk)

--

Date of Decision:                  9 October 2008

--

 


--

DECISION AND REASONS OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

--

 


--

Information No. 6808 alleges as follows:

--

“That on the 20th day of July 2008 at the race meeting at Timaru Racecourse conducted by the South Canterbury Racing Club, being a Licensed Jockey within the meaning of Rule 303 of the New Zealand Rules of Racing [Mr Bothamley] did misconduct [himself] within the meaning of Rule 304 of the said Rules in that [he] did assault Apprentice Jockey Hayden James Hooper and behave in an obscene and disorderly manner in the male jockeys room and that [he is] therefore liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon [him] pursuant to Rule 1003 of the said Rules”.

--

 

--

Rule 304 provides as follows:

--

Every holder of any licence or certificate or registration mentioned in [Rule 303] and every owner, owner-trainer, stablehand, unlicensed apprentice, racing manager or official or employee of any Club who misconducts himself in any way commits a breach of these Rules.

--

 

--

PRELIMINARY MATTER

--

At the outset of the hearing, prior to Mr Bothamley’s pleading to the charge, Mr Tannahill sought leave to make submissions in relation to a preliminary issue of a legal nature. Mr Tannahill said that, on the date of the alleged offence, there was an incident in a race involving Mr Bothamley and apprentice jockey, Hayden Hooper. Following that race, in the jockeys’ room, a further incident took place between the same persons as a result of which Mr Bothamley was taken into the Stewards’ room and issued with a formal warning for misconduct under Rule 304. He referred to the Stewards’ Report for the meeting where it was recorded, in respect of Race 4, that “D Bothamley was issued with a warning under Rule 304 in regard to misconduct in the jockeys’room”.  

--

 

--

Mr Tannahill submitted that Mr Bothamley was “severely spoken to” on the day by the Stewards and issued with the warning. When he left the racecourse that day, Mr Bothamley was “quite contrite” and realised he had misconducted himself in the incident with Hayden Hooper. It was also reported in the media that Mr Bothamley had been dealt with – it was made public and was further made public when it was subsequently reported that he had been charged with misconduct and was to appear before a Judicial Committee.

--

 

--

Mr Tannahill submitted that Mr Bothamley now found himself in a position where he was”charged again”, but this time before a Judicial Committee. He referred to Section 26 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 which deals with “double jeopardy” but conceded that the Section is limited to criminal proceedings. However, he submitted, there are penal provisions in the Rules of Racing in respect of misconduct. Mr Bothamley had been dealt with in having been formally warned – he now found himself charged with the same matter before a Judicial Committee. The rule against “double jeopardy” means that there should not be repeated attempts to find a person guilty of an offence on which he has already been dealt with.

--

 

--

In the present case, although Mr Bothamley had not been fined or suspended, he finds himself in the position where the same facts upon which he admitted the offence are those before the Committee. The matter could and should have been fully investigated and disposed of on the day. He has already suffered “humiliation” arising out of his conduct on the day, Mr Tannahill submitted.

--

 

--

In response, Mr George stated that the Stewards became aware of the incident on the day, investigated that incident and, subsequently, issued a warning to Mr Bothamley. He submitted that under the New Zealand Rules of Racing a warning does not constitute a general penalty. A warning is merely part of the Stewards’ internal process and is not a penalty as such. On the day, the Stewards were not privy to all of the evidence to be presented to this Committee as a result of statements subsequently taken from a number of riders. Some days after the incident, Mr George had received a verbal complaint from a senior jockey concerning Mr Bothamley’s conduct, as a result of which he obtained statements from other jockeys who were present and it was as a result of this further evidence that Mr Bothamley was later charged. Had the Stewards had all of this evidence available to them on the day, they certainly would not have issued a mere warning.

--

sumissionsforpenalty:


reasonsforpenalty:


penalty:


hearing_type: Old Hearing


Rules: 1003.1


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: