Manawatu HRC – 14 February 2008 – Race 1

hearingid: 77476d9aef724b5d2bbf5119e66bdea7

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 14/02/2008

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Manawatu HRC - 14 February 2008 - Race 1

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following the running of race one, G Martin the driver of BETTOR’S STAR was charged with a breach of Rule 869 (3)(f)       It was alleged that Mr Martin drove improperly when using his foot as a bar to strike his horse in the run home.

Following the running of race one, G Martin the driver of BETTOR’S STAR was charged with a breach of Rule 869 (3)(f)      

It was alleged that Mr Martin drove improperly when using his foot as a bar to strike his horse in the run home.

Mr Martin denied the breach of the rule.

When making his submissions Mr Taumanu referred the committee to the Trackside film of the race. In particular the run up the home straight.

Mr Taumanu drew the committee’s attention to Mr Martin’s right leg dropping from the footrest of his sulky and then it coming into contact with the hind leg of BETTOR’S STAR. This continuing on for some distance.

Mr Taumanu was clearly of the view that Mr Martin was using his foot as a bar and as a consequence was driving in an improper manner.

Mr Martin when addressing the committee commenced by denying any wrong doing. He acknowledged that his foot had come loose from the footrest however he contended that this was an accident. He also contended that there was no intent to strike the leg of BETTOR’S STAR but rather the back leg of the horse had struck him instead.

In response to a question from the chairman regarding the length of time his leg had remained out of the footrest Mr Martin stated that he could not reinstate his foot due to two reasons, these being; firstly, that he could not have done so without the horse again striking his leg or foot, and secondly that as he had borrowed the sulky from another trainer this was not set up to his personal specifications and this was causing him some difficulty.

He went on to provide, in some detail, how this borrowed sulky had affected his ability to regain the footrest.

In summing up Mr Taumanu said that this was a clear cut case of Mr Martin using his foot as a bar and as such the charge should be upheld.

Mr Martin in summing up again denied any wrong doing and any intent to use his foot in an illegal way.

Prior to the committee delivering its decision an adjournment was made to facilitate an upcoming race.

At the recommencement of the hearing Mr Taumanu asked if he could provide additional evidence regarding statements Mr Martin had made earlier in the hearing about him borrowing a sulky for BETTORS STAR.

At this point Mr Martin interjected and apologised saying that he had borrowed a sulky for BETTORS STAR.  He stated that he had just recalled that he actually used his own cart for the horse.

DECISION AND REASON

When considering this charge the committee is aided by the very clear Trackside film of the run home, in particular the low down - front on shot. This film demonstrates very clearly where Mr Martin drops his leg and it also where this comes into contact with the right hind leg of BETTORS STAR.

The committee has heard submissions from Mr Martin with regard the reasons he did not reinstate his leg after it became dislodged. These reasons being largely attributable to the fact that he was not driving in his customised sulky. This he stated being compounded by him being some 6’ 2” in height which was causing him difficulty.

Mr Martin has also submitted that he could reinstate his leg as had he attempted to do so then the horse would have struck it again.

Mr Taumanu on the other hand has argued that the films of the alleged breach are self explanatory and clearly demonstrate where Mr Martin’s leg has come into contact with the hind leg of BETTOR’S STAR.

When determining this issue the committee has to decide whether or not the dropping by Mr Martin of his leg was an accidental occurrence or alternatively was it a deliberate action.

Similarly the committee must also consider the reasons for Mr Martin allowing his leg to remain dislodged from the sulky for the time that he did.

Firstly however the committee must record that it was not impressed with the evidence presented by Mr Martin, in particular that part of the hearing where he was at pains to use the defence of not driving in his own customised sulky for the reasons of firstly his leg dropping and then secondly not being able to reinstate it.

He made much of this and used it as a major part of his defence.

However when it has became obvious that Mr Taumanu had established this as incorrect Mr Martin suddenly has had a change of mind and repudiated his early submissions.

In this committees view the evidence of Mr Martin has been unreliable at best.

The committee also has considerable difficulty reconciling the time that Mr Martin has had  his leg out of the footrest and is of the clear view that ample opportunity existed for him to reinstate it.

It must be noted that the dropping of a leg by a driver is not an unusual occurrence in harness racing, what is usual however is that the driver regains the footrest over much a shorter duration than was the case in the incident complained about.

The films demonstrate no attempt being made by Mr Martin to do so. Rather he has allowed his leg to remain hanging and as such it has been struck by BETTOR’S STAR’S hind leg.

On the matter of Mr Martin stating that he has not kicked his horse the committee makes no finding that he has done so, however by allowing his leg to remain in such the position as it was it could not be avoided being struck by that of BETTORS STAR.

The effect on the horse, in this committee’s view, is the same regardless as by positioning his leg as he did Mr Martin has breached the provisions of the Rule and has allowed his foot to be used as a bar.

The committee is unconvinced by any of the arguments of Mr Martin and finds a clear preference for the evidence of Mr Taumanu. The charge is therefore proved.

PENALTY

Prior to making his submission Mr Taumanu presented Mr Martin’s record. This showing no previous breaches of Rule 869 (3)(f)

When addressing the committee on penalty Mr Taumanu has conveyed HRNZ’s strong disapproval of the practice complained of in this case.

He has submitted that a penalty reflecting this position be imposed.

Mr Martin, when asked for his submissions has simply made comments regarding his views of the charge being bought. He has nothing to contribute other than disagreeing with the decision.

When considering the aggravating and mitigating factors it is difficult to find anything in mitigation other than Mr Martin’s record.

Mr Martin has, at best, given misleading evidence and little weight can be placed upon it, he has also pitched a substantial part of his defence on the sulky issue however this has subsequently been discredited.

After carefully considering all matters regarding penalty the committee finds that this breach is a serious one and the penalty imposed must reflect this concern.

The committee is of the clear view that the suspension imposed should be one of weeks as opposed to days.

The driving complained of was indeed improper and Mr Martin has offended at the higher end of the scale

Therefore after taking all matters into consideration it is the finding of this committee that Mr Martin’s horseman’s licence therefore suspended from the conclusion of racing today up to and including racing on Thursday 27^th March 2008.

A six week’s suspension.

RLH Neal,

Chairman.

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869.3.f

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 87ec1b364d05b12e1152d4b5b77c5e8a

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 1

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: c91a1a70a21fd614549df0625d7e3dd9

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 14/02/2008

meet_title: Manawatu HRC - 14 February 2008

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: manawatu-hrc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Manawatu HRC