Forbury Park TC – 11 December 2009 – Race 8
ID: JCA21326
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Forbury Park TC - 11 December 2009
Race Date:
2009/12/11
Race Number:
Race 8
Decision:
FORBURY PARK TROTTING CLUB
--11 December 2009
--RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--
RACE NO: 8 INFORMATION NO: 67430 RULE NO: 870(1), (2)(b) & (c)
Judicial Chairman G Hall
Member of Committee D Steel
Informant: Mr P Knowles, stipendiary steward
Defendant Mr W Low, licensed horseman
Mr Knowles, stipendiary steward, alleged that Mr Low failed to take all reasonable steps to return OUR MONTY to its proper gait in race 8. Mr Low denied the charge and called Mr James, a part-owner of OUR MONTY, to give evidence as to the racing manners of OUR MONTY. Mr Low accepted that the evidence of Mr Chmiel given at the earlier protest could be considered by the Committee.
FORBURY PARK TROTTING CLUB
--11 December 2009
--RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--
RACE NO: 8 INFORMATION NO: 67430 RULE NO: 870(1), (2)(b) & (c)
Judicial Chairman G Hall
Member of Committee D Steel
Informant: Mr P Knowles, stipendiary steward
Defendant Mr W Low, licensed horseman
Mr Knowles, stipendiary steward, alleged that Mr Low failed to take all reasonable steps to return OUR MONTY to its proper gait in race 8. Mr Low denied the charge and called Mr James, a part-owner of OUR MONTY, to give evidence as to the racing manners of OUR MONTY. Mr Low accepted that the evidence of Mr Chmiel given at the earlier protest could be considered by the Committee.
--Mr Knowles demonstrated on the video that OUR MONTY had galloped for a significant distance 3 times in the home straight. He stated Mr Low had failed to take immediate hold of the horse. He said while Mr Low had taken some measures the first time the horse broke, on the third occasion, which was of the gravest concern to him, Mr Low had failed to stop driving the horse out. He pointed to Mr Low using the whip on one occasion while OUR MONTY was in a gallop. He said the horse was mixing its gait and that Mr Low should have taken more reasonable steps to take hold, even to the point of not driving the horse out at all. He said the horse was not losing ground when in a break and that Mr Low was chasing it up.
--Mr Low denied the fact that OUR MONTY was galloping. He said he had driven the horse a number of times and that OUR MONTY always paced roughly and was doing so on this occasion. Mr James confirmed this. Mr Low emphasised he had always had control of OUR MONTY as was evidenced by the fact that he was “swinging on the horse” and it was hard on the bit.
--We accept Mr Knowles submission that OUR MONTY was galloping and that Mr Low had failed to take hold of the horse. Conversely, we do not accept Mr Low’s submission, supported by the evidence of Mr James, that OUR MONTY was only pacing roughly. Mr Low further said the horse was under his control at all times. This is not a defence to the charge under R 870.
--We are satisfied that OUR MONTY was not in its proper gait on at least three occasions in the home straight. The obligation upon Mr Low under the Rules in these circumstances is to take all reasonable steps to return OUR MONTY to its proper gait. He has not only failed to do this but the horse has also failed to lose ground. We thus find the charge under R 870(1) proved.
Penalty
Mr Knowles produced Mr Low’s record which was clear for this season. He asked for a fine of $300.
--Mr Low responded that a fine of this amount was excessive. He still believed he had done nothing wrong and emphasised he was an experienced horseman with a good driving record.
--We accept that OUR MONTY is a difficult horse to drive and acknowledge that Mr Low was able to return the horse to its correct gait on each occasion that the horse galloped. Mr Low has an excellent record over a lengthy period of time. We are told he has been suspended only once in a career spanning over 20 years of driving. This is clearly to his credit and this, together with the racing manners of the horse, are strong mitigating factors. We believe that the breach can be met by a fine of $200 on this occasion but Mr Low is reminded in the strongest terms of his obligations under the Rules of Harness Racing and in particular R 870.
--Geoff Hall David Steel
Chair Committee Member
67430
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: 9319519f5240571fdd5353a20fd0902e
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 11/12/2009
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Forbury Park TC - 11 December 2009 - Race 8
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
FORBURY PARK TROTTING CLUB
--11 December 2009
--RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--
RACE NO: 8 INFORMATION NO: 67430 RULE NO: 870(1), (2)(b) & (c)
Judicial Chairman G Hall
Member of Committee D Steel
Informant: Mr P Knowles, stipendiary steward
Defendant Mr W Low, licensed horseman
Mr Knowles, stipendiary steward, alleged that Mr Low failed to take all reasonable steps to return OUR MONTY to its proper gait in race 8. Mr Low denied the charge and called Mr James, a part-owner of OUR MONTY, to give evidence as to the racing manners of OUR MONTY. Mr Low accepted that the evidence of Mr Chmiel given at the earlier protest could be considered by the Committee.
FORBURY PARK TROTTING CLUB
--11 December 2009
--RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--
RACE NO: 8 INFORMATION NO: 67430 RULE NO: 870(1), (2)(b) & (c)
Judicial Chairman G Hall
Member of Committee D Steel
Informant: Mr P Knowles, stipendiary steward
Defendant Mr W Low, licensed horseman
Mr Knowles, stipendiary steward, alleged that Mr Low failed to take all reasonable steps to return OUR MONTY to its proper gait in race 8. Mr Low denied the charge and called Mr James, a part-owner of OUR MONTY, to give evidence as to the racing manners of OUR MONTY. Mr Low accepted that the evidence of Mr Chmiel given at the earlier protest could be considered by the Committee.
--Mr Knowles demonstrated on the video that OUR MONTY had galloped for a significant distance 3 times in the home straight. He stated Mr Low had failed to take immediate hold of the horse. He said while Mr Low had taken some measures the first time the horse broke, on the third occasion, which was of the gravest concern to him, Mr Low had failed to stop driving the horse out. He pointed to Mr Low using the whip on one occasion while OUR MONTY was in a gallop. He said the horse was mixing its gait and that Mr Low should have taken more reasonable steps to take hold, even to the point of not driving the horse out at all. He said the horse was not losing ground when in a break and that Mr Low was chasing it up.
--Mr Low denied the fact that OUR MONTY was galloping. He said he had driven the horse a number of times and that OUR MONTY always paced roughly and was doing so on this occasion. Mr James confirmed this. Mr Low emphasised he had always had control of OUR MONTY as was evidenced by the fact that he was “swinging on the horse” and it was hard on the bit.
--We accept Mr Knowles submission that OUR MONTY was galloping and that Mr Low had failed to take hold of the horse. Conversely, we do not accept Mr Low’s submission, supported by the evidence of Mr James, that OUR MONTY was only pacing roughly. Mr Low further said the horse was under his control at all times. This is not a defence to the charge under R 870.
--We are satisfied that OUR MONTY was not in its proper gait on at least three occasions in the home straight. The obligation upon Mr Low under the Rules in these circumstances is to take all reasonable steps to return OUR MONTY to its proper gait. He has not only failed to do this but the horse has also failed to lose ground. We thus find the charge under R 870(1) proved.
Penalty
Mr Knowles produced Mr Low’s record which was clear for this season. He asked for a fine of $300.
--Mr Low responded that a fine of this amount was excessive. He still believed he had done nothing wrong and emphasised he was an experienced horseman with a good driving record.
--We accept that OUR MONTY is a difficult horse to drive and acknowledge that Mr Low was able to return the horse to its correct gait on each occasion that the horse galloped. Mr Low has an excellent record over a lengthy period of time. We are told he has been suspended only once in a career spanning over 20 years of driving. This is clearly to his credit and this, together with the racing manners of the horse, are strong mitigating factors. We believe that the breach can be met by a fine of $200 on this occasion but Mr Low is reminded in the strongest terms of his obligations under the Rules of Harness Racing and in particular R 870.
--Geoff Hall David Steel
Chair Committee Member
67430
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 870.1
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: d003a362fd0744784064f9b328684fc9
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 8
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: d779902687de930091ae742f8517458d
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 11/12/2009
meet_title: Forbury Park TC - 11 December 2009
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: forbury-park-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Forbury Park TC