Kapiti Coast HRC – 1 February 2009 – Race 2

Following the running of Race 2, The Mill Liquorsave Levin Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr T. W. Taumanu against Mr G. A. Martin, driver of "Quality Control" (4), alleging a breach of Rule 869(3)(b). The charge was that Mr Martin drove carelessly when he shifted his horse inwards with approximately 1600 metres left to run causing interference to "Ilinspired", resulting in that horse breaking and losing its chance.

Following the running of Race 2, The Mill Liquorsave Levin Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr T. W. Taumanu against Mr G. A. Martin, driver of "Quality Control" (4), alleging a breach of Rule 869(3)(b). The charge was that Mr Martin drove carelessly when he shifted his horse inwards with approximately 1600 metres left to run causing interference to "Ilinspired", resulting in that horse breaking and losing its chance.

Mr Martin had indicated on the information that he admitted this breach of the Rules and he confirmed this at the hearing. He also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under. The charge was found to be proved accordingly.

Stipendiary Steward Mr Renault used video coverage to illustrate the incident. Mr Martin said that "….it’s not the nicest animal I’ve ever had…." and that he was having some difficulty with his horse at the time. Mr Martin also repeated that he had admitted the breach.

In relation to penalty Mr Taumanu advised that Mr Martin had received a two week suspension from 16 to 29 January 2009 inclusive, and that this was only his second day back driving. It was Mr Taumanu’s recommendation that a suspension of between 6 and 8 weeks would be appropriate in this case.

Mr Martin said that he drove his own horses mainly, but also drove for other trainers at times, as he had been today. He also said that he drove at meetings from Cambridge south in the North Island. Mr Martin could not be too specific as to what meetings he would be driving at in the future.

We adjourned to consider the matter of an appropriate penalty. We were concerned that Mr Martin had again been in breach of the careless driving Rule so soon after receiving a two week suspension. On the other hand we believed that a 6 – 8 weeks suspension as recommended was unduly harsh. We decided that in this case a 4 week suspension was appropriate.

On returning to the Enquiry Room Mr Martin was advised that his Open Horseman’s Licence was suspended from after the completion of racing on 1 February 2009, until after the completion of racing on 1 March 2009, this being a 4 week suspension.

J M  Phelan

Chairman