Reefton JC – 6 January 2010 – Race 8

hearingid: c96e0c7e946c18e17d67d834a9b98b94

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 06/01/2010

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Reefton JC - 6 January 2010 - Race 8

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

REEFTON JOCKEY CLUB

WEDNESDAY 6TH JANUARY 2010

RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT

RACE 8

Information 0774 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 330(3)(b) in that that Licensed Jockey CW Johnson permitted himself to be engaged for both “Show Cat” and “Miss Millbrook” in Race 8.

Informant - Mr R Neal, Stipendiary Steward

REEFTON JOCKEY CLUB

WEDNESDAY 6TH JANUARY 2010

RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT

RACE 8

Information 0774 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 330(3)(b) in that that Licensed Jockey CW Johnson permitted himself to be engaged for both “Show Cat” and “Miss Millbrook” in Race 8.

Informant - Mr R Neal, Stipendiary Steward

THE FACTS

Following the request for the ruling hearing, Stipendiary Steward Mr R Neal, charged Mr CW Johnson pursuant to Rule 330(3)(b) of the Rules of Racing in that CW Johnson permitted himself to be engaged for both “Show Cat” and “Miss Millbrook” in Race 8.

Mr Johnson admitted the breach of the Rule, and accordingly, the charge is deemed to be proved.

Mr Neal addressed us on the consequences of the breach of the Rule.  He said that the  breach placed, not only the connections of the horses in question, but also the betting public in a degree of uncertainty.  Furthermore, the fact that it took until Race Day to resolve the dispute between the trainers was, from his perspective, an exacerbating feature.

Mr Neal said that the betting public follow CW Johnson as he has a good record on both horses.  Therefore, there was a considerable degree of inconvenience to the betting public as a result of the breach of the Rule. 

Mr Johnson explained to the hearing that there was clearly a mix-up in communication between himself and his partner, Ms Middlewood.  He confirmed that she is the one responsible for communicating with the trainers.  Furthermore, Mr Johnson did not think that it was a confirmed engagement, (which we note was contrary to what Ms Middlewood told us in the earlier hearing).

In response, Mr Neal said that he had spoken to both Mr Johnson and Mr Middlewood about their systems in terms of accepting rides, and advised that Mr Coulbeck was entitled to rely on the initial engagement that was made.

Mr Neal observed that Mr Johnson was fined $200 on 29 November 2009 at the Otago Racing Club’s meeting for a breach of the same Rule.  He recommended a fine in the region of $200 to $300.

Mr Johnson had no comment to make with regard to the question of penalty.

Having considered all matters, Mr Johnson was fined $250. 

KG Hales          P Welch
CHAIR               Committee Member
0774

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 330.3.b

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: