Timaru HRC – 21 December 2006 – Race 3

hearingid: cbf1c23ad424d2acfa1d0740e17cd3ed

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 21/12/2006

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Timaru HRC - 21 December 2006 - Race 3

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Following the running of Race 3, the NZ Community Trust Mobile Pace, an information was lodged by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Mr S. A. O?Brien, Licensed Trainer of "Cool Charm Talker" (8), alleging a breach of Rule 864(2)(d)

Following the running of Race 3, the NZ Community Trust Mobile Pace, an information was lodged by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Mr S. A. O?Brien, Licensed Trainer of "Cool Charm Talker" (8), alleging a breach of Rule 864(2)(d). The charge reads as follows.

The rule reads as follows.

Mr O?Brien had indicated on the information that he did not admit this breach

of the Rules and he confirmed this before the hearing began. Mr O?Brien also agreed that he understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.

Mr Escott gave evidence that after the race the driver of "Cool Charm Talker", Mr C. T. Woodward, had approached Stipendiary Steward Mrs Williams and told her that he was unable to activate the pull blinds during the race.

Mr O?Brien did not dispute these facts. He said that the reason for this malfunction was that the cord had become jammed up in the hole leading to the blinds. Mr O?Brien could not explain why this happened. Mr O?Brien disputed that he had been the cause of this malfunction. He also said that this gear was in working order when the horse went onto the track.

I was satisfied that the cord had not been affixed properly and that this was the reason for the malfunction. The provisions of Rule 864(2)(d) are quite clear that the trainer (in this case) of a horse has the responsibility to ensure that gear does not malfunction. Rule 1008 is also relevant and provides as follows.

"1008. In the absence of any express provision to the contrary in any

proceeding for a breach of these Rules:-

--

--
1. it shall not be necessary for the informant to prove that the defendant
--

or any person intended to commit that or any breach of the Rule; and

--
2. any breach of the Rule shall be considered as an offence of strict liability."

Mr O?Brien was advised that the charge had been proved, and I then heard

from Mr Escott as to penalty. Mr Escott advised that Mr O?Brien had no previous relevant convictions and recommended a fine of $100-00. Mr O?Brien had nothing relevant to say about penalty. I was satisfied that a fine of $100-00 was appropriate and Mr O?Brien was fined this amount.

________________

--
10. M. Phelan

CHAIRMAN

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 864.2.d

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 1ed7c60f0b69e6f01f72c91e4159ec89

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 3

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 310828158b46cd3b700527782d149bba

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 21/12/2006

meet_title: Timaru HRC - 21 December 2006

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: timaru-hrc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Timaru HRC