Archive Decision

This decision has been migrated from the JCA website. Information is accurate but formatting may differ from contemporary decisions. Please contact us for any further enquiries.

Wellington RC 25 April 2015 – R 8 (heard on 1 May 2015 at Otaki)

ID: JCA22164

Hearing Type:
Old Hearing

Rules:
638(3)(b)

Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing

Decision:

WELLINGTON RACING CLUB 25 APRIL 2015 RACE 8 (HEARD AT OTAKI 1 MAY 2015)

Informant: Mr N Goodwin - Stipendiary Steward

Respondent: Mr N Teeluck - Licenced Apprentice Jockey

Information No: A6808

Meeting: Wellington Racing Club

Date: 25 April 2015 (heard at Otaki on 1 May 2015)

Rule(s): 638(3)(b)

Race: 8

Judicial Committee: N McCutcheon, Chair - P Williams, Committee Member

Also Present: Mrs K Zimmerman, Licenced Trainer and Employer of Mr N Teeluck

Plea: Admitted

Charge: Excessive use of the whip

Evidence

Following the running of Race 8 (Tui – Backing A Winner Since 1889 Handicap) Information No. A6808 was filed with the Judicial Committee. It alleged that Mr Teeluck used his whip in an excessive manner prior to the 200m mark.

Rule 638(3)(b) reads:

A rider shall not strike a horse with a whip in a manner or to an extent which is unnecessary, excessive or improper.

All films were shown and Mr Goodwin identified Mr Teeluck and his mount ADRIENNE as they entered the final straight. He then said that Mr Teeluck hit his horse 12 times with the whip prior to the 200m which was well outside of the guidelines (6 on-6 off).

Mr Teeluck said that he had been suspended earlier in the day and that he was trying a bit too hard. He said that he did not realise that he was hitting (his horse) so much. He said that he has to get out of the habit.

Mrs Zimmerman, in assisting Mr Teeluck, said that Mr Teeluck is trying too hard to ride winners and has got into a bad habit.

Decision

As the charge was admitted the committee found it to be proved.

Submissions for Penalty

Mr Goodwin advised the committee of Mr Teeluck’s record regarding whip related breaches, which showed that Mr Teeluck had been penalised on 3 other occasions since 3 January 2015, with the most recent being on 18 April 2015 when he was fined $500. He submitted that a suspension be imposed.

Mr Teeluck said that he would prefer a fine as he was already under suspension (careless riding) and that if he was further suspended he would be out for about one month. In answer to a question from the committee Mr Teeluck said that he had had advice from senior riders re the use of the whip.

Mrs Zimmerman said that a fine would be preferable and that whether he was suspended or fined, it would cost him either way and if suspended it would mean that he would lose another one and a half weeks going into the winter.

Reasons for Penalty

The committee carefully considered all matters relating to penalty including the admittance of the breach, Mr Teeluck’s record which shows that this was the 4th time that he had been charged with a whip related incident since 3 January 2015. In all of the 3 previous charges he was penalised by way of a fine. In the most recent breach he was fined $500 and advised by the Chair that future breaches of the rule could result in a significant penalty.

An aggravating factor, together with Mr Teeluck’s poor record was that the 12 strikes with the whip were well outside the accepted guidelines of 6 on- 6 off.

The penalty imposed must be of sufficient magnitude to not only adequately penalise the respondent for his continued excessive use of the whip, but also to deter other riders. People involved within the industry need to be aware that the use of the whip is of genuine concern to many people including those organisations operating within the Animal Welfare Act.

The committee believed that the appropriate penalty on this occasion was a term of suspension.

Penalty

The committee noted that Mr Teeluck was currently serving a term of suspension up to and including 16 May 2015. Mr Teeluck’s Apprentice Jockey’s Licence was further suspended from 17 May 2015 up to the close of racing on 28 May 2015. That being 4 Central Districts race days.

The days being:

21 May Woodville
23 May Wellington
24 May Hawera
28 May Manawatu

Northern and Southern days were not included as it was established at an earlier hearing that Mr Teeluck is a Central Districts rider only.

Decision Date: 25/04/2015

Publish Date: 25/04/2015

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: d0515da09a29a00589d930df4f283c40


informantnumber:


horsename:


hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing


startdate: 25/04/2015


newcharge:


plea:


penaltyrequired:


decisiondate: no date provided


hearing_title: Wellington RC 25 April 2015 - R 8 (heard on 1 May 2015 at Otaki)


charge:


facts:


appealdecision:


isappeal:


submissionsfordecision:


reasonsfordecision:


Decision:

WELLINGTON RACING CLUB 25 APRIL 2015 RACE 8 (HEARD AT OTAKI 1 MAY 2015)

Informant: Mr N Goodwin - Stipendiary Steward

Respondent: Mr N Teeluck - Licenced Apprentice Jockey

Information No: A6808

Meeting: Wellington Racing Club

Date: 25 April 2015 (heard at Otaki on 1 May 2015)

Rule(s): 638(3)(b)

Race: 8

Judicial Committee: N McCutcheon, Chair - P Williams, Committee Member

Also Present: Mrs K Zimmerman, Licenced Trainer and Employer of Mr N Teeluck

Plea: Admitted

Charge: Excessive use of the whip

Evidence

Following the running of Race 8 (Tui – Backing A Winner Since 1889 Handicap) Information No. A6808 was filed with the Judicial Committee. It alleged that Mr Teeluck used his whip in an excessive manner prior to the 200m mark.

Rule 638(3)(b) reads:

A rider shall not strike a horse with a whip in a manner or to an extent which is unnecessary, excessive or improper.

All films were shown and Mr Goodwin identified Mr Teeluck and his mount ADRIENNE as they entered the final straight. He then said that Mr Teeluck hit his horse 12 times with the whip prior to the 200m which was well outside of the guidelines (6 on-6 off).

Mr Teeluck said that he had been suspended earlier in the day and that he was trying a bit too hard. He said that he did not realise that he was hitting (his horse) so much. He said that he has to get out of the habit.

Mrs Zimmerman, in assisting Mr Teeluck, said that Mr Teeluck is trying too hard to ride winners and has got into a bad habit.

Decision

As the charge was admitted the committee found it to be proved.

Submissions for Penalty

Mr Goodwin advised the committee of Mr Teeluck’s record regarding whip related breaches, which showed that Mr Teeluck had been penalised on 3 other occasions since 3 January 2015, with the most recent being on 18 April 2015 when he was fined $500. He submitted that a suspension be imposed.

Mr Teeluck said that he would prefer a fine as he was already under suspension (careless riding) and that if he was further suspended he would be out for about one month. In answer to a question from the committee Mr Teeluck said that he had had advice from senior riders re the use of the whip.

Mrs Zimmerman said that a fine would be preferable and that whether he was suspended or fined, it would cost him either way and if suspended it would mean that he would lose another one and a half weeks going into the winter.

Reasons for Penalty

The committee carefully considered all matters relating to penalty including the admittance of the breach, Mr Teeluck’s record which shows that this was the 4th time that he had been charged with a whip related incident since 3 January 2015. In all of the 3 previous charges he was penalised by way of a fine. In the most recent breach he was fined $500 and advised by the Chair that future breaches of the rule could result in a significant penalty.

An aggravating factor, together with Mr Teeluck’s poor record was that the 12 strikes with the whip were well outside the accepted guidelines of 6 on- 6 off.

The penalty imposed must be of sufficient magnitude to not only adequately penalise the respondent for his continued excessive use of the whip, but also to deter other riders. People involved within the industry need to be aware that the use of the whip is of genuine concern to many people including those organisations operating within the Animal Welfare Act.

The committee believed that the appropriate penalty on this occasion was a term of suspension.

Penalty

The committee noted that Mr Teeluck was currently serving a term of suspension up to and including 16 May 2015. Mr Teeluck’s Apprentice Jockey’s Licence was further suspended from 17 May 2015 up to the close of racing on 28 May 2015. That being 4 Central Districts race days.

The days being:

21 May Woodville
23 May Wellington
24 May Hawera
28 May Manawatu

Northern and Southern days were not included as it was established at an earlier hearing that Mr Teeluck is a Central Districts rider only.


sumissionsforpenalty:


reasonsforpenalty:


penalty:


hearing_type: Old Hearing


Rules: 638(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: