Marlborough HRC – 17 June 2007 – Race 4
ID: JCA22697
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
Marlborough HRC - 17 June 2007
Race Date:
2007/06/17
Race Number:
Race 4
Decision:
Following the running of race four on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr BN Orange, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively on Franco Coolie in the run home.
Following the running of race four on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr BN Orange, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively on Franco Coolie in the run home. Mr Orange denied the breach.
----Presenting her case, Stipendiary Steward, Mrs Williams, reaffirmed the allegation that Mr Orange used his whip excessively, in that he used it approximately 22 times in the run home, with several more times through the horse's tail.
----Mrs Williams referred to the guidelines for drivers which have been regularly circulated to drivers and she highlighted sections of these guidelines, specifically that ?excessive? means ?too much?, that it doesn?t distinguish between striking the horse, the harness or sulky, and includes running the whip over the horse's rump or through it's tail.
----In this case, Mrs Williams said that Mr Orange used his whip at least 22 times and she referred to the video to support her view. She did not suggest Mr Orange was using the whip with force, but referred to the number of times and manner it was being used.
----In his submissions, Mr Orange said he is familiar with the guidelines for drivers, and he had seen the film of the race. He disputed the number of times it was alleged he used the whip - he said 17 instead of the alleged 22 - and said that many of these were feigned and nothing was touched.
----Mr Orange said they were fake hits, they were broken up during the run home and at least half a dozen of those were flicking the horse's tail or, as conceded by the stipendiary steward, were light touches when the horse was touched. He denied this use was excessive.
----Decision:
----In this case, Mr Orange is charged under Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used his whip excessively on Franco Coolie in the run home, the concluding stages of race four.
----Evidence was given by the stipendiary steward that referred to Mr Orange's action and the number of times the whip was used in the run home, which included the running of the whip through the horse's tail, and it was the stewards' interpretation that this was excessive.
----Mr Orange denied that, refuted the claims of the stipendiary stewards and said that there were a number of feigned or fake strikes. The incident was highlighted on the video of the race.
----I will make some comment here that the committee is as concerned as the stipendiary stewards about the use of the whip, and the image in racing and, in saying that, there are guidelines and a strict definition that have been referred to.
----In Mr Orange's case, the alleged striking, or use of the whip, occurred in mostly the full length of the straight. I am satisfied they were not full-blooded strikes - and they don?t need to be, of course - and, on checking the video, I am satisfied with his account that there were some breaks between what were strikes and feints.
----The definition of ?excessive use?, as you are aware, simply means ?too much? and, taking the feints into consideration, counting the number of alleged strikes over the long distance involved, and the breaks, I am not satisfied that the evidence sufficiently shows that, under the guidelines, either the horse, sulky or harness were struck.
----Clearly the horse was struck on some occasions, and the others at some time, but I am not convinced the actions, with the feints, could be seen as excessive and they perhaps broke up what may have supported a charge of excessive use. Because of that doubt, Mr Orange is going to receive the benefit of that doubt, and the charge is dismissed.
------
P H Welch
--Chairman
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: eb289d2a41d5b76eb15356507a9568a5
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 17/06/2007
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Marlborough HRC - 17 June 2007 - Race 4
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of race four on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr BN Orange, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively on Franco Coolie in the run home.
Following the running of race four on the programme, an Information was lodged against driver Mr BN Orange, alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a), in that he used his whip excessively on Franco Coolie in the run home. Mr Orange denied the breach.
----Presenting her case, Stipendiary Steward, Mrs Williams, reaffirmed the allegation that Mr Orange used his whip excessively, in that he used it approximately 22 times in the run home, with several more times through the horse's tail.
----Mrs Williams referred to the guidelines for drivers which have been regularly circulated to drivers and she highlighted sections of these guidelines, specifically that ?excessive? means ?too much?, that it doesn?t distinguish between striking the horse, the harness or sulky, and includes running the whip over the horse's rump or through it's tail.
----In this case, Mrs Williams said that Mr Orange used his whip at least 22 times and she referred to the video to support her view. She did not suggest Mr Orange was using the whip with force, but referred to the number of times and manner it was being used.
----In his submissions, Mr Orange said he is familiar with the guidelines for drivers, and he had seen the film of the race. He disputed the number of times it was alleged he used the whip - he said 17 instead of the alleged 22 - and said that many of these were feigned and nothing was touched.
----Mr Orange said they were fake hits, they were broken up during the run home and at least half a dozen of those were flicking the horse's tail or, as conceded by the stipendiary steward, were light touches when the horse was touched. He denied this use was excessive.
----Decision:
----In this case, Mr Orange is charged under Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used his whip excessively on Franco Coolie in the run home, the concluding stages of race four.
----Evidence was given by the stipendiary steward that referred to Mr Orange's action and the number of times the whip was used in the run home, which included the running of the whip through the horse's tail, and it was the stewards' interpretation that this was excessive.
----Mr Orange denied that, refuted the claims of the stipendiary stewards and said that there were a number of feigned or fake strikes. The incident was highlighted on the video of the race.
----I will make some comment here that the committee is as concerned as the stipendiary stewards about the use of the whip, and the image in racing and, in saying that, there are guidelines and a strict definition that have been referred to.
----In Mr Orange's case, the alleged striking, or use of the whip, occurred in mostly the full length of the straight. I am satisfied they were not full-blooded strikes - and they don?t need to be, of course - and, on checking the video, I am satisfied with his account that there were some breaks between what were strikes and feints.
----The definition of ?excessive use?, as you are aware, simply means ?too much? and, taking the feints into consideration, counting the number of alleged strikes over the long distance involved, and the breaks, I am not satisfied that the evidence sufficiently shows that, under the guidelines, either the horse, sulky or harness were struck.
----Clearly the horse was struck on some occasions, and the others at some time, but I am not convinced the actions, with the feints, could be seen as excessive and they perhaps broke up what may have supported a charge of excessive use. Because of that doubt, Mr Orange is going to receive the benefit of that doubt, and the charge is dismissed.
------
P H Welch
--Chairman
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 869.2.a
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 483adfee8e07df6a51a25bce0597b20e
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: a0c013fe0bbf42301d4614c97e5aee53
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 17/06/2007
meet_title: Marlborough HRC - 17 June 2007
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: marlborough-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Marlborough HRC