Ashburton RC – 30 September 2006 – Race 5
ID: JCA19144
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Ashburton RC - 30 September 2006
Race Date:
2006/09/30
Race Number:
Race 5
Decision:
Following the running of race 5 the Stipendiary Stewards lodged an information instigating a charge against Mr C W Johnson. Mr Ching alleged that Mr Johnson (?Smitten Kitten") allowed his mount to shift inwards when not clear causing tightening to ?Volronamo? (J Bullard) and ?Myself? (A M Mundy)
--
DECISION & REASON
--Following the running of race 5 the Stipendiary Stewards lodged an information instigating a charge against Mr C W Johnson. Mr Ching alleged that Mr Johnson (?Smitten Kitten") allowed his mount to shift inwards when not clear causing tightening to ?Volronamo? (J Bullard) and ?Myself? (A M Mundy) and as a result the latter had to check and lost her position.
----At the outset of the hearing Mr Johnson confirmed that the breach was denied.
----Mr McLaughlan, on behalf of the Stipendiary Stewards, outlined the incident with the assistance of the front on video evidence. He asked the Committee to note Mr Johnson starting from the outside barrier draw, moving across, slotting in in behind and then he allowed his horse to put pressure on the horses on his inside ?Volronamo? and ?Myself? causing Ms Mundy to take hold of her horse and lose ground. He also played the back view and again demonstrated the incident referred to previously.
----Ms Mundy said that she was clearly holding her own ground inside Mr Bullard, noticed that there was some pressure coming from the outside, thought it was from Mr Bullard, gave a yell and stood up taking hold of her horse. She was then asked to give her view of the incident after seeing the video evidence. She stated that after viewing the video evidence it was clear that it was not Mr Bullard who had caused her to take hold of her horse but the pressure Mr Johnson's horse put on Mr Bullard's horse and in turn on to her horse.
----Mr Johnson said that ?Smitten Kitten? had knuckled over at the start, he had then crossed over and took up a trailing position. He attempted to take hold of his horse but she started to race keenly and over react. He said he was trying to restrain his horse and she laid in on the inside horse and when this occurred he pulled back and took his horse out of the position.
----Mr Ching said that his view of the incident was that Mr Johnson had not been aware of the three horses on his inside when he slotted into the trail position three out and it was not until he heard the yell from the inside that he realised that there were three horses there. In response to a question from Mr Ching Mr Johnson confirmed this. Mr Ching said it was his view that Mr Johnson allowed his mount to lay in on Mr Bullard's mount and he should have taken remedial action earlier.
----The Committee finds that Mr Johnson's actions were responsible for the checks caused to both Mr Bullard and Ms Mundys' horses. He should have reacted earlier. This is supported by the video evidence, the statements made by the Stipendiary Stewards and Mr Bullard's evidence. The Committee accordingly finds the charge proven.
----In respect of penalty Mr Ching submitted that the appropriate penalty on this occasion was a suspension and that in his view the carelessness was in the middle range. He also advised that there have been four findings of careless riding against Mr Johnson from 1st January 2006, and gave details. Mr Johnson confirmed that the information supplied was correct.
----The Committee is of the view, notwithstanding the statement made by the Stipendiary Stewards, that the interference on this occasion was at the lower end of the scale. In arriving at that degree of carelessness the Committee have noted the racing manners of the horse prior to the incident and the time in which Mr Johnson had available to him to take action to pull his horse off the inside horse. He did take action but in the Committee's view it was late. The Committee is further of the view that, but for his previous suspensions and fines over the period of time mentioned above, a fine would have been appropriate on this occasion. Given his previous record a fine is not appropriate and after allowing credit for the number of rides in relation to the suspension and fines he has incurred a suspension from the completion of racing today, 30th September 2006, until the completion of racing on 7th October 2006 (an effective 3 days) is imposed. In arriving at the effective 3 days the Committee took into account advice from Mr Johnson that he would have been riding at Woodville on 5th, Invercargill on 6th and Hasting on 7th of October 2006.
----After the penalty was announced the Committee was reconvened at the request of Mr Johnson and with him Mr Kennedy, the trainer of ?Hurrah? engaged in the Kelt Capital Stakes at Hastings on Saturday 7th October 2006. Mr Kennedy advised the Committee that Mr Johnson had been engaged to ride the horse some time ago and that not having him available would have an adverse effect on himself as trainer and the owners of the horse. The Stipendiary Stewards accepted the submissions made by Mr Kennedy.
----The Committee is of the view that the previous penalty imposed is appropriate but is prepared to review the penalty, the reasons for doing so are first the impact the suspension would have on the connections of ?Hurrah? in respect of the Kelt Capital Stakes, the only million dollar race in New Zealand, and secondly, the effect it would have on the betting public who had invested on ?Hurrah? on the TAB Futures book in the belief that Mr Johnson would be riding the horse. Accordingly, the previous penalty is set aside and the penalty now imposed is a suspension from the completion of racing today, 30th September 2006, until the completion of racing on 6th October 2006, (an effective 2 days) together with a monetary penalty of $1,000.00.
------------
--B Coombes 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: 292b2530d70b59150bc06016c21cf5db
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 30/09/2006
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Ashburton RC - 30 September 2006 - Race 5
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of race 5 the Stipendiary Stewards lodged an information instigating a charge against Mr C W Johnson. Mr Ching alleged that Mr Johnson (?Smitten Kitten") allowed his mount to shift inwards when not clear causing tightening to ?Volronamo? (J Bullard) and ?Myself? (A M Mundy)
--
DECISION & REASON
--Following the running of race 5 the Stipendiary Stewards lodged an information instigating a charge against Mr C W Johnson. Mr Ching alleged that Mr Johnson (?Smitten Kitten") allowed his mount to shift inwards when not clear causing tightening to ?Volronamo? (J Bullard) and ?Myself? (A M Mundy) and as a result the latter had to check and lost her position.
----At the outset of the hearing Mr Johnson confirmed that the breach was denied.
----Mr McLaughlan, on behalf of the Stipendiary Stewards, outlined the incident with the assistance of the front on video evidence. He asked the Committee to note Mr Johnson starting from the outside barrier draw, moving across, slotting in in behind and then he allowed his horse to put pressure on the horses on his inside ?Volronamo? and ?Myself? causing Ms Mundy to take hold of her horse and lose ground. He also played the back view and again demonstrated the incident referred to previously.
----Ms Mundy said that she was clearly holding her own ground inside Mr Bullard, noticed that there was some pressure coming from the outside, thought it was from Mr Bullard, gave a yell and stood up taking hold of her horse. She was then asked to give her view of the incident after seeing the video evidence. She stated that after viewing the video evidence it was clear that it was not Mr Bullard who had caused her to take hold of her horse but the pressure Mr Johnson's horse put on Mr Bullard's horse and in turn on to her horse.
----Mr Johnson said that ?Smitten Kitten? had knuckled over at the start, he had then crossed over and took up a trailing position. He attempted to take hold of his horse but she started to race keenly and over react. He said he was trying to restrain his horse and she laid in on the inside horse and when this occurred he pulled back and took his horse out of the position.
----Mr Ching said that his view of the incident was that Mr Johnson had not been aware of the three horses on his inside when he slotted into the trail position three out and it was not until he heard the yell from the inside that he realised that there were three horses there. In response to a question from Mr Ching Mr Johnson confirmed this. Mr Ching said it was his view that Mr Johnson allowed his mount to lay in on Mr Bullard's mount and he should have taken remedial action earlier.
----The Committee finds that Mr Johnson's actions were responsible for the checks caused to both Mr Bullard and Ms Mundys' horses. He should have reacted earlier. This is supported by the video evidence, the statements made by the Stipendiary Stewards and Mr Bullard's evidence. The Committee accordingly finds the charge proven.
----In respect of penalty Mr Ching submitted that the appropriate penalty on this occasion was a suspension and that in his view the carelessness was in the middle range. He also advised that there have been four findings of careless riding against Mr Johnson from 1st January 2006, and gave details. Mr Johnson confirmed that the information supplied was correct.
----The Committee is of the view, notwithstanding the statement made by the Stipendiary Stewards, that the interference on this occasion was at the lower end of the scale. In arriving at that degree of carelessness the Committee have noted the racing manners of the horse prior to the incident and the time in which Mr Johnson had available to him to take action to pull his horse off the inside horse. He did take action but in the Committee's view it was late. The Committee is further of the view that, but for his previous suspensions and fines over the period of time mentioned above, a fine would have been appropriate on this occasion. Given his previous record a fine is not appropriate and after allowing credit for the number of rides in relation to the suspension and fines he has incurred a suspension from the completion of racing today, 30th September 2006, until the completion of racing on 7th October 2006 (an effective 3 days) is imposed. In arriving at the effective 3 days the Committee took into account advice from Mr Johnson that he would have been riding at Woodville on 5th, Invercargill on 6th and Hasting on 7th of October 2006.
----After the penalty was announced the Committee was reconvened at the request of Mr Johnson and with him Mr Kennedy, the trainer of ?Hurrah? engaged in the Kelt Capital Stakes at Hastings on Saturday 7th October 2006. Mr Kennedy advised the Committee that Mr Johnson had been engaged to ride the horse some time ago and that not having him available would have an adverse effect on himself as trainer and the owners of the horse. The Stipendiary Stewards accepted the submissions made by Mr Kennedy.
----The Committee is of the view that the previous penalty imposed is appropriate but is prepared to review the penalty, the reasons for doing so are first the impact the suspension would have on the connections of ?Hurrah? in respect of the Kelt Capital Stakes, the only million dollar race in New Zealand, and secondly, the effect it would have on the betting public who had invested on ?Hurrah? on the TAB Futures book in the belief that Mr Johnson would be riding the horse. Accordingly, the previous penalty is set aside and the penalty now imposed is a suspension from the completion of racing today, 30th September 2006, until the completion of racing on 6th October 2006, (an effective 2 days) together with a monetary penalty of $1,000.00.
------------
--B Coombes CHAIRMAN
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules:
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: a52ac313a3be5ce1881278d64f37ab41
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 5
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 1c7b17c49852090f0e5f32acc2cd771b
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 30/09/2006
meet_title: Ashburton RC - 30 September 2006
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: ashburton-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Ashburton RC