Ashburton TC 10 November 2011 – R 6
ID: JCA11460
Meet Title:
Ashburton TC - 10 November 2011
Meet Chair:
KHales
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2011/11/10
Race Number:
R6
Decision:
The charge is found proved.
Penalty:
Mr Hunter is fined $350.
Charge:
It was alleged that Mr Hunter used his whip in an excessive manner in the run home.
Facts:
Mr Wallis demonstrated the incident using the video coverage. In the run home, he alleged that Mr Hunter struck his horse with the whip, at least 22 times. The first 18 strikes were on the forehand, with the last 3 being on the backhand. There was no discernible pauses and neither did Mr Hunter use any form of alternative action, such as running his whip through the horse's tail, touching or holding the whip on the horse's tail or running the reins over the horse's rump.
In reply, Mr Hunter said that he did not use excessive force, and that he did not regard the back hand strikes as "strikes", as such. He also said that he would not have held the 4th place stake bearing position had he not used his whip in the manner that he did.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Wallis submitted that in terms of the rule and the well publicised guide lines, that 22 strikes of the whip was excessive.
Mr Hunter said that he was well aware of the rule and the guidelines but did not think, in all of the circumstances that his use of the whip was excessive.
Reasons for Decision:
The evidence was not really disputed by Mr Hunter although he did not think his use of the whip was excessive. In particular, he did not think that the backhand strikes that he used in the last 50 metres were "strikes" .He said that he did not apply any great force when using the whip, and needed to keep whipping in order to maintain 4th place.
The term "excessive use" is defined in the guidelines which have been published for some years. "Excessive" simply means "too much". It relates to the number of times the whip is used, and in some cases, also means too much force.
In this case, our focus is on the number of times the whip was used.
We are quite satisfied that 22 times fits well within the term "excessive". There were no distinct pauses and no alternative action such as that discussed above. We also find as a fact, that backhand strikes are strikes of the whip.
Furthermore it was established some years ago in the "Fighter Boy" case that it is not a defence to claim that the use of the whip in an excessive manner as a reason to endeavour to hold a stakes bearing position.
We accept without reservation that the horse was not severely punished, but that is not the issue.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Wallis advised the hearing that Mr Hunter was charged with the same offence on 9th Septemebr 2011 and was fined $150.
He submitted that a fine of $400 should be imposed.
In response Mr Hunter was still in denial, and did not think a fine should be imposed.
Reasons for Penalty:
We take as a starting point, the Penalty Guideline for a second offence a fine of $500. However, we are entitled to take into account, aggravating and mitigating features. If we commenced with the aggravating features, namely it being Mr Hunter's second offence within 2 months and the fact that no discount is generally afforded when a charge is defended, in the face of undisputed facts and the fact that Mr Hunter in the face of our findings still appears to be in denial, we would be quite justified in taking the fine upwards to, say, $700. But a fine of that size would be out of all proportion to the fines which appear on the fines database, and would therefore be inconsistent with penaties imposed for similar offending.
Thus, we adopt as a starting point, $300 and add to that $100 for the aggravating features that we have mentioned. We then take into account, the mitigating feature that the horse was not unduly punished and therefore discount the fine by $50.
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: 28e84aaba5a7a8d3a436a4e2c612ec00
informantnumber: A5460
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 04/11/2011
hearing_title: Ashburton TC 10 November 2011 - R 6
charge:
It was alleged that Mr Hunter used his whip in an excessive manner in the run home.
facts:
Mr Wallis demonstrated the incident using the video coverage. In the run home, he alleged that Mr Hunter struck his horse with the whip, at least 22 times. The first 18 strikes were on the forehand, with the last 3 being on the backhand. There was no discernible pauses and neither did Mr Hunter use any form of alternative action, such as running his whip through the horse's tail, touching or holding the whip on the horse's tail or running the reins over the horse's rump.
In reply, Mr Hunter said that he did not use excessive force, and that he did not regard the back hand strikes as "strikes", as such. He also said that he would not have held the 4th place stake bearing position had he not used his whip in the manner that he did.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Wallis submitted that in terms of the rule and the well publicised guide lines, that 22 strikes of the whip was excessive.
Mr Hunter said that he was well aware of the rule and the guidelines but did not think, in all of the circumstances that his use of the whip was excessive.
reasonsfordecision:
The evidence was not really disputed by Mr Hunter although he did not think his use of the whip was excessive. In particular, he did not think that the backhand strikes that he used in the last 50 metres were "strikes" .He said that he did not apply any great force when using the whip, and needed to keep whipping in order to maintain 4th place.
The term "excessive use" is defined in the guidelines which have been published for some years. "Excessive" simply means "too much". It relates to the number of times the whip is used, and in some cases, also means too much force.
In this case, our focus is on the number of times the whip was used.
We are quite satisfied that 22 times fits well within the term "excessive". There were no distinct pauses and no alternative action such as that discussed above. We also find as a fact, that backhand strikes are strikes of the whip.
Furthermore it was established some years ago in the "Fighter Boy" case that it is not a defence to claim that the use of the whip in an excessive manner as a reason to endeavour to hold a stakes bearing position.
We accept without reservation that the horse was not severely punished, but that is not the issue.
Decision:
The charge is found proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Wallis advised the hearing that Mr Hunter was charged with the same offence on 9th Septemebr 2011 and was fined $150.
He submitted that a fine of $400 should be imposed.
In response Mr Hunter was still in denial, and did not think a fine should be imposed.
reasonsforpenalty:
We take as a starting point, the Penalty Guideline for a second offence a fine of $500. However, we are entitled to take into account, aggravating and mitigating features. If we commenced with the aggravating features, namely it being Mr Hunter's second offence within 2 months and the fact that no discount is generally afforded when a charge is defended, in the face of undisputed facts and the fact that Mr Hunter in the face of our findings still appears to be in denial, we would be quite justified in taking the fine upwards to, say, $700. But a fine of that size would be out of all proportion to the fines which appear on the fines database, and would therefore be inconsistent with penaties imposed for similar offending.
Thus, we adopt as a starting point, $300 and add to that $100 for the aggravating features that we have mentioned. We then take into account, the mitigating feature that the horse was not unduly punished and therefore discount the fine by $50.
penalty:
Mr Hunter is fined $350.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: Rule 869(2)(a)
Informant: Mr S Renault - Stipendiary Steward, Mr NG McIntyre - Stipendiary Steward, Mr SW Wallis - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: AFH Hunter - Open Horseman
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: f52207ae997fba2254d62ac580987315
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R6
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 8a1fb438cc7f67a9cbd17116dc56700d
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 10/11/2011
meet_title: Ashburton TC - 10 November 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: ashburton-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: KHales
meet_pm1: SChing
meet_pm2: none
name: Ashburton TC