Auckland RC – 6 March 2010 – Race 10
ID: JCA20392
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 6 March 2010
Race Date:
2010/03/06
Race Number:
Race 10
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--INFORMATION NUMBER 7627
--AUCKLAND RACING CLUB
--6 MARCH 2010
--Following Race 10 an Information was filed pursuant to rule 638 (1) (D). The Informant, Mr George alleged that passing the 300 metres Mr L Innes allowed his mount I’M A KING, to shift in when not clear of CHARLOTTE’S SISTER (S Spratt) who was checked. This caused further crowding to ENSOLEILLE (J McDonald).
--
RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--INFORMATION NUMBER 7627
--AUCKLAND RACING CLUB
--6 MARCH 2010
--Following Race 10 an Information was filed pursuant to rule 638 (1) (D). The Informant, Mr George alleged that passing the 300 metres Mr L Innes allowed his mount I’M A KING, to shift in when not clear of CHARLOTTE’S SISTER (S Spratt) who was checked. This caused further crowding to ENSOLEILLE (J McDonald).
--Mr Innes did not admit the breach
--Mr Coles demonstrated the video films and showed the Committee that, at a point passing the 300 metres, Mr Innes riding I’M A KING move in dictating the line of CHARLOTTE’S SISTER ( S Spratt) when barely a length clear of that runner. Mr Coles stated that Mr Innes moved in approximately 1 ½ horse widths. He conceded that there was slight outward from Mr J Collett but the main contributor to the interference was Mr Innes.
--Mr George said, in confirming what Mr Coles had demonstrated to the Committee, that Mr Innes was the major player in the incident which resulted in Miss Spratt clipping a heel. However he too conceded there was some movement outwards from Mr J Collett.
--Mr Innes called Mr J Mc Donald as a witness who said he got shunted from the inside as a result of a bumping duel to Miss Spratt.
--Mr Innes said he was not denying he moved in but was adamant that Mr Collett had moved out as much as he had moved in. This, he said, resulted in squeezing to Miss Spratt on his inside. He also said the reason his horse had moved in was because his mount had baulked at a line across the track caused by the starting gates.
--Mr George had nothing further to add when he was asked to sum up.
--DECISION
--The Committee carefully considered all evidence and viewed the video film several times. While it is clearly evident that there was tightening to Miss Spratt, the Committee is firmly of the opinion this was caused by the inward and outward movement of 2 horses. This was the inward movement from Mr Innes and the outward movement from Mr Collett. Added to this was the question of Mr Innes’ mount baulking at the line on the track. This line was clearly visible to the Committee and while it was not clear on the film as to whether Mr Innes’ mount had baulked or not, it does raise another doubt as to Mr Innes’ culpability.
--For those reasons the charge is dismissed.
--
Richard Seabrook
CHAIR
7627
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: 7c7b78c3b4c017527d3d7f513de08ac2
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 06/03/2010
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Auckland RC - 6 March 2010 - Race 10
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--INFORMATION NUMBER 7627
--AUCKLAND RACING CLUB
--6 MARCH 2010
--Following Race 10 an Information was filed pursuant to rule 638 (1) (D). The Informant, Mr George alleged that passing the 300 metres Mr L Innes allowed his mount I’M A KING, to shift in when not clear of CHARLOTTE’S SISTER (S Spratt) who was checked. This caused further crowding to ENSOLEILLE (J McDonald).
--
RACEDAY JUDICIAL REPORT
--INFORMATION NUMBER 7627
--AUCKLAND RACING CLUB
--6 MARCH 2010
--Following Race 10 an Information was filed pursuant to rule 638 (1) (D). The Informant, Mr George alleged that passing the 300 metres Mr L Innes allowed his mount I’M A KING, to shift in when not clear of CHARLOTTE’S SISTER (S Spratt) who was checked. This caused further crowding to ENSOLEILLE (J McDonald).
--Mr Innes did not admit the breach
--Mr Coles demonstrated the video films and showed the Committee that, at a point passing the 300 metres, Mr Innes riding I’M A KING move in dictating the line of CHARLOTTE’S SISTER ( S Spratt) when barely a length clear of that runner. Mr Coles stated that Mr Innes moved in approximately 1 ½ horse widths. He conceded that there was slight outward from Mr J Collett but the main contributor to the interference was Mr Innes.
--Mr George said, in confirming what Mr Coles had demonstrated to the Committee, that Mr Innes was the major player in the incident which resulted in Miss Spratt clipping a heel. However he too conceded there was some movement outwards from Mr J Collett.
--Mr Innes called Mr J Mc Donald as a witness who said he got shunted from the inside as a result of a bumping duel to Miss Spratt.
--Mr Innes said he was not denying he moved in but was adamant that Mr Collett had moved out as much as he had moved in. This, he said, resulted in squeezing to Miss Spratt on his inside. He also said the reason his horse had moved in was because his mount had baulked at a line across the track caused by the starting gates.
--Mr George had nothing further to add when he was asked to sum up.
--DECISION
--The Committee carefully considered all evidence and viewed the video film several times. While it is clearly evident that there was tightening to Miss Spratt, the Committee is firmly of the opinion this was caused by the inward and outward movement of 2 horses. This was the inward movement from Mr Innes and the outward movement from Mr Collett. Added to this was the question of Mr Innes’ mount baulking at the line on the track. This line was clearly visible to the Committee and while it was not clear on the film as to whether Mr Innes’ mount had baulked or not, it does raise another doubt as to Mr Innes’ culpability.
--For those reasons the charge is dismissed.
--
Richard Seabrook
CHAIR
7627
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 638.1.d
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e4477f13934a537a657b40a2598a30b1
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 10
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 0f63dc1e8cf0d896e061a46a5201eafc
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 06/03/2010
meet_title: Auckland RC - 6 March 2010
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: Auckland RC