Auckland TC – 14 March 2008 – Race 9

hearingid: 91775e8d0f75e449f8b81e5f873b624f

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 14/03/2008

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Auckland TC - 14 March 2008 - Race 9

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

An information lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr J Muirhead against Mr G Smith, driver of CHARMER DIRECT, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) - careless driving - in that he drove his horse carelessly causing it to break and cause interference to BLAZING CHAPEL,

An information lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr J Muirhead against Mr G Smith, driver of CHARMER DIRECT, alleging a breach of Rule 869 (3) (b) - careless driving - in that he drove his horse carelessly causing it to break and cause interference to BLAZING CHAPEL, driven by Mr G Wolfenden, approximately 400 metres after the start. Mr Smith denied the breach and was present at the hearing.

Mr Muirhead demonstrated the incident by use of the video film. He said Mr Smith drove the horse hard out of the barrier - contested the lead with TUAPEKA TIZ, driven by Mr McKendry, couldn't get the lead, angled in to get the trail - there was insufficient room to do so - pulled back hard on the left rein - slapped up the horse with the right rein and the horse broke, losing its chance and interfering with BLAZING CHAPEL which lost ground. Mr Muirhead said CHARMER DIRECT was not tractable but Mr Smith knew that. Two starts ago the horse was warned after it galloped - Mr Smith was the driver on that occasion. Mr Muirhead said Mr Smith had made too many manoeuvres in too short a time. He needed to take great care to keep the horse balanced.

Stipendiary Steward Mr T Taumanu gave evidence of his observations from the patrol box at the entrance to the home straight. He said there was insufficient room for Mr Smith to get the trail. He heard Ms Chilcott, driver of FOREVER LOYAL, yell out to Mr Smith. Mr Smith turned his horse's head out and slapped it on the backside - the horse broke. He said it was a poor drive - a bad drive.

Mr Smith said two weeks ago, on the same bend, the horse hung when in the trail. He took hold of it and it broke. The horse was warned. Tonight he tried to lead as instructed by the trainer - couldn't get the lead - tried to get the trail - heard Ms Chilcott yell out - eased the horse out - slapped it on the bum with the right rein to try and get the horse back on the bit so as to have better control. He didn't just take hold of the horse because that was what he had done two starts ago and the horse broke. He said the horse was hanging in. He said after the race it was found one of the horse's knee boots had slipped down. He did not think that happened after the horse broke. It could have caused the horse to break.

Mr Muirhead and Mr Smith summed up along the lines of the evidence they had given. Mr Smith added that he did not grab hold of the horse quickly - he had eased back and then later steered the horse out. Mr Smith said he had only driven CHARMER DIRECT twice previously.

DECISION AND REASONS :

There is a direct conflict of evidence between the informant and the defendant as to what caused CHARMER DIRECT to break. From the evidence given and my observations of the video film, I find the following matters established :

--
1. Mr Smith had driven the horse twice previously, one occasion being incident free, the other when he restrained the horse and it broke and was warned. The incident occurred on the same bend.
--
2. Mr Smith was entitled to contest the lead.
--
3. Mr Smith quite properly restrained his horse when he could not get the lead.
--
4. Mr Smith restrained the horse in an acceptable manner.
--
5. Mr Smith made a split second decision to try for the trail. It was a reasonable decision but the gap closed up due to TUAPEKA TIZ easing and FOREVER LOYAL improving.
--
6. Mr Smith moved his horse inwards in an acceptable manner.
--
7. Mr Smith took immediate corrective action when Ms Chilcott called out.
--
8. Mr Smith's corrective action was carried out in an acceptable manner. FOREVER LOYAL was not inconvenienced.
--
9. CHARMER DIRECT did not break or look like breaking when restrained, when moved inwards and when moved outwards.
--
10. Mr Smith's explanation for one moderate slap with the right rein is reasonable given his previous experience with the horse when it broke and was warned.
--
11. An experienced horse should not break when given one moderate slap with a rein.
--
12. The slipping of the knee boot cannot be eliminated as a cause of the horse breaking.

Having found those matters established I am left in a state of doubt. I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Smith's driving caused his horse to break. I consider it is more likely that the racing manners of the horse caused it to break. The slipping of the knee boot could have caused or contributed to the breaking. The charge is dismissed.

B ROWE

Chairman

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869.3.b

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 1f474a266a7846fb3f06177f3edf7b3d

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 9

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: bd574ba175c4176705091e29b417e386

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 14/03/2008

meet_title: Auckland TC - 14 March 2008

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: auckland-tc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Auckland TC