Canterbury JC 12 November 2011 – R 1
ID: JCA12278
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Canterbury Racing - 12 November 2011
Meet Chair:
JPhelan
Meet Committee Member 1:
KHales
Race Date:
2011/11/12
Race Number:
R 1
Decision:
The charge was found to be proved.
Penalty:
Mr Tinsley was fined the sum of $250-00.
Charge:
Alleged possession of modified vest.
Facts:
During today’s race meeting Licensed Jockey Mr H S Tinsley had in his possession a modified vest contrary to Rule 610(4).
The charge reads as follows.
“I, the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Respondent committed a breach of Rule 610(4) (in that) had in his possession a modified vest.
Rule 610(4) reads as follows.
“(4) A Rider may not wear or have in their possession a body protector or a skull cap that has been modified in any way.”
Mr Tinsley had indicated on the Information that this breach of the Rules was admitted, and he confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Tinsley also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr George gave evidence and produced the modified vest for inspection by the committee. It was shown that the tail piece on the vest had been removed.
Mr Tinsley explained that he had used this vest in the past, but also had a vest which was not modified. He decided to revert to using the modified vest because the compliant one was uncomfortable to use. It was also established that the problems with the presently authorised vests was being taken up with the appropriate authorities.
Reasons for Decision:
As this breach was admitted it was deemed to be proved in accordance with Rule 915(1)(d).
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr George advised that Mr Tinsley had not previously breached this Rule. In relation to penalty Mr George advised that Mr C W Johnson had been fined the sum of $350-00 recently for a similar breach of the Rules, although that was his second breach. Mr George submitted that a fine of $350-00 should be imposed in this case.
Mr Tinsley had no submissions to make with regard to penalty.
We adjourned to consider penalty.
Reasons for Penalty:
We took into account Mr Tinsley’s admission of the breach and his good record. We also looked at previous penalties imposed in previous similar breaches. Taking into account all these matters we decided that a fine of $250-00 should be imposed in this case.
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: 48b9e4982b4866b6c8d2034b0fa6611d
informantnumber: A5206
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: admitted
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 14/11/2011
hearing_title: Canterbury JC 12 November 2011 - R 1
charge:
Alleged possession of modified vest.
facts:
During today’s race meeting Licensed Jockey Mr H S Tinsley had in his possession a modified vest contrary to Rule 610(4).
The charge reads as follows.
“I, the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Respondent committed a breach of Rule 610(4) (in that) had in his possession a modified vest.
Rule 610(4) reads as follows.
“(4) A Rider may not wear or have in their possession a body protector or a skull cap that has been modified in any way.”
Mr Tinsley had indicated on the Information that this breach of the Rules was admitted, and he confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Tinsley also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr George gave evidence and produced the modified vest for inspection by the committee. It was shown that the tail piece on the vest had been removed.
Mr Tinsley explained that he had used this vest in the past, but also had a vest which was not modified. He decided to revert to using the modified vest because the compliant one was uncomfortable to use. It was also established that the problems with the presently authorised vests was being taken up with the appropriate authorities.
reasonsfordecision:
As this breach was admitted it was deemed to be proved in accordance with Rule 915(1)(d).
Decision:
The charge was found to be proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr George advised that Mr Tinsley had not previously breached this Rule. In relation to penalty Mr George advised that Mr C W Johnson had been fined the sum of $350-00 recently for a similar breach of the Rules, although that was his second breach. Mr George submitted that a fine of $350-00 should be imposed in this case.
Mr Tinsley had no submissions to make with regard to penalty.
We adjourned to consider penalty.
reasonsforpenalty:
We took into account Mr Tinsley’s admission of the breach and his good record. We also looked at previous penalties imposed in previous similar breaches. Taking into account all these matters we decided that a fine of $250-00 should be imposed in this case.
penalty:
Mr Tinsley was fined the sum of $250-00.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 610(4)
Informant: Mr C George - Chief Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr H S Tinsley - Licensed Jockey
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 2d4051c6476631608a6d43d72043b22d
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 9d582bcc2e896f25cd5bc1227d420964
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 12/11/2011
meet_title: Canterbury Racing - 12 November 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: canterbury-racing
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: JPhelan
meet_pm1: KHales
meet_pm2: none
name: Canterbury Racing