Cheviot HRC – 7 March 2010 – Race 1

hearingid: 05f54fe403d77530b396b598fb7a38aa

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 07/03/2010

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Cheviot HRC - 7 March 2010 - Race 1

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Information No. 68715

Meeting  Cheviot Harness Racing Club  

Date    7 March 2010

Venue  Addington Raceway    

Race 1   Bush Inn Tavern & TAB Trot

Rules   869(5)

Judicial  Chairman  J. M. Phelan, Committee   J. Millar 

Plea   Not Admitted.

Appearing  Informant: Stipendiary Steward Mrs K. R. Williams
                    Defendant: Mr I. D. S. Keith – Open Horseman

DECISION AND REASONS:

Following the running of Race 1, the Bush Inn Tavern & TAB Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mrs K. R. Williams against Mr I. D. S. Keith, the driver of “Armbro Lustre” (11), alleging a breach of Rule 869(5), the “half carting” rule.

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Information No. 68715

Meeting  Cheviot Harness Racing Club  

Date    7 March 2010

Venue  Addington Raceway    

Race 1   Bush Inn Tavern & TAB Trot

Rules   869(5)

Judicial  Chairman  J. M. Phelan, Committee   J. Millar 

Plea   Not Admitted.

Appearing  Informant: Stipendiary Steward Mrs K. R. Williams
                    Defendant: Mr I. D. S. Keith – Open Horseman

DECISION AND REASONS:

Following the running of Race 1, the Bush Inn Tavern & TAB Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mrs K. R. Williams against Mr I. D. S. Keith, the driver of “Armbro Lustre” (11), alleging a breach of Rule 869(5), the “half carting” rule.

The charge reads as follows.

“I the abovenamed Informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant committed a breach of Rule 869(5) in that Mr Keith failed to trail the horse in front squarely on the helmet of the driver, effectively half carting for approx. 300m.”

Rule 869(5) reads as follows.

“A horseman shall trail with his horse’s head behind the seat of the sulky being trailed.”

Mr Keith had indicated on the information that he did not admit this breach of the Rules and he confirmed this at the hearing.  Mr Keith also agreed that he understood the charge and the Rule it was brought under.

Mrs Williams used video coverage of the race to show where it was alleged that Mr Keith had failed to trail as required by the Rules.  She pointed out that the “half carting” commenced at about the 2000 metre mark and continued for quite a distance along the back straight, although Mr Keith did move his horse back on to the pylons for a short distance during this time.  On leaving the back straight Mr Keith moved his horse out to the two wide line.

Mrs Williams said that this Rule was designed to prevent horsemen from impeding trailing horses wanting to improve, as to do so they would have to go 2½ wide instead of 2 wide.

Mr Keith gave evidence that he did not believe that he had breached the Rule.  He said that his horse had an objection to grit being thrown in its face, and that was why he had trailed the wheel.  He also said that the horse behind him had received a good trail and that he had not inconvenienced any other horse in the race.

We adjourned to consider our decision.

In this case the evidence was quite clear that Mr Keith had “half carted” as set out in the Information.  It was also quite clear, especially from the video coverage, that Mr Keith could have moved his horse two wide had he chosen to.  The object of this Rule is to prevent trailing horses having to move wider on the track than is necessary when making a passing movement.  We were satisfied that the charge had been proved.

On resuming the hearing we gave the following oral decision –

“Having heard the evidence, and having seen the video coverage, we are satisfied that Mr Keith is alleged to have “half carted” for about 300 metres along the back straight for the first time.

Mrs Williams used video coverage to show that Mr Keith had moved out to trail the wheel of the horse in front of him at about the 2000 metre mark.  He continued to do so for some distance, before moving back onto the pylons for a short distance.  Mr Keith then resumed trailing the wheel of the horse in front.  On leaving the back straight Mr Keith moved two out.

Mr Keith said that his horse had an objection to grit in its face.  He also said he did not cause any inconvenience to trailing horses.  Mr Keith did not dispute that he did in fact trail the wheel of the horses in front of him.

Mr Keith’s reasons for “half carting” do not excuse him for breaching this Rule, and we find the charge proved.”

Penalty: 

Mrs Williams advised that Mr Keith had a clear record, and recommended a fine of $200-00.  Mr Keith had no relevant submission to make regarding penalty.

We were satisfied that a starting point for a fine for a breach of this Rule in ordinary circumstances would be a fine of $200-00.  In this case we took into account Mr Keith’s good record and he was fined the sum of $200-00.

J. M. Phelan             J. Millar
CHAIR                      Committee Member
68715

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 869.5

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 2b57f3a8cdca4df227ee681479cb02f2

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 1

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: a116440c867a155924351e9a42f03aeb

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 07/03/2010

meet_title: Cheviot HRC - 7 March 2010

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: cheviot-hrc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Cheviot HRC