Forbury Park TC 7 July 2016 – R 4 – Chair, Prof G Hall
ID: JCA16858
Meet Title:
Forbury Park TC - 7 July 2016
Meet Chair:
GHall
Meet Committee Member 1:
PKnowles
Race Date:
2016/07/07
Race Number:
R 4
Decision:
The charge of careless driving is dismissed.
Facts:
Mr Tidmarsh, Stipendiary Steward, alleged that Mr N Williamson (TAKENOPRISONERS) on the bend near the 900 metres in race 4, the SPEIGHT’S TROT, shifted inwards when not sufficiently clear of SOUTH COASTER (S Golding) contacting the off front leg causing SOUTH COASTER to gallop.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Tidmarsh first called Mr Golding to give evidence. Mr Golding stated that he was racing two wide in the parked out position when Mr N Williamson came around looking for it. He said when Mr Williamson crossed there was contact between a wheel of Mr Williamson’s cart and a leg of SOUTH COASTER.
When questioned by Mr Tidmarsh as to whether there was pressure from his inside, Mr Golding said he was not aware of it at the time, but after viewing the video he would say yes. When asked how far in front the respondent was, he said Mr Williamson was reasonably close to crossing but was not clear. He added his horse was travelling well enough at the time. He said after watching the video he was aware his horse had made a slight movement outwards at the time of contact. He said the respondent would have crossed okay if it were not for the bend.
Mr Golding said he could see TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in and was running inwards. He said the horse’s head was around. He emphasised his horse was running out and the respondent’s horse was running in at the point of the bend. This was why there had been contact.
Mr Golding said he had received slight pressure from the inside from Mr B Williamson. He was aware at the time there was some pressure but when looking at the video it was more than he had thought. Mr Golding believed if Mr B Williamson had waited a split second later he could have been pushed 3 wide as he had not been keeping up with the horse in front of him.
Mr Golding concluded his evidence by stating the reason contact was made was because there was pressure from his inside at the time there was pressure from his outside. He now believed it was pressure from Mr B Williamson that was the principal cause of the interference.
Mr Tidmarsh showed the videos and demonstrated that Mr Golding was established in his position inside the respondent. He said he refuted the evidence of Mr Golding. The respondent’s horse was racing tractably and he had made a misjudgement when crossing over. He said Mr B Williamson had not shifted out and he had had no bearing on the reason there had been contact between TAKENOPRISONERS and SOUTH COASTER.
Mr N Williamson stated that TAKENOPRISONERS had a tendency to lug in and did attempt to do so slightly on the point of the bend. He said the video evidence at the point of contact demonstrated that the horse was three wide. He said he had to straighten his horse to keep him out as he was lugging in and he wore gear to stop him doing this. It took his best efforts to keep him three wide.
The thrust of the respondent’s defence was that most of the pressure on Mr Golding was from Mr Golding’s inside. He said he was aware Mr Golding was there and that he was not clear of SOUTH COASTER and that TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in, so he was racing sufficiently wide to give him enough room. He said Mr B Williamson was lugging out substantially and reiterated the pressure was from the inside out. Mr Golding had said TAKENOPRISONERS was racing keenly and was racing with its head around slightly.
Mr Williamson pointed out that the head of BELMONT INVASION was facing inwards and so the horse had a tendency to run out. SOUTH COASTER was suffering pressure from its inside and had reacted to TAKENOPRISONERS crossing. He accepted SOUTH COASTER had hit his inside wheel and was out of play for the rest of the race as a consequence.
Mr Williamson emphasised TAKENOPRISONERS was attempting to lug in when insufficiently clear. SOUTH COASTER was racing keenly and was lugging out. BELMONT INVASION was also lugging out and was trotting a bit rough. He said the video angle at the time of contact was not the best and did not demonstrate the extent to which TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in, He said the camera angle two strides after contact showed how wide he was at the point of contact, which was three cart widths.
Mr N Williamson called Mr B Williamson to give evidence. Mr B Williamson said his horse BELMONT INVASION was trotting nicely although it did run in a touch under pressure. He said the horse had done this at exactly the time of contact between TAKENOPRISONERS and SOUTH COASTER. He said he had thus put a bit of pressure on the inside of Mr Golding’s wheel and as a consequence Mr Golding had not been able to check his horse clear of Mr N Williamson. He said BELMONT INVASION’s head was on the wheel line of the horse in front (CHEEKY PAT) and not immediately behind the helmet of Mr Ferguson, the driver of CHEEKY PAT. So he believed SOUTH COASTER had galloped because of pressure from both sides.
Mr B Williamson paused the videos and demonstrated that Mr Golding had moved out because he had put pressure on him with the body of his horse being very close to Mr Golding’s inside stay. It was only 30 or 40 cms that he had come out, but Mr Golding had not had the normal room he would have expected to have. Through the need for safety, Mr Golding was keeping out because of the pressure BELMONT INVASION was placing on him.
Mr B Williamson emphasised he was not trying to shift out but his horse had run out. He demonstrated that two or three strides after the incident in question his horse was wider on the track. Again, this was because his horse had run out and was not because he was shifting out into a gap. At the time of contact BELMONT INVASION’s head was on an inwards angle. This was because he was putting pressure on the inside rein to keep the horse straight.
Mr B Williamson also stated he believed SOUTH COASTER had put in a wayward step at the time of contact. He believed off front leg of SOUTH COASTER had over-reached. It was an extremely long stride.
Mr Tidmarsh summed up by stating it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Golding was clearly established to the inside of the respondent and when the respondent was shifting inwards there was contact between his sulky wheel and the leg of SOUTH COASTER. He refuted that Mr N Williamson was 3 wide. If he had been, the incident would not have occurred. He believed Mr B Williamson’s hands did not deviate at the time there was contact between TAKENOPRISONERS and SOUTH COASTER. He believed Mr B Williamson had elected to shift outwards after SOUTH COASTER galloped. He emphasised that Mr Golding initially thought that the respondent was running in.
Mr N Williamson summed up by stating he had not made an inwards movement because he was aware he was not clear of SOUTH COASTER. He had not endeavoured to go two wide and was still three wide and trying to keep off Mr Golding. If BELMONT INVASION was lugging out as Mr B Williamson had said, the horse’s head would be facing in. The video evidence confirmed it was. There was outwards movement from BELMONT INVASION, although it was not drastic. Although TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in, he believed he had given Mr Golding sufficient room.
Reasons for Decision:
The video evidence of the incident is not conclusive. The angles are poor, particularly in assisting the determining of the extent to which, if any, the respondent has shifted in on to Mr Golding. We note Mr Golding’s initial thought was that the contact had occurred as a consequence of the respondent moving down on the track. However, after viewing the videos he is of the view that there was pressure from BELMONT INVASION to his inside and that this contributed to the incident and indeed was the cause of his moving slightly wider on the track at the time of contact with the cart of the respondent. Mr B Williamson has also given evidence that BELMONT INVASION was running in, that its head was around and its body was angled outwards as a consequence and came close to the stay of Mr Golding’s cart. He has demonstrated on the video where the head of BELMONT INVASION is pointed inwards.
The extent to which BELMONT INVASION has inconvenienced SOUTH COASTER or TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in at the time of contact is not clearly demonstrated on the videos nor is the extent to which Mr Williamson has moved from a three to a two wide position. The best angle is the camera positioned at the winning post, but this provides a rear and angled view of the incident. It is the respondent’s contention he was three wide, that he was aware Mr Golding was to his inside and that he was not clear of Mr Golding. Hence, he was not moving down on the track at this time. It is clear, nonetheless, that the respondent was intending to take up the one out position ahead of Mr Golding.
Mr Tidmarsh may be correct in his assertion that Mr Williamson had simply failed to give SOUTH COASTER sufficient room at that point of the bend, in that he had shifted in when not clear. The video evidence points to this being the case but it is not conclusive of the fact, as there is no head-on view of the incident. Conversely, the evidence of both Mr Golding and Mr Williamson is to the effect that BELMONT INVASION had placed pressure on SOUTH COASTER from the inside at the point of contact. Mr Golding, who was the informant’s witness, has further stated that SOUTH COASTER had made a slight movement outwards at the time of contact. He does not blame Mr Williamson for the interference to SOUTH COASTER. The Rules require that we must be satisfied of the respondent’s breach of the rule to the standard of the balance of probabilities. Having regard to all of the evidence before us, we are not so satisfied.
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: ab1bb7b13ad583749a00b0e7c0e25569
informantnumber: A7639
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Careless driving
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 0
decisiondate: 10/07/2016
hearing_title: Forbury Park TC 7 July 2016 - R 4 - Chair, Prof G Hall
charge:
facts:
Mr Tidmarsh, Stipendiary Steward, alleged that Mr N Williamson (TAKENOPRISONERS) on the bend near the 900 metres in race 4, the SPEIGHT’S TROT, shifted inwards when not sufficiently clear of SOUTH COASTER (S Golding) contacting the off front leg causing SOUTH COASTER to gallop.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Tidmarsh first called Mr Golding to give evidence. Mr Golding stated that he was racing two wide in the parked out position when Mr N Williamson came around looking for it. He said when Mr Williamson crossed there was contact between a wheel of Mr Williamson’s cart and a leg of SOUTH COASTER.
When questioned by Mr Tidmarsh as to whether there was pressure from his inside, Mr Golding said he was not aware of it at the time, but after viewing the video he would say yes. When asked how far in front the respondent was, he said Mr Williamson was reasonably close to crossing but was not clear. He added his horse was travelling well enough at the time. He said after watching the video he was aware his horse had made a slight movement outwards at the time of contact. He said the respondent would have crossed okay if it were not for the bend.
Mr Golding said he could see TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in and was running inwards. He said the horse’s head was around. He emphasised his horse was running out and the respondent’s horse was running in at the point of the bend. This was why there had been contact.
Mr Golding said he had received slight pressure from the inside from Mr B Williamson. He was aware at the time there was some pressure but when looking at the video it was more than he had thought. Mr Golding believed if Mr B Williamson had waited a split second later he could have been pushed 3 wide as he had not been keeping up with the horse in front of him.
Mr Golding concluded his evidence by stating the reason contact was made was because there was pressure from his inside at the time there was pressure from his outside. He now believed it was pressure from Mr B Williamson that was the principal cause of the interference.
Mr Tidmarsh showed the videos and demonstrated that Mr Golding was established in his position inside the respondent. He said he refuted the evidence of Mr Golding. The respondent’s horse was racing tractably and he had made a misjudgement when crossing over. He said Mr B Williamson had not shifted out and he had had no bearing on the reason there had been contact between TAKENOPRISONERS and SOUTH COASTER.
Mr N Williamson stated that TAKENOPRISONERS had a tendency to lug in and did attempt to do so slightly on the point of the bend. He said the video evidence at the point of contact demonstrated that the horse was three wide. He said he had to straighten his horse to keep him out as he was lugging in and he wore gear to stop him doing this. It took his best efforts to keep him three wide.
The thrust of the respondent’s defence was that most of the pressure on Mr Golding was from Mr Golding’s inside. He said he was aware Mr Golding was there and that he was not clear of SOUTH COASTER and that TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in, so he was racing sufficiently wide to give him enough room. He said Mr B Williamson was lugging out substantially and reiterated the pressure was from the inside out. Mr Golding had said TAKENOPRISONERS was racing keenly and was racing with its head around slightly.
Mr Williamson pointed out that the head of BELMONT INVASION was facing inwards and so the horse had a tendency to run out. SOUTH COASTER was suffering pressure from its inside and had reacted to TAKENOPRISONERS crossing. He accepted SOUTH COASTER had hit his inside wheel and was out of play for the rest of the race as a consequence.
Mr Williamson emphasised TAKENOPRISONERS was attempting to lug in when insufficiently clear. SOUTH COASTER was racing keenly and was lugging out. BELMONT INVASION was also lugging out and was trotting a bit rough. He said the video angle at the time of contact was not the best and did not demonstrate the extent to which TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in, He said the camera angle two strides after contact showed how wide he was at the point of contact, which was three cart widths.
Mr N Williamson called Mr B Williamson to give evidence. Mr B Williamson said his horse BELMONT INVASION was trotting nicely although it did run in a touch under pressure. He said the horse had done this at exactly the time of contact between TAKENOPRISONERS and SOUTH COASTER. He said he had thus put a bit of pressure on the inside of Mr Golding’s wheel and as a consequence Mr Golding had not been able to check his horse clear of Mr N Williamson. He said BELMONT INVASION’s head was on the wheel line of the horse in front (CHEEKY PAT) and not immediately behind the helmet of Mr Ferguson, the driver of CHEEKY PAT. So he believed SOUTH COASTER had galloped because of pressure from both sides.
Mr B Williamson paused the videos and demonstrated that Mr Golding had moved out because he had put pressure on him with the body of his horse being very close to Mr Golding’s inside stay. It was only 30 or 40 cms that he had come out, but Mr Golding had not had the normal room he would have expected to have. Through the need for safety, Mr Golding was keeping out because of the pressure BELMONT INVASION was placing on him.
Mr B Williamson emphasised he was not trying to shift out but his horse had run out. He demonstrated that two or three strides after the incident in question his horse was wider on the track. Again, this was because his horse had run out and was not because he was shifting out into a gap. At the time of contact BELMONT INVASION’s head was on an inwards angle. This was because he was putting pressure on the inside rein to keep the horse straight.
Mr B Williamson also stated he believed SOUTH COASTER had put in a wayward step at the time of contact. He believed off front leg of SOUTH COASTER had over-reached. It was an extremely long stride.
Mr Tidmarsh summed up by stating it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Golding was clearly established to the inside of the respondent and when the respondent was shifting inwards there was contact between his sulky wheel and the leg of SOUTH COASTER. He refuted that Mr N Williamson was 3 wide. If he had been, the incident would not have occurred. He believed Mr B Williamson’s hands did not deviate at the time there was contact between TAKENOPRISONERS and SOUTH COASTER. He believed Mr B Williamson had elected to shift outwards after SOUTH COASTER galloped. He emphasised that Mr Golding initially thought that the respondent was running in.
Mr N Williamson summed up by stating he had not made an inwards movement because he was aware he was not clear of SOUTH COASTER. He had not endeavoured to go two wide and was still three wide and trying to keep off Mr Golding. If BELMONT INVASION was lugging out as Mr B Williamson had said, the horse’s head would be facing in. The video evidence confirmed it was. There was outwards movement from BELMONT INVASION, although it was not drastic. Although TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in, he believed he had given Mr Golding sufficient room.
reasonsfordecision:
The video evidence of the incident is not conclusive. The angles are poor, particularly in assisting the determining of the extent to which, if any, the respondent has shifted in on to Mr Golding. We note Mr Golding’s initial thought was that the contact had occurred as a consequence of the respondent moving down on the track. However, after viewing the videos he is of the view that there was pressure from BELMONT INVASION to his inside and that this contributed to the incident and indeed was the cause of his moving slightly wider on the track at the time of contact with the cart of the respondent. Mr B Williamson has also given evidence that BELMONT INVASION was running in, that its head was around and its body was angled outwards as a consequence and came close to the stay of Mr Golding’s cart. He has demonstrated on the video where the head of BELMONT INVASION is pointed inwards.
The extent to which BELMONT INVASION has inconvenienced SOUTH COASTER or TAKENOPRISONERS was lugging in at the time of contact is not clearly demonstrated on the videos nor is the extent to which Mr Williamson has moved from a three to a two wide position. The best angle is the camera positioned at the winning post, but this provides a rear and angled view of the incident. It is the respondent’s contention he was three wide, that he was aware Mr Golding was to his inside and that he was not clear of Mr Golding. Hence, he was not moving down on the track at this time. It is clear, nonetheless, that the respondent was intending to take up the one out position ahead of Mr Golding.
Mr Tidmarsh may be correct in his assertion that Mr Williamson had simply failed to give SOUTH COASTER sufficient room at that point of the bend, in that he had shifted in when not clear. The video evidence points to this being the case but it is not conclusive of the fact, as there is no head-on view of the incident. Conversely, the evidence of both Mr Golding and Mr Williamson is to the effect that BELMONT INVASION had placed pressure on SOUTH COASTER from the inside at the point of contact. Mr Golding, who was the informant’s witness, has further stated that SOUTH COASTER had made a slight movement outwards at the time of contact. He does not blame Mr Williamson for the interference to SOUTH COASTER. The Rules require that we must be satisfied of the respondent’s breach of the rule to the standard of the balance of probabilities. Having regard to all of the evidence before us, we are not so satisfied.
Decision:
The charge of careless driving is dismissed.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(3)(b)
Informant: Mr L Tidmarsh - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr N Williamson - Open Horseman
Otherperson: Mr S Walkinshaw - Open Horseman
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: d9a586f87069b46298a247b7733f946a
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: f2a968e7a8c300d186a56a8539ca2b7c
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 07/07/2016
meet_title: Forbury Park TC - 7 July 2016
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: forbury-park-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: GHall
meet_pm1: PKnowles
meet_pm2: none
name: Forbury Park TC