Geraldine TC 26 November 2011 – R 10
ID: JCA10550
Meet Title:
Geraldine TC - 26 November 2011
Meet Chair:
JMillar
Meet Committee Member 1:
JPhelan
Race Date:
2011/11/26
Race Number:
R10
Decision:
We accordingly find that the charge is not proved.
Charge:
Following the running of race 10 Stipendiary Steward McIntyre filed an information against J Howe alleging a breach of Rule 864 (2) (d). It was alleged that:
“During the running of the race the boring pole on Beat The Monarch came adrift”
Rule 864 (2) (d) reads:
“(2) Every horseman, owner, trainer and assistant thereof of a horse shall with regard that horse ensure that – (d) all gear is correctly applied and/or fixed so as not to malfunction or come adrift”
A breach of this rule would normally be dealt with by Minor Infringement Notice, but had been filed by way of an information, as Mr Howe wished to defend the matter.
A breach of this rule would normally attract strict liability.
Facts:
Mr McIntyre with the assistance of the race video gave evidence that the boring pole attached to the harness of “Beat The Monarch” had come adrift during the race. He described the manner in which the boring pole would normally be attached by use of a safety strap. Mr McIntyre gave evidence that the strap could not be located and had obviously fallen to the track at some stage after becoming detached. The safety strap was therefore not produced.
Mr Howe in evidence accepted that the boring pole had come adrift during the race as illustrated by Mr McIntyre.
Mr Howe stated that the safety strap was near new and in good order prior to the race.
He gave evidence explaining how the safety strap was attached in a permanent fashion to the boring pole. He also gave evidence that the strap must have broken where it was attached to the boring pole, as had it simply come undone at the buckle, it would have still have been attached to the boring pole after the race.
He advised the Committee that the driver of “Beat The Monarch”, Mr Chmiel, had told him that due to delays in starting the race, the horse had at times put considerable weight on the boring pole. Mr Howe advanced an opinion that this was when the safety strap may have been weakened.
Mr McIntyre conceded that the safety strap must have broken at the boring pole.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Howe submitted that the gear was in good condition, had been properly attached. He submitted that the only explanation he had was that the gear had become damaged at the start, or during the race, and that this damage caused the boring pole to come adrift.
Mr McIntyre relied on the video footage and Mr Howe’s admission that the boring pole had become dislodged. In answer to a question from the panel Mr McIntyre conceded that if the safety strap was available for inspection, had appeared to have been in good condition prior to the race but had evident damage which had occurred during or immediately prior to the race, the information may not have been filed.
Reasons for Decision:
We are satisfied that the Boring Pole attached to the harness of “Beat The Monarch” came adrift during the race. Mr Howe gave evidence that the safety strap was in good condition prior to the race and that the harness had been correctly fitted. He also described how the strap would have still been attached to the boring pole if the buckle had become undone.
The informant did not produce the safety strap and was therefore not in a position to give evidence on its probable condition prior to the race. It was also not possible for the informant to provide evidence as to whether the harness had suffered any damage during or immediately before the race. Mr McIntyre conceded if in fact the strap concerned was damaged during or immediately before the race as described, that the information may well not have been filed.
Without evidence to satisfy the committee that the damage did not occur as a result of some event or action during or immediately before the race we determined that Mr Howe should be given the benefit of the doubt and conclude that the charge had not been proved.
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: 0221bc7aaf0d0fd85f8b18ce3d341b99
informantnumber: A1033
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 0
decisiondate: 23/11/2011
hearing_title: Geraldine TC 26 November 2011 - R 10
charge:
Following the running of race 10 Stipendiary Steward McIntyre filed an information against J Howe alleging a breach of Rule 864 (2) (d). It was alleged that:
“During the running of the race the boring pole on Beat The Monarch came adrift”
Rule 864 (2) (d) reads:
“(2) Every horseman, owner, trainer and assistant thereof of a horse shall with regard that horse ensure that – (d) all gear is correctly applied and/or fixed so as not to malfunction or come adrift”
A breach of this rule would normally be dealt with by Minor Infringement Notice, but had been filed by way of an information, as Mr Howe wished to defend the matter.
A breach of this rule would normally attract strict liability.
facts:
Mr McIntyre with the assistance of the race video gave evidence that the boring pole attached to the harness of “Beat The Monarch” had come adrift during the race. He described the manner in which the boring pole would normally be attached by use of a safety strap. Mr McIntyre gave evidence that the strap could not be located and had obviously fallen to the track at some stage after becoming detached. The safety strap was therefore not produced.
Mr Howe in evidence accepted that the boring pole had come adrift during the race as illustrated by Mr McIntyre.
Mr Howe stated that the safety strap was near new and in good order prior to the race.
He gave evidence explaining how the safety strap was attached in a permanent fashion to the boring pole. He also gave evidence that the strap must have broken where it was attached to the boring pole, as had it simply come undone at the buckle, it would have still have been attached to the boring pole after the race.
He advised the Committee that the driver of “Beat The Monarch”, Mr Chmiel, had told him that due to delays in starting the race, the horse had at times put considerable weight on the boring pole. Mr Howe advanced an opinion that this was when the safety strap may have been weakened.
Mr McIntyre conceded that the safety strap must have broken at the boring pole.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Howe submitted that the gear was in good condition, had been properly attached. He submitted that the only explanation he had was that the gear had become damaged at the start, or during the race, and that this damage caused the boring pole to come adrift.
Mr McIntyre relied on the video footage and Mr Howe’s admission that the boring pole had become dislodged. In answer to a question from the panel Mr McIntyre conceded that if the safety strap was available for inspection, had appeared to have been in good condition prior to the race but had evident damage which had occurred during or immediately prior to the race, the information may not have been filed.
reasonsfordecision:
We are satisfied that the Boring Pole attached to the harness of “Beat The Monarch” came adrift during the race. Mr Howe gave evidence that the safety strap was in good condition prior to the race and that the harness had been correctly fitted. He also described how the strap would have still been attached to the boring pole if the buckle had become undone.
The informant did not produce the safety strap and was therefore not in a position to give evidence on its probable condition prior to the race. It was also not possible for the informant to provide evidence as to whether the harness had suffered any damage during or immediately before the race. Mr McIntyre conceded if in fact the strap concerned was damaged during or immediately before the race as described, that the information may well not have been filed.
Without evidence to satisfy the committee that the damage did not occur as a result of some event or action during or immediately before the race we determined that Mr Howe should be given the benefit of the doubt and conclude that the charge had not been proved.
Decision:
We accordingly find that the charge is not proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 864(2)(d)
Informant: Mr NG McIntyre - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr JM Howe - Licensed Trainer
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 68aefb814b9d18a7b07241ec36ad8ca8
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R10
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 4e95bda774d2942f96ebe564e6fa0258
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 26/11/2011
meet_title: Geraldine TC - 26 November 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: geraldine-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: JMillar
meet_pm1: JPhelan
meet_pm2: none
name: Geraldine TC