Geraldine TC 28 November 2015 – R 3 – Chair, Mr S Ching
ID: JCA10444
Meet Title:
Geraldine TC - 28 November 2015
Meet Chair:
SChing
Meet Committee Member 1:
GClapp
Race Date:
2015/11/28
Race Number:
R 3
Decision:
The charge was found to be proved.
Penalty:
Accordingly Mr Chmiel was fined the sum of $200.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 3, the Temuka Transport F&M C1-C2 Pace, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Renault against Open Horseman, Mr T Chmiel, alleging a breach of Rule 869(4) and the Home Straight Regulations in that he drove in a manner likely to cause interference after allowing his horse ROYAL COUNSEL to shift outwards in the home straight.
Rule 869(4)) reads as follows.
(4) No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
Home Straight Regulations as follows:
7. Except where a horseman is making a move pursuant to Rule 869(7) and subject to the proceeding provisions of this regulation where applicable, every horse shall upon entering the straight prior to the finish line maintain as straight a course as possible to the finish line.
Mr Renault explained to the Committee that Mr Chmiel had been served the information and that Mr Chmiel had elected to not make a plea or attend the hearing.
The Committee was satisfied that Mr Chmiel had been served the information pursuant to the Fifth Schedule Sections 13.1 (c) and 24 which read as follows:
13 Notice of hearing
13.1 Where:
(c) the respondent is not present the respondent shall be deemed to have notice of the hearing when the information or notice of the hearing is given to the person in apparent control of a horse named in the information or is announced over the public address system at the racecourse.
24 No appearance at hearing
24.1 At the hearing of an information if the respondent does not appear and the Judicial Committee is satisfied notice of the hearing was given in accordance with clause 13 the hearing may proceed in the absence of the respondent.
The Committee therefore proceeded with the hearing in Mr Chmiel’s absence and due to his lack of a plea treated the hearing as a defended charge.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Renault stated that this charge had arisen from an unsuccessful protest against 1st placed ROYAL COUNSEL by 2nd placed MACKENZIE.
Mr Renault gave evidence and used video coverage to show that near the 400m and turning for home, Mr Chmiel, driving ROYAL COUNSEL, was in the lead and on the pylons as the horses straightened for the run home. Mr Renault pointed out ROYAL COUNSEL which shifted out over the concluding stages from the home turn from being in a position on the pylons to a position at least 4 to 5 sulky widths wider on the track by the time the horse reached the winning post. He stated that at no time did Mr Chmiel try and straighten his horse and has continued to drive his horse out by using the whip and urging the horse along whilst shifting out. He said Mr Chmiel had stated to the Stewards that his horse was hanging out in the straight but at no stage did Mr Chmiel stop driving and straighten his horse as required to maintain it on as straight a course as possible. Mr Chmiel, he said, has driven in a manner likely to cause interference to the horse outside him being MACKENZIE. Mr Renault submitted that Mr Chmiel was clearly in breach of the Home Straight Regulations by allowing his horse to shift outwards 4 to 5 sulky widths over the concluding stages.
Reasons for Decision:
We carefully considered the evidence given and the compelling video coverage of the incident. The Committee was satisfied that ROYAL COUNSEL, driven by Mr Chmiel, had shifted out at least 4 to 5 sulky widths over the final straight. The Committee decided that this was a clear breach of the Home Straight Regulations. We were also satisfied that Mr Chmiel had driven in a manner likely to cause interference as ROYAL COUNSEL’s shift outwards of 4 to 5 sulky widths over the final straight was in a manner likely to cause interference to the outside runner MACKENZIE and in doing so was in clear breach of Rule 869(4). We therefore found the charge proved.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Renault informed the Committee that Mr Chmiel had a clear record in regard to the Rule and Regulation over the previous 12 months He stated that Mr Chmiel had had 352 career drives last season with 63 drives so far this season. Mr Renault stated that the JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point of a 6 drive suspension or a $300 fine. He submitted that Mr Chmiel should be given credit for his good record and that that was the only mitigating factor for Mr Chmiel. Mr Renault stated that level of offending in his opinion was mid-range and submitted a fine of $250 be considered as penalty.
Reasons for Penalty:
Taking into consideration the JCA Penalty Guide starting point of $300 for a breach of this Rule, the Committee were able to give a discount of $50 for Mr Chmiel’s good record and a further discount of $50 for the level of the breach which we determined to be low to mid-range. We therefore determined that a fine of $200 was an appropriate penalty.
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: 0083b9c2cf9d5226f46fb3a28ad30013
informantnumber: A3630
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Breach of Rule 869(4)
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 03/12/2015
hearing_title: Geraldine TC 28 November 2015 - R 3 - Chair, Mr S Ching
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 3, the Temuka Transport F&M C1-C2 Pace, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Renault against Open Horseman, Mr T Chmiel, alleging a breach of Rule 869(4) and the Home Straight Regulations in that he drove in a manner likely to cause interference after allowing his horse ROYAL COUNSEL to shift outwards in the home straight.
Rule 869(4)) reads as follows.
(4) No horseman shall during any race do anything which interferes or is likely to interfere with his own horse and/or any other horse or its progress.
Home Straight Regulations as follows:
7. Except where a horseman is making a move pursuant to Rule 869(7) and subject to the proceeding provisions of this regulation where applicable, every horse shall upon entering the straight prior to the finish line maintain as straight a course as possible to the finish line.
Mr Renault explained to the Committee that Mr Chmiel had been served the information and that Mr Chmiel had elected to not make a plea or attend the hearing.
The Committee was satisfied that Mr Chmiel had been served the information pursuant to the Fifth Schedule Sections 13.1 (c) and 24 which read as follows:
13 Notice of hearing
13.1 Where:
(c) the respondent is not present the respondent shall be deemed to have notice of the hearing when the information or notice of the hearing is given to the person in apparent control of a horse named in the information or is announced over the public address system at the racecourse.
24 No appearance at hearing
24.1 At the hearing of an information if the respondent does not appear and the Judicial Committee is satisfied notice of the hearing was given in accordance with clause 13 the hearing may proceed in the absence of the respondent.
The Committee therefore proceeded with the hearing in Mr Chmiel’s absence and due to his lack of a plea treated the hearing as a defended charge.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Renault stated that this charge had arisen from an unsuccessful protest against 1st placed ROYAL COUNSEL by 2nd placed MACKENZIE.
Mr Renault gave evidence and used video coverage to show that near the 400m and turning for home, Mr Chmiel, driving ROYAL COUNSEL, was in the lead and on the pylons as the horses straightened for the run home. Mr Renault pointed out ROYAL COUNSEL which shifted out over the concluding stages from the home turn from being in a position on the pylons to a position at least 4 to 5 sulky widths wider on the track by the time the horse reached the winning post. He stated that at no time did Mr Chmiel try and straighten his horse and has continued to drive his horse out by using the whip and urging the horse along whilst shifting out. He said Mr Chmiel had stated to the Stewards that his horse was hanging out in the straight but at no stage did Mr Chmiel stop driving and straighten his horse as required to maintain it on as straight a course as possible. Mr Chmiel, he said, has driven in a manner likely to cause interference to the horse outside him being MACKENZIE. Mr Renault submitted that Mr Chmiel was clearly in breach of the Home Straight Regulations by allowing his horse to shift outwards 4 to 5 sulky widths over the concluding stages.
reasonsfordecision:
We carefully considered the evidence given and the compelling video coverage of the incident. The Committee was satisfied that ROYAL COUNSEL, driven by Mr Chmiel, had shifted out at least 4 to 5 sulky widths over the final straight. The Committee decided that this was a clear breach of the Home Straight Regulations. We were also satisfied that Mr Chmiel had driven in a manner likely to cause interference as ROYAL COUNSEL’s shift outwards of 4 to 5 sulky widths over the final straight was in a manner likely to cause interference to the outside runner MACKENZIE and in doing so was in clear breach of Rule 869(4). We therefore found the charge proved.
Decision:
The charge was found to be proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Renault informed the Committee that Mr Chmiel had a clear record in regard to the Rule and Regulation over the previous 12 months He stated that Mr Chmiel had had 352 career drives last season with 63 drives so far this season. Mr Renault stated that the JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point of a 6 drive suspension or a $300 fine. He submitted that Mr Chmiel should be given credit for his good record and that that was the only mitigating factor for Mr Chmiel. Mr Renault stated that level of offending in his opinion was mid-range and submitted a fine of $250 be considered as penalty.
reasonsforpenalty:
Taking into consideration the JCA Penalty Guide starting point of $300 for a breach of this Rule, the Committee were able to give a discount of $50 for Mr Chmiel’s good record and a further discount of $50 for the level of the breach which we determined to be low to mid-range. We therefore determined that a fine of $200 was an appropriate penalty.
penalty:
Accordingly Mr Chmiel was fined the sum of $200.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(4) and Home Straight Regulations
Informant: Mr S Renault - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr T Chmiel - Licensed Open Horseman
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: e9b12e31f6a9f99661444842aa66a69f
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 3
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: a901c9351e25607caa8adfd59d72ce3a
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 28/11/2015
meet_title: Geraldine TC - 28 November 2015
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: geraldine-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: SChing
meet_pm1: GClapp
meet_pm2: none
name: Geraldine TC