Manukau TC 3 June 2011 – R 9
ID: JCA14838
Decision:
N/A
Penalty:
The Committee imposes a fine of $300 on Mr Stormont.
Charge:
Breach of Rule 869(2)(a)
Facts:
An Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead against Driver Mr JP Stormont alleging that Mr Stormont used his whip in an excessive manner throughout the straight on the final occasion when driving OTO INVASION. Mr Stormont was present at the Hearing and he advised this Committee that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 869(2)(a) states:
“No Horseman shall during any race use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”
Rule 869(2)(a) states:
“No Horseman shall during any race use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”
Mr Muirhead referred to the Whip Guidelines issued by the then Chief Stipendiary Steward on the 1st of June 2009. The Guidelines provide:
"Excessive use of the whip simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used”.
The Guidelines further provide:
"Subject to the provisions of Rule 869(2) no Horseman shall use the whip continuously at any time during a race and there must be distinct pauses between the whip being used or the use of the whip shall be interrupted by acceptable alternative actions”.
Mr Stormont acknowledged that he was aware of the Guidelines.
Mr Muirhead demonstrated the incident by use of the video films and he showed OTO INVASION finishing on in the straight and Mr Stormont using the whip several times at the top of the straight and then continuously to the finish. Mr Muirhead said that there were about 20 continuous strikes with the whip and about 22 overall. Mr Muirhead said that as far as the Stipendiary Stewards were concerned Mr Stormont had used the whip too many times and had used it continuously and his use of the whip was excessive.
Mr Stormont was given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Muirhead but declined to do so.
Mr Stormont for his part acknowledged that he had hit the horse about 20 times but said that if he didn’t keep at him he wouldn’t have won. He said that when his horse was finishing on he thought that if he could get to the leader it might break and he was doing his best to win the race. He also said that he did not hit his horse hard because he said if he hit him too hard he would have tucked up and galloped. Mr Stormont said that he was out there to make money for the Owner and the Punter and himself and he was trying to do his best.
In answer to questions from Mr Muirhead he said that if he had of paused at any stage he would not have got the same result from his horse. He acknowledged that he had hit his horse continuously. He also said again that when he was out there he was trying to do his best to make money for the Owner, the Punter and himself and he didn’t give any thought about the Rules or the Guidelines regarding the use of the whip and his only thought about the use of the whip was to keep his horse doing its best. He did not consider other options.
"Excessive use of the whip simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used”.
The Guidelines further provide:
"Subject to the provisions of Rule 869(2) no Horseman shall use the whip continuously at any time during a race and there must be distinct pauses between the whip being used or the use of the whip shall be interrupted by acceptable alternative actions”.
Mr Stormont acknowledged that he was aware of the Guidelines.
Mr Muirhead demonstrated the incident by use of the video films and he showed OTO INVASION finishing on in the straight and Mr Stormont using the whip several times at the top of the straight and then continuously to the finish. Mr Muirhead said that there were about 20 continuous strikes with the whip and about 22 overall. Mr Muirhead said that as far as the Stipendiary Stewards were concerned Mr Stormont had used the whip too many times and had used it continuously and his use of the whip was excessive.
Mr Stormont was given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Muirhead but declined to do so.
Mr Stormont for his part acknowledged that he had hit the horse about 20 times but said that if he didn’t keep at him he wouldn’t have won. He said that when his horse was finishing on he thought that if he could get to the leader it might break and he was doing his best to win the race. He also said that he did not hit his horse hard because he said if he hit him too hard he would have tucked up and galloped. Mr Stormont said that he was out there to make money for the Owner and the Punter and himself and he was trying to do his best.
In answer to questions from Mr Muirhead he said that if he had of paused at any stage he would not have got the same result from his horse. He acknowledged that he had hit his horse continuously. He also said again that when he was out there he was trying to do his best to make money for the Owner, the Punter and himself and he didn’t give any thought about the Rules or the Guidelines regarding the use of the whip and his only thought about the use of the whip was to keep his horse doing its best. He did not consider other options.
Submissions for Decision:
N/A
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee watched the films a number of times and have listened to the evidence presented to it. In the Committee’s view Mr Stormont has used the whip 20 times in the straight and at least 16 of those strikes were continuous. Notwithstanding the evidence presented by Mr Stormont the fact of the matter is that he has breached the Whip Guidelines and the Rule and this is clearly shown on the film.
The Committee accordingly finds the charge proven.
The Committee accordingly finds the charge proven.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Muirhead said that Mr Stormont had one previous matter on the 19th of December 2010. He said that the JCA Guidelines provided for a fine of $250 and/or a suspension for one week.
The Committee pointed out to both Messrs Muirhead and Stormont that new JCA Guidelines came into force on the 1st of June 2011 and for a breach of this Rule the recommended penalty for a first breach was six drives or a $300 fine and for a second breach within a year, 10 drives or a $500 fine.
Mr Muirhead said that on the scale of seriousness the actions of Mr Stormont were in the medium range and he submitted that a fine should be in the range of $250 upwards.
Mr Stormont for his part requested a fine as low as possible.
The Committee pointed out to both Messrs Muirhead and Stormont that new JCA Guidelines came into force on the 1st of June 2011 and for a breach of this Rule the recommended penalty for a first breach was six drives or a $300 fine and for a second breach within a year, 10 drives or a $500 fine.
Mr Muirhead said that on the scale of seriousness the actions of Mr Stormont were in the medium range and he submitted that a fine should be in the range of $250 upwards.
Mr Stormont for his part requested a fine as low as possible.
Reasons for Penalty:
In deciding on penalty the Committee finds that it had no option other than to find the charge proven. Mr Stormont breached the Guidelines and the Rule by both the number of times that he used the whip and the continuous use of it.
Mr Stormont has defended the charge when clearly he was in breach of the Rule.
The Committee notes Mr Stormont’s comments that he was doing his best for the Owners, the Punters and himself but this does not justify excessive use of the whip. The Committee has pointed out to Mr Stormont the new JCA Penalty Guidelines and the possible penalties he might face. It is clear that Mr Stormont should be careful with his use of the whip in future.
The Committee in this instance is going to deal with the matter by way of a fine and believes that a fine of $300 is appropriate.
Mr Stormont has defended the charge when clearly he was in breach of the Rule.
The Committee notes Mr Stormont’s comments that he was doing his best for the Owners, the Punters and himself but this does not justify excessive use of the whip. The Committee has pointed out to Mr Stormont the new JCA Penalty Guidelines and the possible penalties he might face. It is clear that Mr Stormont should be careful with his use of the whip in future.
The Committee in this instance is going to deal with the matter by way of a fine and believes that a fine of $300 is appropriate.
Decision Date: 25/05/2011
Publish Date: 25/05/2011
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: 821d7765f4db3a729b74b9d24d8240ce
informantnumber: 66804
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 25/05/2011
hearing_title: Manukau TC 3 June 2011 - R 9
charge:
Breach of Rule 869(2)(a)
facts:
An Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr JM Muirhead against Driver Mr JP Stormont alleging that Mr Stormont used his whip in an excessive manner throughout the straight on the final occasion when driving OTO INVASION. Mr Stormont was present at the Hearing and he advised this Committee that he did not admit the breach.
Rule 869(2)(a) states:
“No Horseman shall during any race use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”
Rule 869(2)(a) states:
“No Horseman shall during any race use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”
Mr Muirhead referred to the Whip Guidelines issued by the then Chief Stipendiary Steward on the 1st of June 2009. The Guidelines provide:
"Excessive use of the whip simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used”.
The Guidelines further provide:
"Subject to the provisions of Rule 869(2) no Horseman shall use the whip continuously at any time during a race and there must be distinct pauses between the whip being used or the use of the whip shall be interrupted by acceptable alternative actions”.
Mr Stormont acknowledged that he was aware of the Guidelines.
Mr Muirhead demonstrated the incident by use of the video films and he showed OTO INVASION finishing on in the straight and Mr Stormont using the whip several times at the top of the straight and then continuously to the finish. Mr Muirhead said that there were about 20 continuous strikes with the whip and about 22 overall. Mr Muirhead said that as far as the Stipendiary Stewards were concerned Mr Stormont had used the whip too many times and had used it continuously and his use of the whip was excessive.
Mr Stormont was given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Muirhead but declined to do so.
Mr Stormont for his part acknowledged that he had hit the horse about 20 times but said that if he didn’t keep at him he wouldn’t have won. He said that when his horse was finishing on he thought that if he could get to the leader it might break and he was doing his best to win the race. He also said that he did not hit his horse hard because he said if he hit him too hard he would have tucked up and galloped. Mr Stormont said that he was out there to make money for the Owner and the Punter and himself and he was trying to do his best.
In answer to questions from Mr Muirhead he said that if he had of paused at any stage he would not have got the same result from his horse. He acknowledged that he had hit his horse continuously. He also said again that when he was out there he was trying to do his best to make money for the Owner, the Punter and himself and he didn’t give any thought about the Rules or the Guidelines regarding the use of the whip and his only thought about the use of the whip was to keep his horse doing its best. He did not consider other options.
"Excessive use of the whip simply means “too much” and relates to the number of times and/or the force with which the whip is used”.
The Guidelines further provide:
"Subject to the provisions of Rule 869(2) no Horseman shall use the whip continuously at any time during a race and there must be distinct pauses between the whip being used or the use of the whip shall be interrupted by acceptable alternative actions”.
Mr Stormont acknowledged that he was aware of the Guidelines.
Mr Muirhead demonstrated the incident by use of the video films and he showed OTO INVASION finishing on in the straight and Mr Stormont using the whip several times at the top of the straight and then continuously to the finish. Mr Muirhead said that there were about 20 continuous strikes with the whip and about 22 overall. Mr Muirhead said that as far as the Stipendiary Stewards were concerned Mr Stormont had used the whip too many times and had used it continuously and his use of the whip was excessive.
Mr Stormont was given the opportunity to cross examine Mr Muirhead but declined to do so.
Mr Stormont for his part acknowledged that he had hit the horse about 20 times but said that if he didn’t keep at him he wouldn’t have won. He said that when his horse was finishing on he thought that if he could get to the leader it might break and he was doing his best to win the race. He also said that he did not hit his horse hard because he said if he hit him too hard he would have tucked up and galloped. Mr Stormont said that he was out there to make money for the Owner and the Punter and himself and he was trying to do his best.
In answer to questions from Mr Muirhead he said that if he had of paused at any stage he would not have got the same result from his horse. He acknowledged that he had hit his horse continuously. He also said again that when he was out there he was trying to do his best to make money for the Owner, the Punter and himself and he didn’t give any thought about the Rules or the Guidelines regarding the use of the whip and his only thought about the use of the whip was to keep his horse doing its best. He did not consider other options.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
N/A
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee watched the films a number of times and have listened to the evidence presented to it. In the Committee’s view Mr Stormont has used the whip 20 times in the straight and at least 16 of those strikes were continuous. Notwithstanding the evidence presented by Mr Stormont the fact of the matter is that he has breached the Whip Guidelines and the Rule and this is clearly shown on the film.
The Committee accordingly finds the charge proven.
The Committee accordingly finds the charge proven.
Decision:
N/A
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Muirhead said that Mr Stormont had one previous matter on the 19th of December 2010. He said that the JCA Guidelines provided for a fine of $250 and/or a suspension for one week.
The Committee pointed out to both Messrs Muirhead and Stormont that new JCA Guidelines came into force on the 1st of June 2011 and for a breach of this Rule the recommended penalty for a first breach was six drives or a $300 fine and for a second breach within a year, 10 drives or a $500 fine.
Mr Muirhead said that on the scale of seriousness the actions of Mr Stormont were in the medium range and he submitted that a fine should be in the range of $250 upwards.
Mr Stormont for his part requested a fine as low as possible.
The Committee pointed out to both Messrs Muirhead and Stormont that new JCA Guidelines came into force on the 1st of June 2011 and for a breach of this Rule the recommended penalty for a first breach was six drives or a $300 fine and for a second breach within a year, 10 drives or a $500 fine.
Mr Muirhead said that on the scale of seriousness the actions of Mr Stormont were in the medium range and he submitted that a fine should be in the range of $250 upwards.
Mr Stormont for his part requested a fine as low as possible.
reasonsforpenalty:
In deciding on penalty the Committee finds that it had no option other than to find the charge proven. Mr Stormont breached the Guidelines and the Rule by both the number of times that he used the whip and the continuous use of it.
Mr Stormont has defended the charge when clearly he was in breach of the Rule.
The Committee notes Mr Stormont’s comments that he was doing his best for the Owners, the Punters and himself but this does not justify excessive use of the whip. The Committee has pointed out to Mr Stormont the new JCA Penalty Guidelines and the possible penalties he might face. It is clear that Mr Stormont should be careful with his use of the whip in future.
The Committee in this instance is going to deal with the matter by way of a fine and believes that a fine of $300 is appropriate.
Mr Stormont has defended the charge when clearly he was in breach of the Rule.
The Committee notes Mr Stormont’s comments that he was doing his best for the Owners, the Punters and himself but this does not justify excessive use of the whip. The Committee has pointed out to Mr Stormont the new JCA Penalty Guidelines and the possible penalties he might face. It is clear that Mr Stormont should be careful with his use of the whip in future.
The Committee in this instance is going to deal with the matter by way of a fine and believes that a fine of $300 is appropriate.
penalty:
The Committee imposes a fine of $300 on Mr Stormont.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 869(2)(a)
Informant: Mr JM Muirhead
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: