Non Raceday Inquiry – HRNZ v T Newton heard 5 August 2009

hearingid: b6def1e913ab4e3664d969a8b32130c5

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 01/01/2001

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry - HRNZ v T Newton heard 5 August 2009

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

IN THE MATTER of Information No. 7481

BETWEEN   REID SANDERS, Chief Stipendiary
Steward for New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing 
              Informant
AND  T C NEWTON of Christchurch, Licensed Jockey 
              Defendant

Date of Hearing: Wednesday, 5 August 2009
Venue: Judicial Room, Riccarton Park, Christchurch
Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie (Chairman)
                                    J M Phelan
Present:   Mr R Sanders (the Informant)
 Ms T C Newton (the Defendant)
 Mr M R Pitman (Lay Advocate for Ms Newton)
 Mr S C Ching (Registrar)

DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

Information No. 7481 filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr Reid Sanders, alleged that Licensed Jockey, Ms T C Newton, when riding LE THUNDER in Race 4, Dennison’s Joinery Sprint, at the South Canterbury Racing Club meeting at Washdyke on Sunday, 19 July 2009, “failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure that the horse was given full opportunity to win or obtain the best possible position”.

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

IN THE MATTER of Information No. 7481

BETWEEN   REID SANDERS, Chief Stipendiary
Steward for New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing
              Informant
AND  T C NEWTON of Christchurch, Licensed Jockey 
              Defendant

Date of Hearing: Wednesday, 5 August 2009
Venue: Judicial Room, Riccarton Park, Christchurch
Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie (Chairman)
                                     J M Phelan
Present:   Mr R Sanders (the Informant)
Ms T C Newton (the Defendant)
Mr M R Pitman (Lay Advocate for Ms Newton)
Mr S C Ching (Registrar)

DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

Information No. 7481 filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr Reid Sanders, alleged that Licensed Jockey, Ms T C Newton, when riding LE THUNDER in Race 4, Dennison’s Joinery Sprint, at the South Canterbury Racing Club meeting at Washdyke on Sunday, 19 July 2009, “failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure that the horse was given full opportunity to win or obtain the best possible position”.

The information particularised the allegation as follows:
“1. Between the 600 metres and the 400 metres [she] allowed LE THUNDER to lose ground from the remainder of the field, when it was reasonable and permissible for [her] to ride [her] horse to stay in contact.
2. The further particular is that from the 400 metres until the winning post [she] failed to ride LE THUNDER with sufficient vigour, when it reasonable and permissible for [her] to do so.
The Stipendiary Stewards state that as a result of [her] failure in the above particulars [she has] failed to give LE THUNDER full opportunity to obtain the best possible position.”

Rule 866 provides as follows:
(1)    Every person commits a breach of these Rules who: 
  (b)   being the rider of a horse in a race, fails to take all reasonable and permissible throughout the race to ensure that his horse is given full opportunity to win the race or to obtain the best possible finishing place and position.

Mr Sanders produced written permission of the Chief Executive of New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing to the filing of the information pursuant to Rule 1103 (4) (d).

Ms Newton was present at the hearing of the information and was represented by Mr M R Pitman, Licensed Trainer, as her lay advocate. Ms Newton waived reading of the Rule and the charge and indicated that she admitted the breach. The breach was found proved accordingly and the hearing proceeded in relation to penalty.

Mr Sanders produced written submissions which both Ms Newton and Mr Pitman confirmed they had read. Ms Newton waived reading of the submissions.

Those submissions may be summarised as follows:
1. Ms Newton has been a licensed rider for 8 years. She has ridden in over 1,200 races. In the 2008/2009 season, she rode in only 67 races. She has not previously breached Rule 866 (1) (b) and has incurred only three suspensions in her entire career.
2. Her riding at Timaru on 19 July 2009 fell far below that expected of a rider of her experience and ability.
3. The Rule is in place to protect the betting fraternity and general public. Breaches of the Rule involve more than a mere error of judgement but rather an error that is unreasonable and impermissible in the circumstances. In this case, the lack of attention, poor judgement or negligence was not what one would expect from a rider of Ms Newton’s experience. 
4. The Rule is about perception and appearance and a rider is obliged to do whatever can reasonably be done whatever the result. Ms Newton’s ride on LE THUNDER was left “wide open for query”.
5. Those who invest on racehorses need to do so with the comfort and reassurance that the horses they support are given every possible chance of performing to their abilities. Anything that falls short of this standard has the real potential to seriously harm the industry and affect the confidence of those investing on the outcome of races.
6.  Public confidence has been eroded as a consequence of Ms Newton’s ride on LE THUNDER at Timaru.
7. Ms Newton did too little to ride the horse out and did not properly test the horse over the concluding stages as she was obliged to do.
8. The breach is a serious one given the lack of any demonstrable vigour and also the fact that the riding complained of occurred in full view of all and was easily seen by all.
9. The riding complained of was at the top end of the scale and the Stewards sought a period of suspension of not less than 4 weeks.  

Mr Sanders showed video replays of the Race.  He pointed out LE THUNDER, which had drawn Barrier No.1 at the 1200 metres start, start slowly and become “tailed off”. Mr Sanders said that the horse had raced 8 days previously over 1600 metres on a heavy track at Trentham.  Mr Sanders said that Ms Newton had ridden with a lack of vigour in the home straight.  Prior to that, LE THUNDER lost ground on the second-to-last horse between the 600 metres and the 400 metres, a critical stage of the Race.

Mr Pitman told the Committee that, after viewing the video replays with the Stipendiary Stewards, Ms Newton believed that she had made an error of judgment and had decided to admit the breach. He made a number of points on Ms Newton’s behalf:
1. There had been some interference involving other runners in the final stages of the Race which accentuated the finishing run of LE THUNDER.
2. Ms Newton has ridden the horse in its last 11 starts. The horse is difficult to ride. She had used the whip on it at its last start at Trentham when it was beaten. At Timaru, she had used her hands on the horse in the straight.
3. Mr Pitman produced an analysis of sectional times for the last 600 metres of the Race which had been prepared by Race Analyst, Mr Neil Davis of “Formpro”. These showed that LE THUNDER had run the same time for the last 600 metres as the eventual winner, TURF FIRE. The three horses which had slower sectional times were the three horses involved in the interference in the final 200 metres.
4. Mr Pitman produced e-mails from jockeys, D G Bradley and L J Allpress in support of his submission that LE THUNDER is a difficult horse to ride.
5. In the Timaru race, LE THUNDER jumped and relaxed which is most unusual for the horse.

Ms Newton said that she had “rolled around the corner” in search of better ground but came out too wide and lost ground. She had tried the horse and did not believe it could finish in the first six placings, hence her lack of vigour.

Mr Pitman referred to Ms Newton’s admission of the breach and her record which he described as “outstanding”.

Ms Newton said that she had engagements for the 3rd day of the Grand National meeting on Saturday, 8 August 2009. She sought a deferment of penalty to enable her to fulfil those engagements.

Following a deliberation, the Committee delivered the following oral decision:
“Ms Newton has pleaded guilty to the charge in relation to her ride on LE THUNDER at the South Canterbury meeting on 19 July 2009 of failing to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure that her horse was given full opportunity to win or obtain the best possible position in the Race.
Mr Sanders submitted that a message should be sent to the racing industry that the standard of riding exhibited by Ms Newton in the race will not be tolerated. He further submitted that, in the Stewards’ view, the riding was at the top end of the scale of seriousness.  He submitted a term of suspension of not less than 4 weeks was appropriate.
Mr Pitman, in his submissions on behalf of Ms Newton, asked the Committee to take into account Ms Newton’s admission of the breach and her very good riding record, which was acknowledged by Mr Sanders.  However, he agreed that Ms Newton had made an error of judgment. He asked the Committee to consider a term of less than 4 weeks.
Ms Newton informed the Committee that she had engagements to ride on the 3rd day of the Grand National meeting on Saturday, 8 August 2009, and she sought a deferment to enable her to fulfil those engagements.
The JCA Penalty Guide recommends a starting point for a breach of this Rule of a fine of $1,000 and/or a suspension for 1 month. The Committee agrees with Mr Sanders’ submission that the breach by Ms Newton is near the top end of the scale. Rather than weeks, we have looked at riding days since it is conceded that Ms Newton, for all intents and purposes, rides exclusively in the South Island.
A suspension of 4 weeks (the minimum recommended by Mr Sanders) would encompass only 4 riding days. The Committee believes that the breach is more serious than that. Ms Newton was guilty of a quite serious error of judgment. Taking riding days then, we have taken a starting point of 7 riding days for this breach but we have given Ms Newton a credit of 2 days for her plea of guilty and her excellent race riding record.
So, her jockey’s licence will be suspended for 5 days commencing after the close of racing on Saturday, 8 August 2009, up to and including Sunday, 13 September 2009, which we note is 5 weeks”.

FOOTNOTE:
For the avoidance of doubt, the Committee records that the penalty is one of a 5 weeks’ suspension and that the penalty should not be taken as a precedent for a penalty of a 5-days’ suspension for a breach of the Rule. The intended penalty is a 5 weeks’ suspension but, in Ms Newton’s particular circumstances, this happens to include 5 meetings at which, she informed us, she would be likely to ride.

R G McKenzie
CHAIRMAN

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 1103.4.d, 866.1.b

Informant:

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: