Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v J Goode – Reserved Written Decision dated 12 April 2017, Chair Prof G Hall
ID: JCA14017
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Greyhound Racing
BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT
Informant
Informant
AND Mr John Goode
Licensed Greyhound Trainer
Respondent
Licensed Greyhound Trainer
Respondent
Information No. A7212 to A7216
Judicial Committee: Prof G Hall, Chairman Mr R McKenzie, Member of Committee
Appearing: Mr D Matthews and Mr P Lamb, for the Informant
The Respondent in person, with the assistance of Mr B Cuttance
Date of hearing: 25 January 2017
RESERVED DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
[1] The respondent, Mr Goode, faces the following charges:
Information No A7212: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode misconducted himself by abusing and using foul language to RIU Investigator, Mrs K Williams. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.o of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
[1] The respondent, Mr Goode, faces the following charges:
Information No A7212: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode misconducted himself by abusing and using foul language to RIU Investigator, Mrs K Williams. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.o of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No A7213: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode refused to provide a urine sample when requested and refused to sign the notification form requesting such sample. This is an alleged breach of r 87.4.a of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No A7214: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode failed to wear a tie as per the Club’s dress code. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.y of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No A7215 – 2 breaches: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode failed to “obey with” lawful orders of Stewards, S Renault and S Wallis. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.p of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No 7216: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode abused Steward, S Wallis in the kennel block area of Addington Raceway. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.g of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
[2] The informant produced authorisation in a letter dated 28 November 2016 from Mr Godber, General Manager RIU, to lay the informations.
[3] The charges as outlined in informations A7212, A7213, A7215, and A7216 were heard at Addington Raceway on 25 January. Mr Goode admitted the charge in information A7214.
[4] The respective rules provide:
87.1 Any person (including an Official) commits an offence if he/she:
1.g. assaults, obstructs, impedes, abuses, threatens or insults the Board, any member of the Board, a Club, any member of a Club Committee, any Steward, any member of a Judicial Committee and any member of the Appeals Tribunal or any other Official;
1.o. has, in relation to a Greyhound or Greyhound racing, done a thing, or omitted to do a thing which is negligent, dishonest, corrupt, fraudulent or improper, or constitutes misconduct;
1.p. disobeys or fails to comply with the lawful order of a Steward or other Person having Official duties in relation to Greyhound racing;
1. y. being a Handler of a Greyhound fails to comply with the Board’s dress standards;
87.4. a. A Steward or Racecourse Investigator may require a Handler, or any other Licensed Person who has carried out, is carrying out, or is likely to carry out, a Safety Sensitive Activity at a Racecourse, to supply a Sample at a time and such place nominated by the Steward or Racecourse Investigator. If so, such Handler, or any other Licensed Person must comply with such a requirement. Any Handler, or any other Licensed Person who has carried out, is carrying out, or is likely to carry out, a Safety Sensitive Activity at a Racecourse acting in contravention of this Rule shall be reported to Association by the Steward or Racecourse Investigator dealing with the breach and the Association shall consider whether, in addition to any penalty which may be imposed by the Judicial Committee, such person’s Licence should be revoked, varied or suspended (including having conditions imposed on it), under r 107 of these Rules.
[5] The respondent had indicated at the teleconference held on 9 December 2016 that he would admit the breach alleged in information A7215. However, when the charge was read at the hearing he indicated he wished to defend that charge also. An adjournment was granted at the request of the informant to allow counsel to take instructions, following which the informant sought and was granted leave to amend the charge to reflect only an alleged failure to obey the lawful order of Stipendiary Steward, Mr Wallis, as Mr Renault was not present to give evidence. We permitted Mr Goode to change his plea on this charge to one of not admitted.
[6] Evidence was heard from witnesses for the informant on the charges that were denied, and the respondent, with the assistance of Mr Cuttance, cross examined these witnesses and made oral submissions with respect to his defence to these charges.
[7] Mr Goode accepted at the hearing that he is a licensed Greyhound trainer, that Mrs Williams is a Racecourse Investigator, and that Mr Wallis is a Stipendiary Steward. These matters were thus not in issue.
[8] During the course of the hearing the respondent raised for the first time the issue of whether r 87.4.a had been properly enacted. It was evident that in order to respond to this submission the informant would need to research the records of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association (NZGRA).
[9] The hearing was adjourned prior to the summing up from each of the parties to enable the informant to investigate the procedural failings that were alleged by Mr Goode with respect to this rule.
[10] An extension of time in which to file submissions was granted to both parties by the Committee, at the request of each party.
[11] The informant filed written submissions on 27 February and a brief response to Mr Goode’s submission on 6 April.
[12] The respondent filed his submissions on 30 March.
Informant’s case
[13] The informant alleged that Mr Goode on 25 November 2016:
Refused to provide a urine sample when required to do so by investigator Mrs Kylie Williams;
Misconducted himself by using foul language against Mrs Williams, namely the words "Go get f****d" and by giving her a two-fingered gesture;
Refused to comply with a lawful order of steward Mr Wallis, who directed him to go to the Stewards’ Room to have a discussion about his earlier behaviour;
Abused Steward, Mr Wallis by calling him a "lying wormy c***" and making gestures of physical aggression towards him.
[14] The informant’s first witness was Mrs Kylie Williams, a Racing Investigator, attached to the RIU. She stated that on 25 November last, she attended a Greyhound race meeting conducted by the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington. Drug testing of selected licensed persons was programmed on that day.
[15] Testing was carried out pursuant to r 87.4.a and was conducted using the services of the Drug Detection Agency (TDDA). At approximately 11.06 am she spoke to Mr John Goode in the Secretary’s Office at the Greyhound Racing complex. Also present in the office at that time were a number of Greyhound Racing employees.
[16] Mrs Williams introduced herself to Mr Goode, who acknowledged that he knew who she was. She advised him that the RIU were conducting drug testing that day on licensed persons and that he was one of those persons to be tested. He replied that he had not been drinking.
[17] Mrs Williams said she informed him that the RIU was not testing for alcohol and that they were conducting drug testing. Mr Goode replied that Mrs Williams could “Go and get f****d” and walked away. He began to walk up the stairs in order to leave the office and she asked him to come back. Mr Goode stopped on the stairs, turned around, and again said that she could “Go and get f****d”. He then gave Mrs Williams the two-finger gesture and walked out. She believed the Greyhound Racing Club staff present in the office witnessed these words and actions of Mr Goode. Mrs Williams said she had no other dealings with Mr Goode that day.
[18] Mr Goode left the racecourse without providing a sample of urine as directed. Mrs Williams stated he was therefore deemed to have refused to provide a sample for analysis.
[19] When questioned by the respondent, Mrs Williams said she could see the respondent very clearly when he gestured at her. He was walking up the stairs and was 5 to 8 metres away from her.
[20] Mr Cuttance questioned Mrs Williams as to why Mr Goode was to be tested. She said there were 13 names on the list, nine of which were tested. She explained not all persons on the list had turned up at the course that day and the respondent was the last person due to be tested. She agreed it was a pre-determined list that was based on information received from Stipendiary Stewards. It was a list of persons in respect of whom it was believed they would be likely to test positive. She understood that there had been a smell of cannabis in the kennelling area at an earlier meeting and this was the reason for the testing.
[21] Mrs Williams had been given the list and she reiterated that whilst the names had not been randomly selected, she had no role whatsoever in selecting the names on the list. All the names were those of males, except one, and that female had not been tested, as she was not at the course.
[22] The RIU regularly used the services of the TDDA. The tester was female. Mrs Williams explained there was not a requirement that the tester be the same gender as the person being tested. She referred to the Kennett case (9 September 2011) in this regard.
[23] Mrs Williams confirmed she had told Mr Goode that it was a drug test and when he replied he had not been drinking, she said the test was not for alcohol but was for drugs. She thought she had spoken to Mr Goode for about a minute.
[24] Mrs Williams confirmed the abusive words she alleged Mr Goode had used were spoken in a normal conversational volume when he was about half a metre away from her. Mrs Williams was adamant the words used were “Go and get f****d” and not “Get f****d” as Mr Goode alleged to her in questioning. She said in her experience in racing administration no one had ever spoken to her in these terms before.
[25] When questioned whether she could see up the stairs, Mrs Williams replied she could, as she was standing beside the table. Mr Goode was almost at the top of the stairs when he turned around and made the offensive gesture. She saw the gesture, which was not subtle, very clearly.
[26] Mrs Williams agreed there was nothing unusual about Mr Goode’s demeanour on the day. He was not staggering and there was no evidence of drugs or alcohol. She believed he had been summoned to attend for the test by the Stipendiary Stewards in person.
[27] Mrs Williams stated that to her knowledge this was the first time members of the Greyhound Racing industry had been tested. The testing had resulted in two positive readings. She explained the rule had only been introduced in February 2016. She thought the testing had been advertised in the industry’s monthly magazine, but was not personally certain that this was the case.
[28] Mr James Smith was the next person to give evidence. He stated he was the Race Starter for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On 25 November 2016, he was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and he was sitting in the office with several other staff members. He was eating his lunch just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode.
[29] Mr Smith could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. Mr Goode then said to Mrs Williams, “Get fucked”. Mr Goode then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d” again. He then gave her the fingers. This was quite blatant. Mr Goode walked out the door, slamming it behind him. A number of staff witnessed this incident.
[30] Mr Smith explained his attention was drawn to the conversation due to the foul language. It had been very quiet and prior to this time he could not hear what Mrs Williams and Mr Goode were saying. He saw Mr Goode very clearly give the fingers to Mrs Williams when he was half way up the stairs.
[31] When questioned by Mr Cuttance, he said it was the nature of the language that had drawn his attention. There may have been raised voices, however, he was not sure as to this. As to the words used, he said the first time it was “Get f****d”. The second time when Mr Goode spoke on the stairs it was “Go and get f****d” or “Go get f****d”. He reiterated to the best of his recollection that was exactly what he had heard. He was 5 to 7 metres away at the time of the first statement and 12 to 15 metres away on the second occasion. Mr Goode was not yelling but had raised his voice and had slammed the door as he was leaving. He said Mrs Williams had said to Mr Goode after the first words, “Please come back”, but Mr Goode had continued up the stairs. He agreed Mrs Williams had said, “Did anyone hear that?” after Mr Goode had spoken on the second occasion. He had replied, “Yes”.
[32] Mr Smith acknowledged his relationship with Mr Goode was not the best. They had had a running battle. It was greyhound related but had nothing to do with this incident. He agreed that the respondent did not appear to be drug or drink impaired.
[33] The next witness for the informant was Ms Stephanie Wigley. She stated she was the Office Administrator for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On 25 November 2016, she was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and she was sitting in the office with several other staff members just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode. Ms Wigley could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. He then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d”. He then gave her the fingers. He walked out the door, slamming it behind him.
[34] Ms Wigley said she had heard Mr Goode’s statements very clearly and had seen his hand gesture. She had a full view of him waist down when he was on the stairs and he had bent down to make the gesture. She thought he was 1/2 to 1/4 of the way up the stairs. She estimated Mr Goode was 20 metres away from her. His words were “elevated” and he had said, “Go get f****d”.
[35] As she recalled, Ms Wigley believed Mr Lamb had asked her to give a statement. She said she had spoken to the RIU and they had typed up her statement. She had read it and signed it. The statement was not in her own words but it was what had happened on the day.
[36] Ms Wigley said there was nothing about Mr Goode’s demeanour that concerned her. He was acting normally.
[37] When questioned as to how many times she heard the respondent use the “f word”, she replied she thought she heard it twice and was sure it was once. That was when he was on the stairs. She was certain the words he used were “Go get f****d.”
[38] Ms Pauline Munro gave evidence that she was the Kennelling Identification Steward for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On Friday 25 November 2016, she was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and she was sitting in the office with several other staff members just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode. She could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. He then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d”. He then gave her the fingers. He walked out the door, slamming it behind him.
[39] Ms Munro said she had seen the respondent clearly as she was looking directly up the stairs. She also very clearly heard the words “Go get f****d”. She was about 3 or 4 metres away at the time. The words were spoken first as Mr Goode walked away from Mrs Williams and the gesture and the words a second time were when he was on the stairs. His voice was raised. She thought he was getting a bit angry. She was not certain whether Mrs Williams had stood up and moved away from the desk. She thought she was sitting at the desk the whole time. She had definitely told Mr Goode to please come back when he walked away.
[40] Ms Munro said she agreed with the words on the piece of paper she had signed and that was why she had signed it. She would not have signed it if it were not right. She also said there was nothing about Mr Goode’s demeanour that concerned her.
[41] Ms Munro agreed that the word “f**k” was used in social company. It did not offend her, although that would depend on the circumstances. On this occasion, it did offend her because of Mrs Williams’s status and the context in which the word was used. It was in the workplace when people were carrying out their duties. She said she believed there was a difference between using the word “f**k” and the expression “Go get f****d”. She, herself, would not use those words.
[42] The next witness for the informant was Ms Robyn Herbert, who stated she was the Security Officer for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On Friday 25 November 2016, she was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and she was sitting in the office with several other staff members just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode. She could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. He then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d”. He then gave her the fingers. He walked out the door, slamming it behind him.
[43] Ms Herbert said she was 3 to 4 metres away from the respondent when he turned around and spoke to Mrs Williams. She heard him very clearly. She believed Mrs Williams was standing between the table and the bench at this time. She only heard the words being used once. The finger gesture was made when Mr Goode was halfway up the stairs. He gestured twice. The words used were definitely “Go get f****d”. He had sworn when Mrs Williams had asked him to come back.
[44] Ms Herbert had said she would be a witness when Mrs Williams had asked the other persons present whether they had heard what Mr Goode had said. She said Mr Renault took her statement and she signed it after she had read it. It was correct. She would not have signed it otherwise.
[45] Ms Herbert said Mr Goode was very very angry but he did not appear to be impaired on the day. He had slammed the door when he left. It was just like a naughty child would slam the door.
[46] The final witness was Mr Scott Wallis, a Stipendiary Steward attached to the RIU. He said on Friday 25 November 2016 he was on duty at the meeting conducted by the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington. At about 12.15 pm he spoke to licensed trainer Mr John Goode. Mr Goode was sitting at the front of the kennel block by himself at that time. Mr Wallis requested him to go to the Stipendiary Stewards’ room to discuss an earlier incident between himself and Racing Investigator, Mrs Kylie Williams. Mr Goode’s reply to that request was “Oh that f***ing mole up there.”
[47] Mr Wallis said he replied that there was no need to speak like that. Mr Goode then directed abusive and foul language at Mr Wallis, calling him a “lying wormy c**t” and telling him that he “could go and f**k off as well”. Mr Goode continued with the profanities for a brief period then proceeded to verbally threaten Mr Wallis by saying “You are lucky I don’t whack you now” or words to that effect. Mr Wallis said at this time Mr Goode had his fists up to Mr Wallis’s face; they were about a foot away. He was also that close when he used the foul language. He said Mr Goode was usually fine to deal with. There had been no issues in the past. He was shocked at his language and very surprised by his response. He appeared to be very very angry. At the time, he said there was a low (not even waist high) fence between them. It was so low that a person could just step over it.
[48] Mr Wallis said he asked Mr Goode twice to go to the Stewards’ room. He gave him two directions to that effect. He had asked him to go because he was aware Mr Goode had told Mrs Williams to “Get f****d”. He did not ask him for an explanation. When Mr Goode did not respond the first time, he went and got another Stipendiary Steward, Mr Renault, and he again directed Mr Goode to the Stipendiary Stewards’ room, in the presence of Mr Renault.
[49] He was aware he needed a witness to the direction and that was why he had called Mr Renault. He said he gave the direction in the presence of Mr Renault. He told Mr Goode to go and see Mr Quirk (who is a Stipendiary Steward). He said his asking him to do this was the direction. Mr Goode said nothing to him at this time. He had no further dealings with Mr Goode that day but he understood Mr Goode never went to the room. He confirmed that Mr Renault never said anything to Mr Goode.
[50] Mr Goode questioned Mr Wallis as to when r 87.4.a came into effect. Mr Wallis replied that it was last year. This could be the first time the rule had been used although he believed it had been used at Wanganui previously. He agreed with Mr Goode that Mr Goode did not appear drugged or drunk. He also acknowledged he had not told Mr Goode why he had to go and see Mrs Williams. The second time he had told Mr Goode he needed to go to the Stewards’ room to talk with Mr Quirk about the earlier matters. Mr Goode did not comply. It would have been about a 15-metre walk to the room.
Respondent’s oral submissions
[51] Mr Goode questioned the validity of r 87.4. He believed it had come into existence in October 2015 when the various clubs had voted on remits and this was one that was passed. It was contentious; it was not unanimous. He submitted it had not been publicly notified in the official magazine and had not been placed on the website, as was required by the constitution. He was thus unaware of the rule. He was familiar with the alcohol rule. This was why he had said he had not been drinking. He acknowledged that Mrs Williams had said this was a drug test. He was concerned all this was taking place in the office in front of people he knew and the veterinarian. He said he “saw red” because it was in front of his peers and in his mind, he thought the rule did not exist.
[52] Mr Goode continued by stating the Greyhound Racing head office was dysfunctional for a time and all the rules that emanated from the 2015 conference were null and void. There was thus no power or authority for the Stipendiary Stewards to require him to take a drug test. He had read the greyhound journal from cover to cover and there was no mention of the rule. It was not on the website. He said other trainers he had spoken to did not know about the rule either. There was no danger when walking a dog to the traps, so he believed the fact this was seen as a safety sensitive issue was a nonsense.
[53] Mr Goode said he had been “frog marched” to the Secretary’s Office. He thought it was about an abusive email he had sent to the Wanganui Greyhound Club concerning the use of devices to test for alcohol. He was angered, as he does not drink, and thought it was “political”. Drugs had not crossed his mind and it added to his surprise to be told in front of an audience that he was to be drug tested. He thought this was demeaning and an attack on his character, and that was why he said, “Get f****d”.
[54] Mr Goode said the fact that other people were listening in to the conversation he was having with Mrs Williams when he was about to be tested made him angry. He said the words he used were “Get f****d”. He said he turned on his heels and slammed the door. He did not remember making any gesture.
[55] Mr Goode stated that the word “f**k” was commonly used in everyday conversation and in using that word he was not using abusive or foul language. It was merely an exclamation of annoyance; it was not threatening. It was part of his vocabulary. He had had a background as a seaman and had worked below decks. The word was ingrained in him. It had been used recently on Trackside in an interview after a race and was used by protesters through megaphones. It was nothing more than slang; like “bugger” and “bastard”. There were no children present and in the context of adults, such as Racecourse Investigators, its use was “nothing”.
[56] The words he had had with Mr Wallis he could not recall, but they were not what Mr Wallis had said. It was a “robust conversation”. The Committee only had Mr Wallis’s word that those were the words he used. He acknowledged he had had a meeting with Mr Wallis and had been asked to go and report to Mr Quirk and had not done so.
[57] Mr Goode emphasised that the confrontations were all instigated by the RIU and there had always been a fence between him and Mr Wallis. He had been “blindsided” by being asked for a drug test. This had angered him but it was not a shouting match.
[58] Mr Goode believed the four civilian witnesses (those present in the office) were a “jack-up” or a “fait accompli”. Their statements were not in their own words. Mr Renault had written them. They had simply signed on the dotted line. He alleged the witnesses had been coerced into signing their statements and that there were discrepancies in their oral evidence.
[59] Mr Goode stated he had been “warned off” by a letter he had received on 7 or 8 December last. He asked the Committee to look into this for him. (We explained that this was a decision of GRNZ. The informant acknowledged that they had made a recommendation to this effect to GRNZ. We suggested to the informant that perhaps this matter could be revisited in light of the fact that the hearing would be adjourned and there would be a reserved decision. We understand the warning off was lifted a few days after the hearing.)
[60] Mr Goode concluded by stating “the rule does not exist” and that “constitutional errors with r 87.4 rendered enforcement of the rule ultra vires.” There was no person with the authority to require him to take a drug test. He had been in Greyhound Racing for 31 years and any previous breaches had been for minor matters.
Informant’s written submissions by way of summing up
The charge of failing to provide a urine sample
[61] The informant submitted there was no dispute that Mrs Williams required Mr Goode to provide a urine sample pursuant to the requirements of r 87.4.a of the Rules.
[61] The informant submitted there was no dispute that Mrs Williams required Mr Goode to provide a urine sample pursuant to the requirements of r 87.4.a of the Rules.
[62] The respondent's argument was identified as being that r 87.4.a was a nullity, as it had not been passed in accordance with r 8 of the Greyhound Racing Rules. Rule 8 states:
Amendments to these rules or regulations
8.1 The Rules of Racing or any of them may from time to time be amended or revoked by unanimous resolution of the Board of which not less than fourteen days' notice has been given to each Board member. Prior to any amendment, revocation or addition to the Rules of Racing being considered by the Board, the proposed amendment, revocation or addition shall be notified to:
a. every Club;
b. the Judicial Control Authority;
c. the Integrity Service Provider; and
d. the New Zealand Racing Board.
In addition, details of any proposed amendment, revocation or addition to the Racing Rules shall be placed on the Association website and published in the Association's industry magazine no later than 20 days prior to the Board meeting at which the amendment, revocation or addition will be considered.
No amendment to the Rules of Racing shall be made by the Board without the prior written consent of the New Zealand Racing Board and the prior consent of clubs holding not less than two thirds of the votes able
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 14/04/2017
Publish Date: 14/04/2017
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: 8d0747fb56a47d1e903900e155b06f4b
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 14/04/2017
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v J Goode - Reserved Written Decision dated 12 April 2017, Chair Prof G Hall
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Greyhound Racing
BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT
Informant
Informant
AND Mr John Goode
Licensed Greyhound Trainer
Respondent
Licensed Greyhound Trainer
Respondent
Information No. A7212 to A7216
Judicial Committee: Prof G Hall, Chairman Mr R McKenzie, Member of Committee
Appearing: Mr D Matthews and Mr P Lamb, for the Informant
The Respondent in person, with the assistance of Mr B Cuttance
Date of hearing: 25 January 2017
RESERVED DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
[1] The respondent, Mr Goode, faces the following charges:
Information No A7212: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode misconducted himself by abusing and using foul language to RIU Investigator, Mrs K Williams. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.o of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
[1] The respondent, Mr Goode, faces the following charges:
Information No A7212: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode misconducted himself by abusing and using foul language to RIU Investigator, Mrs K Williams. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.o of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No A7213: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode refused to provide a urine sample when requested and refused to sign the notification form requesting such sample. This is an alleged breach of r 87.4.a of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No A7214: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode failed to wear a tie as per the Club’s dress code. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.y of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No A7215 – 2 breaches: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode failed to “obey with” lawful orders of Stewards, S Renault and S Wallis. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.p of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
Information No 7216: THAT, on 25 November 2016 at a race meeting conducted by Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington Mr Goode abused Steward, S Wallis in the kennel block area of Addington Raceway. This is an alleged breach of r 87.1.g of the Greyhound Racing New Zealand Rules of Racing.
[2] The informant produced authorisation in a letter dated 28 November 2016 from Mr Godber, General Manager RIU, to lay the informations.
[3] The charges as outlined in informations A7212, A7213, A7215, and A7216 were heard at Addington Raceway on 25 January. Mr Goode admitted the charge in information A7214.
[4] The respective rules provide:
87.1 Any person (including an Official) commits an offence if he/she:
1.g. assaults, obstructs, impedes, abuses, threatens or insults the Board, any member of the Board, a Club, any member of a Club Committee, any Steward, any member of a Judicial Committee and any member of the Appeals Tribunal or any other Official;
1.o. has, in relation to a Greyhound or Greyhound racing, done a thing, or omitted to do a thing which is negligent, dishonest, corrupt, fraudulent or improper, or constitutes misconduct;
1.p. disobeys or fails to comply with the lawful order of a Steward or other Person having Official duties in relation to Greyhound racing;
1. y. being a Handler of a Greyhound fails to comply with the Board’s dress standards;
87.4. a. A Steward or Racecourse Investigator may require a Handler, or any other Licensed Person who has carried out, is carrying out, or is likely to carry out, a Safety Sensitive Activity at a Racecourse, to supply a Sample at a time and such place nominated by the Steward or Racecourse Investigator. If so, such Handler, or any other Licensed Person must comply with such a requirement. Any Handler, or any other Licensed Person who has carried out, is carrying out, or is likely to carry out, a Safety Sensitive Activity at a Racecourse acting in contravention of this Rule shall be reported to Association by the Steward or Racecourse Investigator dealing with the breach and the Association shall consider whether, in addition to any penalty which may be imposed by the Judicial Committee, such person’s Licence should be revoked, varied or suspended (including having conditions imposed on it), under r 107 of these Rules.
[5] The respondent had indicated at the teleconference held on 9 December 2016 that he would admit the breach alleged in information A7215. However, when the charge was read at the hearing he indicated he wished to defend that charge also. An adjournment was granted at the request of the informant to allow counsel to take instructions, following which the informant sought and was granted leave to amend the charge to reflect only an alleged failure to obey the lawful order of Stipendiary Steward, Mr Wallis, as Mr Renault was not present to give evidence. We permitted Mr Goode to change his plea on this charge to one of not admitted.
[6] Evidence was heard from witnesses for the informant on the charges that were denied, and the respondent, with the assistance of Mr Cuttance, cross examined these witnesses and made oral submissions with respect to his defence to these charges.
[7] Mr Goode accepted at the hearing that he is a licensed Greyhound trainer, that Mrs Williams is a Racecourse Investigator, and that Mr Wallis is a Stipendiary Steward. These matters were thus not in issue.
[8] During the course of the hearing the respondent raised for the first time the issue of whether r 87.4.a had been properly enacted. It was evident that in order to respond to this submission the informant would need to research the records of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association (NZGRA).
[9] The hearing was adjourned prior to the summing up from each of the parties to enable the informant to investigate the procedural failings that were alleged by Mr Goode with respect to this rule.
[10] An extension of time in which to file submissions was granted to both parties by the Committee, at the request of each party.
[11] The informant filed written submissions on 27 February and a brief response to Mr Goode’s submission on 6 April.
[12] The respondent filed his submissions on 30 March.
Informant’s case
[13] The informant alleged that Mr Goode on 25 November 2016:
Refused to provide a urine sample when required to do so by investigator Mrs Kylie Williams;
Misconducted himself by using foul language against Mrs Williams, namely the words "Go get f****d" and by giving her a two-fingered gesture;
Refused to comply with a lawful order of steward Mr Wallis, who directed him to go to the Stewards’ Room to have a discussion about his earlier behaviour;
Abused Steward, Mr Wallis by calling him a "lying wormy c***" and making gestures of physical aggression towards him.
[14] The informant’s first witness was Mrs Kylie Williams, a Racing Investigator, attached to the RIU. She stated that on 25 November last, she attended a Greyhound race meeting conducted by the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington. Drug testing of selected licensed persons was programmed on that day.
[15] Testing was carried out pursuant to r 87.4.a and was conducted using the services of the Drug Detection Agency (TDDA). At approximately 11.06 am she spoke to Mr John Goode in the Secretary’s Office at the Greyhound Racing complex. Also present in the office at that time were a number of Greyhound Racing employees.
[16] Mrs Williams introduced herself to Mr Goode, who acknowledged that he knew who she was. She advised him that the RIU were conducting drug testing that day on licensed persons and that he was one of those persons to be tested. He replied that he had not been drinking.
[17] Mrs Williams said she informed him that the RIU was not testing for alcohol and that they were conducting drug testing. Mr Goode replied that Mrs Williams could “Go and get f****d” and walked away. He began to walk up the stairs in order to leave the office and she asked him to come back. Mr Goode stopped on the stairs, turned around, and again said that she could “Go and get f****d”. He then gave Mrs Williams the two-finger gesture and walked out. She believed the Greyhound Racing Club staff present in the office witnessed these words and actions of Mr Goode. Mrs Williams said she had no other dealings with Mr Goode that day.
[18] Mr Goode left the racecourse without providing a sample of urine as directed. Mrs Williams stated he was therefore deemed to have refused to provide a sample for analysis.
[19] When questioned by the respondent, Mrs Williams said she could see the respondent very clearly when he gestured at her. He was walking up the stairs and was 5 to 8 metres away from her.
[20] Mr Cuttance questioned Mrs Williams as to why Mr Goode was to be tested. She said there were 13 names on the list, nine of which were tested. She explained not all persons on the list had turned up at the course that day and the respondent was the last person due to be tested. She agreed it was a pre-determined list that was based on information received from Stipendiary Stewards. It was a list of persons in respect of whom it was believed they would be likely to test positive. She understood that there had been a smell of cannabis in the kennelling area at an earlier meeting and this was the reason for the testing.
[21] Mrs Williams had been given the list and she reiterated that whilst the names had not been randomly selected, she had no role whatsoever in selecting the names on the list. All the names were those of males, except one, and that female had not been tested, as she was not at the course.
[22] The RIU regularly used the services of the TDDA. The tester was female. Mrs Williams explained there was not a requirement that the tester be the same gender as the person being tested. She referred to the Kennett case (9 September 2011) in this regard.
[23] Mrs Williams confirmed she had told Mr Goode that it was a drug test and when he replied he had not been drinking, she said the test was not for alcohol but was for drugs. She thought she had spoken to Mr Goode for about a minute.
[24] Mrs Williams confirmed the abusive words she alleged Mr Goode had used were spoken in a normal conversational volume when he was about half a metre away from her. Mrs Williams was adamant the words used were “Go and get f****d” and not “Get f****d” as Mr Goode alleged to her in questioning. She said in her experience in racing administration no one had ever spoken to her in these terms before.
[25] When questioned whether she could see up the stairs, Mrs Williams replied she could, as she was standing beside the table. Mr Goode was almost at the top of the stairs when he turned around and made the offensive gesture. She saw the gesture, which was not subtle, very clearly.
[26] Mrs Williams agreed there was nothing unusual about Mr Goode’s demeanour on the day. He was not staggering and there was no evidence of drugs or alcohol. She believed he had been summoned to attend for the test by the Stipendiary Stewards in person.
[27] Mrs Williams stated that to her knowledge this was the first time members of the Greyhound Racing industry had been tested. The testing had resulted in two positive readings. She explained the rule had only been introduced in February 2016. She thought the testing had been advertised in the industry’s monthly magazine, but was not personally certain that this was the case.
[28] Mr James Smith was the next person to give evidence. He stated he was the Race Starter for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On 25 November 2016, he was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and he was sitting in the office with several other staff members. He was eating his lunch just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode.
[29] Mr Smith could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. Mr Goode then said to Mrs Williams, “Get fucked”. Mr Goode then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d” again. He then gave her the fingers. This was quite blatant. Mr Goode walked out the door, slamming it behind him. A number of staff witnessed this incident.
[30] Mr Smith explained his attention was drawn to the conversation due to the foul language. It had been very quiet and prior to this time he could not hear what Mrs Williams and Mr Goode were saying. He saw Mr Goode very clearly give the fingers to Mrs Williams when he was half way up the stairs.
[31] When questioned by Mr Cuttance, he said it was the nature of the language that had drawn his attention. There may have been raised voices, however, he was not sure as to this. As to the words used, he said the first time it was “Get f****d”. The second time when Mr Goode spoke on the stairs it was “Go and get f****d” or “Go get f****d”. He reiterated to the best of his recollection that was exactly what he had heard. He was 5 to 7 metres away at the time of the first statement and 12 to 15 metres away on the second occasion. Mr Goode was not yelling but had raised his voice and had slammed the door as he was leaving. He said Mrs Williams had said to Mr Goode after the first words, “Please come back”, but Mr Goode had continued up the stairs. He agreed Mrs Williams had said, “Did anyone hear that?” after Mr Goode had spoken on the second occasion. He had replied, “Yes”.
[32] Mr Smith acknowledged his relationship with Mr Goode was not the best. They had had a running battle. It was greyhound related but had nothing to do with this incident. He agreed that the respondent did not appear to be drug or drink impaired.
[33] The next witness for the informant was Ms Stephanie Wigley. She stated she was the Office Administrator for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On 25 November 2016, she was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and she was sitting in the office with several other staff members just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode. Ms Wigley could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. He then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d”. He then gave her the fingers. He walked out the door, slamming it behind him.
[34] Ms Wigley said she had heard Mr Goode’s statements very clearly and had seen his hand gesture. She had a full view of him waist down when he was on the stairs and he had bent down to make the gesture. She thought he was 1/2 to 1/4 of the way up the stairs. She estimated Mr Goode was 20 metres away from her. His words were “elevated” and he had said, “Go get f****d”.
[35] As she recalled, Ms Wigley believed Mr Lamb had asked her to give a statement. She said she had spoken to the RIU and they had typed up her statement. She had read it and signed it. The statement was not in her own words but it was what had happened on the day.
[36] Ms Wigley said there was nothing about Mr Goode’s demeanour that concerned her. He was acting normally.
[37] When questioned as to how many times she heard the respondent use the “f word”, she replied she thought she heard it twice and was sure it was once. That was when he was on the stairs. She was certain the words he used were “Go get f****d.”
[38] Ms Pauline Munro gave evidence that she was the Kennelling Identification Steward for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On Friday 25 November 2016, she was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and she was sitting in the office with several other staff members just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode. She could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. He then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d”. He then gave her the fingers. He walked out the door, slamming it behind him.
[39] Ms Munro said she had seen the respondent clearly as she was looking directly up the stairs. She also very clearly heard the words “Go get f****d”. She was about 3 or 4 metres away at the time. The words were spoken first as Mr Goode walked away from Mrs Williams and the gesture and the words a second time were when he was on the stairs. His voice was raised. She thought he was getting a bit angry. She was not certain whether Mrs Williams had stood up and moved away from the desk. She thought she was sitting at the desk the whole time. She had definitely told Mr Goode to please come back when he walked away.
[40] Ms Munro said she agreed with the words on the piece of paper she had signed and that was why she had signed it. She would not have signed it if it were not right. She also said there was nothing about Mr Goode’s demeanour that concerned her.
[41] Ms Munro agreed that the word “f**k” was used in social company. It did not offend her, although that would depend on the circumstances. On this occasion, it did offend her because of Mrs Williams’s status and the context in which the word was used. It was in the workplace when people were carrying out their duties. She said she believed there was a difference between using the word “f**k” and the expression “Go get f****d”. She, herself, would not use those words.
[42] The next witness for the informant was Ms Robyn Herbert, who stated she was the Security Officer for the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club. On Friday 25 November 2016, she was present at the Secretary’s Office at Addington. It was before a race meeting and she was sitting in the office with several other staff members just after 11.00 am. Also present were Mrs Williams and Mr Goode. She could see Mrs Williams talking to Mr Goode. He then walked up the stairs to leave the office. Mrs Williams asked him to come back. Mr Goode turned around and told Mrs Williams to “Go get f****d”. He then gave her the fingers. He walked out the door, slamming it behind him.
[43] Ms Herbert said she was 3 to 4 metres away from the respondent when he turned around and spoke to Mrs Williams. She heard him very clearly. She believed Mrs Williams was standing between the table and the bench at this time. She only heard the words being used once. The finger gesture was made when Mr Goode was halfway up the stairs. He gestured twice. The words used were definitely “Go get f****d”. He had sworn when Mrs Williams had asked him to come back.
[44] Ms Herbert had said she would be a witness when Mrs Williams had asked the other persons present whether they had heard what Mr Goode had said. She said Mr Renault took her statement and she signed it after she had read it. It was correct. She would not have signed it otherwise.
[45] Ms Herbert said Mr Goode was very very angry but he did not appear to be impaired on the day. He had slammed the door when he left. It was just like a naughty child would slam the door.
[46] The final witness was Mr Scott Wallis, a Stipendiary Steward attached to the RIU. He said on Friday 25 November 2016 he was on duty at the meeting conducted by the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington. At about 12.15 pm he spoke to licensed trainer Mr John Goode. Mr Goode was sitting at the front of the kennel block by himself at that time. Mr Wallis requested him to go to the Stipendiary Stewards’ room to discuss an earlier incident between himself and Racing Investigator, Mrs Kylie Williams. Mr Goode’s reply to that request was “Oh that f***ing mole up there.”
[47] Mr Wallis said he replied that there was no need to speak like that. Mr Goode then directed abusive and foul language at Mr Wallis, calling him a “lying wormy c**t” and telling him that he “could go and f**k off as well”. Mr Goode continued with the profanities for a brief period then proceeded to verbally threaten Mr Wallis by saying “You are lucky I don’t whack you now” or words to that effect. Mr Wallis said at this time Mr Goode had his fists up to Mr Wallis’s face; they were about a foot away. He was also that close when he used the foul language. He said Mr Goode was usually fine to deal with. There had been no issues in the past. He was shocked at his language and very surprised by his response. He appeared to be very very angry. At the time, he said there was a low (not even waist high) fence between them. It was so low that a person could just step over it.
[48] Mr Wallis said he asked Mr Goode twice to go to the Stewards’ room. He gave him two directions to that effect. He had asked him to go because he was aware Mr Goode had told Mrs Williams to “Get f****d”. He did not ask him for an explanation. When Mr Goode did not respond the first time, he went and got another Stipendiary Steward, Mr Renault, and he again directed Mr Goode to the Stipendiary Stewards’ room, in the presence of Mr Renault.
[49] He was aware he needed a witness to the direction and that was why he had called Mr Renault. He said he gave the direction in the presence of Mr Renault. He told Mr Goode to go and see Mr Quirk (who is a Stipendiary Steward). He said his asking him to do this was the direction. Mr Goode said nothing to him at this time. He had no further dealings with Mr Goode that day but he understood Mr Goode never went to the room. He confirmed that Mr Renault never said anything to Mr Goode.
[50] Mr Goode questioned Mr Wallis as to when r 87.4.a came into effect. Mr Wallis replied that it was last year. This could be the first time the rule had been used although he believed it had been used at Wanganui previously. He agreed with Mr Goode that Mr Goode did not appear drugged or drunk. He also acknowledged he had not told Mr Goode why he had to go and see Mrs Williams. The second time he had told Mr Goode he needed to go to the Stewards’ room to talk with Mr Quirk about the earlier matters. Mr Goode did not comply. It would have been about a 15-metre walk to the room.
Respondent’s oral submissions
[51] Mr Goode questioned the validity of r 87.4. He believed it had come into existence in October 2015 when the various clubs had voted on remits and this was one that was passed. It was contentious; it was not unanimous. He submitted it had not been publicly notified in the official magazine and had not been placed on the website, as was required by the constitution. He was thus unaware of the rule. He was familiar with the alcohol rule. This was why he had said he had not been drinking. He acknowledged that Mrs Williams had said this was a drug test. He was concerned all this was taking place in the office in front of people he knew and the veterinarian. He said he “saw red” because it was in front of his peers and in his mind, he thought the rule did not exist.
[52] Mr Goode continued by stating the Greyhound Racing head office was dysfunctional for a time and all the rules that emanated from the 2015 conference were null and void. There was thus no power or authority for the Stipendiary Stewards to require him to take a drug test. He had read the greyhound journal from cover to cover and there was no mention of the rule. It was not on the website. He said other trainers he had spoken to did not know about the rule either. There was no danger when walking a dog to the traps, so he believed the fact this was seen as a safety sensitive issue was a nonsense.
[53] Mr Goode said he had been “frog marched” to the Secretary’s Office. He thought it was about an abusive email he had sent to the Wanganui Greyhound Club concerning the use of devices to test for alcohol. He was angered, as he does not drink, and thought it was “political”. Drugs had not crossed his mind and it added to his surprise to be told in front of an audience that he was to be drug tested. He thought this was demeaning and an attack on his character, and that was why he said, “Get f****d”.
[54] Mr Goode said the fact that other people were listening in to the conversation he was having with Mrs Williams when he was about to be tested made him angry. He said the words he used were “Get f****d”. He said he turned on his heels and slammed the door. He did not remember making any gesture.
[55] Mr Goode stated that the word “f**k” was commonly used in everyday conversation and in using that word he was not using abusive or foul language. It was merely an exclamation of annoyance; it was not threatening. It was part of his vocabulary. He had had a background as a seaman and had worked below decks. The word was ingrained in him. It had been used recently on Trackside in an interview after a race and was used by protesters through megaphones. It was nothing more than slang; like “bugger” and “bastard”. There were no children present and in the context of adults, such as Racecourse Investigators, its use was “nothing”.
[56] The words he had had with Mr Wallis he could not recall, but they were not what Mr Wallis had said. It was a “robust conversation”. The Committee only had Mr Wallis’s word that those were the words he used. He acknowledged he had had a meeting with Mr Wallis and had been asked to go and report to Mr Quirk and had not done so.
[57] Mr Goode emphasised that the confrontations were all instigated by the RIU and there had always been a fence between him and Mr Wallis. He had been “blindsided” by being asked for a drug test. This had angered him but it was not a shouting match.
[58] Mr Goode believed the four civilian witnesses (those present in the office) were a “jack-up” or a “fait accompli”. Their statements were not in their own words. Mr Renault had written them. They had simply signed on the dotted line. He alleged the witnesses had been coerced into signing their statements and that there were discrepancies in their oral evidence.
[59] Mr Goode stated he had been “warned off” by a letter he had received on 7 or 8 December last. He asked the Committee to look into this for him. (We explained that this was a decision of GRNZ. The informant acknowledged that they had made a recommendation to this effect to GRNZ. We suggested to the informant that perhaps this matter could be revisited in light of the fact that the hearing would be adjourned and there would be a reserved decision. We understand the warning off was lifted a few days after the hearing.)
[60] Mr Goode concluded by stating “the rule does not exist” and that “constitutional errors with r 87.4 rendered enforcement of the rule ultra vires.” There was no person with the authority to require him to take a drug test. He had been in Greyhound Racing for 31 years and any previous breaches had been for minor matters.
Informant’s written submissions by way of summing up
The charge of failing to provide a urine sample
[61] The informant submitted there was no dispute that Mrs Williams required Mr Goode to provide a urine sample pursuant to the requirements of r 87.4.a of the Rules.
[61] The informant submitted there was no dispute that Mrs Williams required Mr Goode to provide a urine sample pursuant to the requirements of r 87.4.a of the Rules.
[62] The respondent's argument was identified as being that r 87.4.a was a nullity, as it had not been passed in accordance with r 8 of the Greyhound Racing Rules. Rule 8 states:
Amendments to these rules or regulations
8.1 The Rules of Racing or any of them may from time to time be amended or revoked by unanimous resolution of the Board of which not less than fourteen days' notice has been given to each Board member. Prior to any amendment, revocation or addition to the Rules of Racing being considered by the Board, the proposed amendment, revocation or addition shall be notified to:
a. every Club;
b. the Judicial Control Authority;
c. the Integrity Service Provider; and
d. the New Zealand Racing Board.
In addition, details of any proposed amendment, revocation or addition to the Racing Rules shall be placed on the Association website and published in the Association's industry magazine no later than 20 days prior to the Board meeting at which the amendment, revocation or addition will be considered.
No amendment to the Rules of Racing shall be made by the Board without the prior written consent of the New Zealand Racing Board and the prior consent of clubs holding not less than two thirds of the votes able
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules:
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: