Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v J McInerney – Reserved Decision of Judicial Committee dated 14 August 2014

hearingid: 3fc5045b0565d9bd67e47b920ae767bd

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype:

startdate: no date provided

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: 18/08/2014

hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v J McInerney - Reserved Decision of Judicial Committee dated 14 August 2014

charge:

facts:

appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

HELD AT CHRISTCHURCH

IN THE MATTER of the Rules of New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association

IN THE MATTER of Information No. A6311 

BETWEEN J M McLAUGHLIN, Stipendiary Steward for the Racing Integrity Unit

Informant

AND JONATHON McINERNEY of Darfield, Licensed Person

Respondent

Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman - S C Ching, Panelist

Present: Mr J M McLaughlin, the Informant

Mr J McInerney jnr, the Respondent

Kirsty Taylor, in support of Mr McInerney

Mr N G McIntyre, Registrar

Date of Hearing: 23 July 2014

Date of Decision: 14 August 2014

RESERVED DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

The Charge

[1] Information No.A6311 alleges that at the meeting of Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club at Addington on 27 June 2014 Mr McInerney committed a breach of Rule 88.1.o in that he “committed an improper act by removing the blinkers of JACKS A JEWEL (trained by A C Roberts) at the lure after Race 8”.

[2] The information was served on Mr McInerney on the day of the meeting. Mr McInerney signed the Statement by the Respondent at the foot of the Information indicating that he did not admit the breach of the Rule.

The Rule

[3] Rule 88 of the Rules of New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association provides as follows:

88.1 Any person (including an Official) commits an offence if he/she:

(o) has, in relation to a Greyhound or Greyhound racing, done a thing, or omitted to do a thing which is negligent, dishonest, fraudulent or improper, or constitutes misconduct;

The Plea

[4] The above charge and Rule were read to Mr McInerney and he indicated that he denied the charge.

Evidence of the Informant

[5] Mr McLaughlin informed the Committee that he was relying on video evidence in support of the charge. He also produced a written statement from the starter, Mr J D Smith, to which Mr McInerney had no objection.

[6] Prior to the start of Race 8, racingdogs.co.nz Dash for C3 greyhounds over a distance of 295 metres at the meeting of Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club held at Addington Raceway on 27 June 2014, the starter, Mr Jim Smith, radioed the Stewards requesting clarification of the legitimacy of the blinkers worn by JACK’S A JEWEL after being queried by Mr McInerney. Stipendiary Steward, Mr R A Quirk, radioed back stating that the blinkers were approved by the Stewards. JACK’S A JEWEL wears the inside blinker lower than the outside blinker.

[7] JACK’S A JEWEL is trained by Mr A C Roberts and wears blinkers. Mr Roberts at no time gave permission to Mr McInerney to handle or take the blinkers off JACK’S A JEWEL. The dog was handled and boxed by Mr Matthew McCook.

[8] Mr McInerney’s runner in the race was BOTANY PRANCER, trained by Mr J T McInerney. It was boxed and handled by the Respondent.

[9] JACK’S A JEWEL finished 4th of 8 runners and ran to the lure with its blinkers intact.

[10] Mr McInerney then handled JACK’S A JEWEL and the next view of that dog shows it going back to the lure without blinkers. The blinkers would have been attached to the muzzle of JACK’S A JEWEL.

[11] Upon viewing the back-on footage, Mr McInerney could be seen to grab JACK’S A JEWEL, turn the dog away from the lure, remove the blinkers and throw them on the ground. He then pushed the dog away and the dog went back to the lure minus blinkers.

[12] Stewards deem that Mr McInerney removed the blinkers/muzzle from JACK’S A JEWEL after the race, thus committing an improper act.

[13] Mr McLaughlin alleged that by intentionally grabbing JACK’S A JEWEL before its handler and removing the blinkers/muzzle from the dog and releasing it has left that runner free without a muzzle and thus exposed licence-holders and greyhounds to a potentially dangerous situation.

[14] Mr McLaughlin then showed a video replay of the race. When the field got to the lure, JACK’S A JEWEL ran in with its head on the lure. The muzzle and blinkers were clearly still attached. Mr McInerney confirmed that he handled the dog at that point.

[15] A discussion then took place as to the actions of Mr McInerney in handling the dog. Mr McInerney said the he accepted that the first bite that the dog took was at the lure but the second bite was on the greyhound, McJOPSON. That was when he grabbed the dog, Mr McInerney said.

[16] Mr McLaughlin referred to the video replay and alleged that Mr McInerney could be seen to put his hand on the blinkers, drag them off and throw them away onto the track. He then threw the dog away. The dog ran back without a muzzle or blinkers on. Mr McCook then retrieved the muzzle and blinkers from the track and replaced them on the dog. There was never any reason for removing the muzzle from a dog at the lure in this manner, Mr McLaughlin alleged.

[17] Mr McLaughlin alleged that Mr McInerney had committed an improper act when he removed the muzzle and blinkers from JACK’S A JEWEL at the lure.

[18] Mr McInerney had no objection to Mr McLaughlin producing a written statement from Mr J D Smith, the starter. The relevant part of that statement stated as follows:

“John [Mr McInerney] then lodged a complaint that he objected to the blinkers on the greyhound (JACK’S A JEWEL) that Mathew McCook was taking out in the same race. The objection was that one blinker was sticking out flat and in his opinion it could impede his dog from passing it in a race. I went over and checked the blinkers on JACK’S A JEWEL. In my opinion it was fine so I informed John McInerney of this fact.”

[19] Mr McInerney said that he was upset about the starter’s reaction but he nevertheless allowed BOTANY PRANCER to start in the race.

[20] Mr McInerney then produced to the hearing a muzzle with a blinker fitted in the same manner as on JACK’S A JEWEL in the race in question. He said that when dogs were racing in tight quarters, it could hinder another dog.

Evidence of the Respondent

[21] Mr McInerney produced a lengthy written statement. The relevant portions state:

“At the finish of the race as the lure was coming to a stop, with all 8 dogs on the lure at the time, I was the first person there. I witnessed the runner JACK’S A JEWEL trying to bite another runner, the eventual winner McJOPSON, around the ears and head, and also around the underside of its rib cage and back muscles. At this point I have reacted by catching JACK’S A JEWEL to stop it causing any damage to the other dog. When catching dogs at the end of a race, my right arm is looped under the dog’s rib cage, and my left hand lifts the dog off the lure from the underside of the neck, as the dog is suspended with all four legs off the ground so it cannot keep lunging forward.

As I have caught the dog, I swung around to the right to look for the handler of it, Mr Matthew McCook. In my right hand was my own collar and lead. I looked up and thought I saw Matthew McCook, the handler of JACK’S A JEWEL, and went to pass him the dog.

At this point JACK’S A JEWEL has lunged forward and attempted to get back to the other dogs. Whilst my right hand was holding the dog under its rib cage, in an attempt to hold it so it could not get back to the lure, my left hand has slipped over the dog’s face while I was pushing it in the direction of Matthew McCook.

When I have seen Matthew McCook come around to the front of JACK’S A JEWEL and put his hands around the dog’s neck I have then let go of the dog so I could get back to retrieve my own dog, BOTANY PRANCER, from the lure.”

[22] Mr McInerney’s statement then went on, at some length, to describe a history of the behaviour of JACK’S A JEWEL at the lure and the failure of its handler to control it on this occasion. It then continues:

“I cannot and did not see how the muzzle came off JACK’S A JEWEL. The muzzle that this dog wears has blinkers on either side of it, the right one is vertical whereas the blinker on the left of the muzzle is horizontal.

In no way would I ever remove a muzzle from another dog at the lure, especially one which has a reputation of attacking other dogs, as JACK’S A JEWEL does. This would be putting my dog and others in a problem situation. I would never do this, as I hold animal welfare in high regard and will do anything I possibly can to make sure the dogs are safe.”

[23] Mr McInerney’s statement concludes by saying:

“In conclusion, there was absolutely no way that I would take the muzzle off JACK’S A JEWEL. The only reason that I caught this dog was to stop it attacking the other dogs. What would I have to gain by taking the muzzle off this dog? My own dog was still at the lure so that would put it and others at risk of being attacked by an unmuzzled dog. Common sense would tell you that I would not do this, there is no benefit for me in this situation and it does not make sense. I cannot see how or why the muzzle has come of JACK’S A JEWEL. The dog still had its muzzle on when I left it in the hands of Mr Matthew McCook.”

[24] Mr McInerney produced letters from six persons who had handled other greyhounds in the race. However, none of these letters assisted Mr McInerney as none of the writers could attest that Mr McInerney had not removed the muzzle and blinkers from JACK’S A JEWEL.

[25] In oral evidence before the Committee Mr McInerney said that, if he did remove the muzzle from JACK’S A JEWEL, he did so accidentally. He could not see from the video replays where he had done so. He did not dispute, when questioned by the Committee, that his hand had touched or connected with the muzzle nor did he dispute that the muzzle had come off. It was not uncommon for a muzzle to fall off a dog at the lure – he suggested, perhaps, one in ten races.

Reasons for Decision

[26] Mr McLaughlin showed us video replays of the incident at the lure following the race in support of the allegation that Mr McInerney removed the muzzle and blinkers from JACK’S A JEWEL, trained by Mr A C Roberts, and in doing so committed a breach of Rule 88.1 (o) in that he committed an improper act. Mr McLaughlin relied, principally, on that video evidence.

[27] Mr McInerney denied that he had removed the muzzle and blinkers from JACK’S A JEWEL as alleged and his defence was essentially that, in the face of the video evidence which appeared to support Mr McLaughlin’s allegation that he had done so.

[28] Mr McInerney was prepared to confirm that his hand had touched or connected with the muzzle of the dog and to concede that the muzzle had come off. However, he denied that he had removed the muzzle but said that, if he did, he had done so accidentally and not deliberately.

[29] While during the course of the hearing the Committee heard much oral evidence and submissions and received a written statement from Mr McInerney, in the final analysis it was the video evidence that was compelling.

[30] The Committee carefully viewed the video replays of the field of dogs at the lure following the race. It was our observation, and we find as a fact, that Mr McInerney could, quite clearly be seen to take of hold of JACK’S A JEWEL and forcibly remove the muzzle and blinkers from that dog and throw them on to the track.

[31] Mr McInerney’s evidence needs to be considered in the light of the statement of the starter, Mr Smith, to the effect that Mr McInerney had objected, prior to the start of the race, to the muzzle and blinkers worn by JACK’S A JEWEL. Mr McInerney made it clear from his own evidence that he took strong exception to the gear. The Committee believes that this explains Mr McInerney’s removing it at the lure and reinforces our finding that he did so wilfully. Mr McInerney was asking us to accept it as coincidence that the muzzle and blinkers came off the dog when he was attempting to prevent it getting at the other dogs at the lure - after he had expressed obvious concern about that equipment at the boxes prior to the start.

[32] The Committee does not accept Mr McInerney’s evidence as credible.

[33] Having found that Mr McInerney removed the muzzle and blinkers as alleged, the Committee then needed to determine whether that constituted an improper act in terms of the Rule.

[34] In this context, we take “improper” to mean “something that a reasonable and sensible person would not do” or “something that does not conform to accepted behaviour or customs”. We are satisfied that Mr McInerney’s actions, on this occasion, came within those definitions.

[35] The Committee is satisfied that Mr McInerney committed an improper act when he removed the muzzle and blinkers from JACK’S A JEWEL at the lure. It must never be proper, except in exceptional circumstances which did not exist in this case, for a handler to interfere in such a manner at any time with the gear of a dog trained by another trainer.

[36] The charge is, therefore, found proved.

Penalty and Costs

[37] The Committee invites the parties to file written submissions in relation to penalty and costs. The Informant shall have 5 working days from the date of this decision for such purpose and the Respondent shall have a further 5 working days from the date of receipt of the Informant’s decisions to file his submissions. Such submissions are to be filed with the Executive Officer of the Judicial Control Authority.

R G McKENZIE                   S C CHING

Chairman                         Panelist 

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: