Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v TM Patton – Decision dated 6 November 2014
ID: JCA17412
Decision:
NON RACEDAY INQUIRY BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
Non Raceday Judicial Committee: Mr N McCutcheon, Chair – Mr A Godsalve, Committee Member
Venue: Cambridge Raceway
Date: 6 November 2014
Information No: A7102
Informant: Mr A Cruickshank – Racing Integrity Unit
Respondent: Mr TM Patton – Greyhound Licensed Owner/Trainer
Present: Mrs T Patton
Registrar: Mr B Oliver
Plea: Admitted
Mr Cruickshank produced written authority from Mr Godber, General Manager Racing Integrity Unit to lodge the information against Mr Thomas Mark Patton for a breach of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association Rules.
CHARGE:
On the 25th day of September 2014, Thomas Mark Patton was the licensed Owner/Trainer of the greyhound “VALAIN’S FLYER” which was presented for and raced in race 12 at a race meeting conducted by the Waikato Greyhound Racing Club at Cambridge, when the said greyhound was found to have had administered to it a prohibited substance, namely Diclofenac, being an offence under the provisions of Rules 87.1 and 87.3 and punishable pursuant to Rule 89.1 and 87.4 of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association Rules.
RULE 87.1
The Owner, Trainer or person in charge of a greyhound nominated to compete in a race, shall produce the greyhound for the race free of any prohibited substance.
RULE 87.3
Without limiting any of the provisions of these rules, the Owner and Trainer or person for the time being in charge of any greyhound brought onto the racecourse of any club for the purposes of engaging in any race which is found on testing, examination or analysis conducted pursuant to these rules to have received a prohibited substance shall be severally guilty of an offence.
PENALTY:
Rule 89.1
Any person found guilty of an offence under these rules shall be liable to:
a. A fine not exceeding $10,000 for any one (1) Offence, and/or
b. Suspension and/or
c. Disqualification, and/or
d. Warning Off.
Rule 87.4
Any greyhound which competes in a race and is found to be the recipient of a prohibited substance shall be disqualified from that race.
Subsequent to the Rules being read, Mr Patton acknowledged that he understood the Rules and the Charge that had been preferred against him.
SUMMARY OF FACTS:
The respondent Thomas Mark Patton is a licenced Owner/Trainer under the Rules of the New Zealand Greyhound Association.
On the 25th September 2014 “VALAIN’S FLYER” was correctly entered and presented to race by Mr Patton in Race 12 at the Waikato Greyhound Racing Club Meeting at Cambridge.
“VALAIN’S FLYER” underwent a random routine pre-race swab. Mr Patton does not contest the swabbing process.
“VALAIN’S FLYER” finished seventh of the eight greyhounds and did not win a stake.
All swab samples from the meeting were couriered to the New Zealand Racing Laboratory and were analysed for the presence of substances prohibited under the Rules of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association.
On the 7th of October 2014 the Official Racing Analyst reported in writing that the sample from “VALAIN’S FLYER” had tested positive to Diclofenac.
Diclofenac is an anti-inflammatory medication commonly used to reduce pain, swelling and inflammation. It is available to be purchased over the counter at most supermarkets and pharmacies in a variety of forms.
Diclofenac is a prohibited substance within the meaning of the Rules and its presence in a raceday sample is, prima facie, a breach of the Rules.
Mr Patton was interviewed at the Cambridge Racetrack on Thursday the 9th of October 2014. He was co-operative and was surprised when informed of the nature of the positive test. He could not explain the test result and denied ever having given “VALAIN’S FLYER” anything other than Aloe Vera Gel and All Black and Blue. Mr Patton stated that he used these products when rubbing “VALAIN’S FLYER” down.
On the 11th of October 2014 Mr Patton contacted investigators to advise that he had since learned that his wife had rubbed “VALAIN’S FLYER” down, on the 24th September 2014 with Voltaren Emulgel, a product containing Diclofenac.
Mr Patton has been involved in the greyhound industry for five years – the last 2 as a Trainer of “VALAIN’S FLYER”. He has had no previous rule breaches in this time.
When asked by the Chair Mr Patton said that the summary was true and correct.
Mr Patton for his part said that he took full responsibility for what had happened. He said that he had phoned his wife from his workplace and asked that she apply the Aloe Vera Gel to “VALAIN’S FLYER” and that some two days later his wife had told him she had used Voltaren Emulgel on the greyhound. He added that if he had have known this prior to the race and that there was a possibility of the greyhound returning a positive test he would have scratched it from the race.
Mrs Patton said that following the phone call from her husband that she went to locate the pottle (Aloe Vera Gel) but was unable to find it. She said that she had an injury herself and was using Voltaren Emulgel on the injury and decided to use the product on “VALAIN’S FLYER”. She added that she had no idea that the product could result in a positive result and realises that she made a mistake in what she did.
As Mr Patton admitted the breach it was found to be proved.
PENALTY SUBMISSIONS: (Presented by Mr A Cruickshank)
1. The respondent Thomas Mark Patton is a licensed Owner/Trainer under the Rules of the New Zealand Greyhound Association. He has been involved in the industry for 5 years. He is 54 years of age with a date of birth of 12.07.60.
2. He has admitted a breach of the Rules in relation to his greyhound “VALAIN’S FLYER” on the 25th September 2014 at the Waikato Greyhound Racing Club Meeting at Cambridge.
3. The drug concerned, the details of its administration are all contained in the agreed Summary of Facts and these are not disputed.
4. The penalties which may be imposed are also fully detailed in the attached Charge Rule Penalty provisions document.
5. I believe that this breach can be dealt with by way of a monetary penalty. To that end I seek a fine of $2,000.
6. In support of this penalty I will refer to previous decisions by the J.C.A which set the precedent and may be of some assistance.
7. In R.I.U v SC (25.08.14) in this matter the two greyhounds tested positive for Pheniramine which was mistakenly administered. The penalty imposed was a total fine of $2,600 and both dogs disqualified.
8. R.I.U v NG (26.6.11) in this matter the greyhound had Stanozolol negligently administered and was fined $2,000, $350 J.C.A costs and the greyhound disqualified.
9. R.I.U v PL (15.11.13) in this matter the greyhound had Difflam administered knowing it contained Benzyclamine. Penalty imposed $1450 fine and the greyhound disqualified.
10. R.I.U v MR (2.11.12) in this matter was the non-intentional administration of morphine through having fed poppy seed bread. Penalty imposed $2000 fine, JCA costs $350 and the greyhound disqualified.
11. R.I.U v JM (30.10.11) the same circumstances as paragraph 10. Penalty imposed $2000 fine, J.C.A costs $500 and greyhound disqualified.
12. R.I.U v JM (4.11.13) this matter related to a performance enhancing caffeine type product that was safe to use because it was undetectable. It was intentionally administered. Penalty imposed $3,000 on both charges with both greyhounds disqualified.
13. This matter is not a situation where the drug in this case Diclofenac was administered to enhance performance.
14. The substance which was used was an over the counter anti-inflammatory previously used by Patton’s wife to treat an injury that she was suffering from.
15. The administration of Diclofenac to the animal by his wife was not known by Patton.
16. It is fully acknowledged that Patton has been fully co-operative throughout the investigative process.
17. He has no other Rule breaches during his 5 year involvement in the industry.
18. Under Rule 87.4 “VALAIN’S FLYER” is required to be disqualified.
19. “VALAIN’S FLYER” did not win any stakes in the race so repayment of these is not required.
20. The ‘B’ sample has not been tested and the R.I.U is seeking no costs.
Mr Patton said that “Mr C” had two greyhounds that returned positive results due to similar circumstances and was fined $2,600. He said that as he only had the one positive result he submitted that a fine of $1,300 would be a suitable penalty.
REASONS FOR PENALTY
The committee carefully considered all penalty submissions and adopted a starting point of $2,000.
The committee was satisfied that there were a number of mitigating factors namely
1. The admittance of the breach
2. Mr Patton’s unblemished record over a period of 5 years
3. His co-operation with the investigator
4. That the anti-inflammatory product was not applied to intentionally enhance the greyhound’s performance
5. That the positive result was due to an error on the part of Mrs Patton in applying Voltaren Emulgel on the greyhound
The committee determined that a significant discount from the starting point of $2,000 was appropriate.
PENALTY:
Mr Patton was fined $1,400 with no order as to costs.
“VALAIN’S FLYER” was disqualified from the said race pursuant to Rule 87.4.
N McCutcheon A Godsalve
Chair Committee Member
6 November 2014
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 01/11/2014
Publish Date: 01/11/2014
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: e094c5b14b5da846e98db6277a253297
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 01/11/2014
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v TM Patton - Decision dated 6 November 2014
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
NON RACEDAY INQUIRY BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
Non Raceday Judicial Committee: Mr N McCutcheon, Chair – Mr A Godsalve, Committee Member
Venue: Cambridge Raceway
Date: 6 November 2014
Information No: A7102
Informant: Mr A Cruickshank – Racing Integrity Unit
Respondent: Mr TM Patton – Greyhound Licensed Owner/Trainer
Present: Mrs T Patton
Registrar: Mr B Oliver
Plea: Admitted
Mr Cruickshank produced written authority from Mr Godber, General Manager Racing Integrity Unit to lodge the information against Mr Thomas Mark Patton for a breach of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association Rules.
CHARGE:
On the 25th day of September 2014, Thomas Mark Patton was the licensed Owner/Trainer of the greyhound “VALAIN’S FLYER” which was presented for and raced in race 12 at a race meeting conducted by the Waikato Greyhound Racing Club at Cambridge, when the said greyhound was found to have had administered to it a prohibited substance, namely Diclofenac, being an offence under the provisions of Rules 87.1 and 87.3 and punishable pursuant to Rule 89.1 and 87.4 of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association Rules.
RULE 87.1
The Owner, Trainer or person in charge of a greyhound nominated to compete in a race, shall produce the greyhound for the race free of any prohibited substance.
RULE 87.3
Without limiting any of the provisions of these rules, the Owner and Trainer or person for the time being in charge of any greyhound brought onto the racecourse of any club for the purposes of engaging in any race which is found on testing, examination or analysis conducted pursuant to these rules to have received a prohibited substance shall be severally guilty of an offence.
PENALTY:
Rule 89.1
Any person found guilty of an offence under these rules shall be liable to:
a. A fine not exceeding $10,000 for any one (1) Offence, and/or
b. Suspension and/or
c. Disqualification, and/or
d. Warning Off.
Rule 87.4
Any greyhound which competes in a race and is found to be the recipient of a prohibited substance shall be disqualified from that race.
Subsequent to the Rules being read, Mr Patton acknowledged that he understood the Rules and the Charge that had been preferred against him.
SUMMARY OF FACTS:
The respondent Thomas Mark Patton is a licenced Owner/Trainer under the Rules of the New Zealand Greyhound Association.
On the 25th September 2014 “VALAIN’S FLYER” was correctly entered and presented to race by Mr Patton in Race 12 at the Waikato Greyhound Racing Club Meeting at Cambridge.
“VALAIN’S FLYER” underwent a random routine pre-race swab. Mr Patton does not contest the swabbing process.
“VALAIN’S FLYER” finished seventh of the eight greyhounds and did not win a stake.
All swab samples from the meeting were couriered to the New Zealand Racing Laboratory and were analysed for the presence of substances prohibited under the Rules of the New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association.
On the 7th of October 2014 the Official Racing Analyst reported in writing that the sample from “VALAIN’S FLYER” had tested positive to Diclofenac.
Diclofenac is an anti-inflammatory medication commonly used to reduce pain, swelling and inflammation. It is available to be purchased over the counter at most supermarkets and pharmacies in a variety of forms.
Diclofenac is a prohibited substance within the meaning of the Rules and its presence in a raceday sample is, prima facie, a breach of the Rules.
Mr Patton was interviewed at the Cambridge Racetrack on Thursday the 9th of October 2014. He was co-operative and was surprised when informed of the nature of the positive test. He could not explain the test result and denied ever having given “VALAIN’S FLYER” anything other than Aloe Vera Gel and All Black and Blue. Mr Patton stated that he used these products when rubbing “VALAIN’S FLYER” down.
On the 11th of October 2014 Mr Patton contacted investigators to advise that he had since learned that his wife had rubbed “VALAIN’S FLYER” down, on the 24th September 2014 with Voltaren Emulgel, a product containing Diclofenac.
Mr Patton has been involved in the greyhound industry for five years – the last 2 as a Trainer of “VALAIN’S FLYER”. He has had no previous rule breaches in this time.
When asked by the Chair Mr Patton said that the summary was true and correct.
Mr Patton for his part said that he took full responsibility for what had happened. He said that he had phoned his wife from his workplace and asked that she apply the Aloe Vera Gel to “VALAIN’S FLYER” and that some two days later his wife had told him she had used Voltaren Emulgel on the greyhound. He added that if he had have known this prior to the race and that there was a possibility of the greyhound returning a positive test he would have scratched it from the race.
Mrs Patton said that following the phone call from her husband that she went to locate the pottle (Aloe Vera Gel) but was unable to find it. She said that she had an injury herself and was using Voltaren Emulgel on the injury and decided to use the product on “VALAIN’S FLYER”. She added that she had no idea that the product could result in a positive result and realises that she made a mistake in what she did.
As Mr Patton admitted the breach it was found to be proved.
PENALTY SUBMISSIONS: (Presented by Mr A Cruickshank)
1. The respondent Thomas Mark Patton is a licensed Owner/Trainer under the Rules of the New Zealand Greyhound Association. He has been involved in the industry for 5 years. He is 54 years of age with a date of birth of 12.07.60.
2. He has admitted a breach of the Rules in relation to his greyhound “VALAIN’S FLYER” on the 25th September 2014 at the Waikato Greyhound Racing Club Meeting at Cambridge.
3. The drug concerned, the details of its administration are all contained in the agreed Summary of Facts and these are not disputed.
4. The penalties which may be imposed are also fully detailed in the attached Charge Rule Penalty provisions document.
5. I believe that this breach can be dealt with by way of a monetary penalty. To that end I seek a fine of $2,000.
6. In support of this penalty I will refer to previous decisions by the J.C.A which set the precedent and may be of some assistance.
7. In R.I.U v SC (25.08.14) in this matter the two greyhounds tested positive for Pheniramine which was mistakenly administered. The penalty imposed was a total fine of $2,600 and both dogs disqualified.
8. R.I.U v NG (26.6.11) in this matter the greyhound had Stanozolol negligently administered and was fined $2,000, $350 J.C.A costs and the greyhound disqualified.
9. R.I.U v PL (15.11.13) in this matter the greyhound had Difflam administered knowing it contained Benzyclamine. Penalty imposed $1450 fine and the greyhound disqualified.
10. R.I.U v MR (2.11.12) in this matter was the non-intentional administration of morphine through having fed poppy seed bread. Penalty imposed $2000 fine, JCA costs $350 and the greyhound disqualified.
11. R.I.U v JM (30.10.11) the same circumstances as paragraph 10. Penalty imposed $2000 fine, J.C.A costs $500 and greyhound disqualified.
12. R.I.U v JM (4.11.13) this matter related to a performance enhancing caffeine type product that was safe to use because it was undetectable. It was intentionally administered. Penalty imposed $3,000 on both charges with both greyhounds disqualified.
13. This matter is not a situation where the drug in this case Diclofenac was administered to enhance performance.
14. The substance which was used was an over the counter anti-inflammatory previously used by Patton’s wife to treat an injury that she was suffering from.
15. The administration of Diclofenac to the animal by his wife was not known by Patton.
16. It is fully acknowledged that Patton has been fully co-operative throughout the investigative process.
17. He has no other Rule breaches during his 5 year involvement in the industry.
18. Under Rule 87.4 “VALAIN’S FLYER” is required to be disqualified.
19. “VALAIN’S FLYER” did not win any stakes in the race so repayment of these is not required.
20. The ‘B’ sample has not been tested and the R.I.U is seeking no costs.
Mr Patton said that “Mr C” had two greyhounds that returned positive results due to similar circumstances and was fined $2,600. He said that as he only had the one positive result he submitted that a fine of $1,300 would be a suitable penalty.
REASONS FOR PENALTY
The committee carefully considered all penalty submissions and adopted a starting point of $2,000.
The committee was satisfied that there were a number of mitigating factors namely
1. The admittance of the breach
2. Mr Patton’s unblemished record over a period of 5 years
3. His co-operation with the investigator
4. That the anti-inflammatory product was not applied to intentionally enhance the greyhound’s performance
5. That the positive result was due to an error on the part of Mrs Patton in applying Voltaren Emulgel on the greyhound
The committee determined that a significant discount from the starting point of $2,000 was appropriate.
PENALTY:
Mr Patton was fined $1,400 with no order as to costs.
“VALAIN’S FLYER” was disqualified from the said race pursuant to Rule 87.4.
N McCutcheon A Godsalve
Chair Committee Member
6 November 2014
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: