Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v WA Fausett – Decision dated 11 July 2016 – Chair, Mr A Dooley

hearingid: a52090bb2f935871cb0ab87f55645597

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype:

startdate: no date provided

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: 11/07/2016

hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v WA Fausett - Decision dated 11 July 2016 - Chair, Mr A Dooley

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

AND IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing

BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT (RIU)

Informant

AND WAYNE ALAN FAUSETT

Open Horseman / Trainer

Respondent

Information: A8415

Appearing: Mr O Westerlund - Investigator Racing Integrity Unit

Mr W Fausett – Open Horseman / Trainer

Date of hearing: 8 July 2016

Venue: Alexandra Park

Judicial Committee: Mr A Dooley, Chairman – Mr B Scott, Committee Member

DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

Charge

The Informant, Mr O Westerlund, Racing Investigator, alleged that between the 14th April 2016 and the 15th April 2016 being the holder of a Licence to Train and Open Driver issued under the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing, Mr Fausett did place 10 multi bets electronically through his TAB account which included the horse he was driving.

Rule 505(1) and (2) states:

(1) A horseman may not bet on any horse or combination of horses in a race, in which he or she is driving.

(2) A breach of this sub-rule (1) is declared to be a serious racing offence.

PENALTY: 1001 (2)

Every person who commits a serious racing offence shall be liable to the following penalties:

(a) a fine exceeding $30,000; and/or

(b) suspension from holding or obtaining a licence, for any specific period or for life; and/or

(c) disqualification for a specific period or for life.

Mr Fausett acknowledged that he understood the nature of the charge and admitted the breach.

Mr Fausett acknowledged that all the relevant documents from the RIU had been disclosed to him. Mr Fausett said he accepted the contents of the documents and consented to them being admitted as evidence.

The proposed procedure for the hearing was explained to Mr Fausett and he had no concerns or objections.

Mr Westerlund produced a letter dated 23 June 2016 from Mr M Godber, Operations Manager for the Racing Integrity Unit, authorising the filing of the Information pursuant to Rule 1108 (2) alleging breaches of the NZ Rules of Harness Racing under Rule 505(1) & 505 (2)

Summary of agreed Facts by the Informant

The respondent Wayne Alan FAUSETT is a Licenced Trainer and Open Driver issued under the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing. He had been an Open Driver for 27 years and Licenced to Train for 12 months.

FAUSETT operates a New Zealand TAB account, number XXXXXX.

As a result of information received the Racing Integrity Unit betting analyst completed analysis of FAUSETT’s TAB account on the 15 April 2016.

On the 14th April 2016 FAUSETT placed six multi bets on himself via his TAB account using the internet to place his bets. Also on the 15th April 2016 he further placed four more multi bets on himself via his TAB account using the internet to place his bets. He anchored the horse that he was driving “Pocket Major” in all his multi bets.

All the multi bets were on horses that were racing at the Auckland Trotting Club meeting held at Alexandra Park on Friday the 15th April 2016.

Refer SCHEDULE 1 as to the list of bets taken.

DATE               TIME                MEDIUM   BET       NAME OF        PLACING OF    AMT        AMT

                                                               TYPE     HORSE HE       HORSE             INV         RET

                                                                            DROVE           ANCHORED

                                                                             & OWNS
14/06/2016    18:11.59 hrs    Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $40         $0
14/06/2016    18:12.32 hrs    Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $40         $0
14/06/2016    18:13.32 hrs    Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $20         $0
14/06/2016    18:13.57 hrs    Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $20         $0
14/06/2016    18:18.53 hrs    Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $20         $0
14/06/2016    18:19.24 hrs    Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $20         $0

15/06/2016     11:54.24 hrs   Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $30         $0
15/06/2016     11:54.56 hrs   Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $30         $0
15/06/2016     11:55.48 hrs   Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $10         $0
15/06/2016     11:56.15 hrs   Internet    Multi     Pocket Major   Second             $10         $0
                                                                                                                          TOTAL=  TOTAL=
                                                                                                                           $240       $0

His total investment was $240 for no return. None of the multi bets were successful, as a number of legs did not win including “Pocket Major”.

Mr FAUSETT was interviewed on the 2nd June 2016 and he admitted placing the bets on his TAB account.

In explanation he stated that he was sort of aware that he was not allowed to bet on himself but likes having a bet to try and make a dollar.

Mr FAUSETT is aged 52 years and has not previously appeared.

Submissions by the Respondent

Mr Fausett said that he made a mistake and stated he didn’t realise he was doing a lot wrong. He added that he was unsure of the Rule until Mr Westerlund fully explained it to him during the investigation.

In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Fausett confirmed that he understood the Rule and would learn from this experience.

Decision

As Mr Fausett admitted the breach we find the charge proved.

Submissions on Penalty by Informant

The respondent Wayne FAUSETT is a licensed Trainer and Open Driver under the Rules of New Zealand Harness Racing. He has been involved in the industry for approximately 27 years. He is 52 years of age with a date of birth of 16 August 1963.

He has admitted to one ‘representative charge’ in breach of Rule 505 (1) in relation to placing 10 multi bets on his TAB account on a horse that he was driving in combination with other horses on the 15th April 2016 at the Auckland Trotting Club meeting at Alexandra Park, Auckland.

The details of the bets are in the agreed Summary of Facts.

When interviewed FAUSETT admitted betting and stated that he was sort of aware that he was not allowed to bet on himself but likes having a bet to try and make a dollar.

The penalties which may be imposed are also fully detailed in the attached Charge Rule Penalty provisions document.

It is submitted that a fine $1500 fine should be imposed.

Given that a ‘representative charge’ was preferred over 10 individual charges, some weighting in penalty must be given to the number of bets placed.

In support of this penalty I will refer to previous decisions by the Judicial Control Authority which may be of some assistance:

In R.I.U v M. KERR (11.01.2015) - one “all up” bet placed including a horse in one leg that he was driving. The penalty imposed was a fine of $650.

In R.I.U v W.D. O’CONELL (02.09.2015) – placing a fixed odd bet on a horse that he was driving to win and place. The penalty imposed was a disqualification of 4 months.

In R.I.U v N.C. RASMUSSEN (18.12.2015) – three charges including one for betting on herself in one race she was driving (Charge 3 - $750 fine on this charge). The penalty imposed on all charges was a total fine of $3750.

In R.I.U v B. CROTHERS (26.12.2015) - placing a bet on a horse he was driving to win and place. The penalty imposed was a fine of $650.

In R.I.U v N. TEELUCK (16.05.2016) – a jockey placing 15 bets on the “Jockey Challenge”. The penalty imposed was $2000.

The Racing Integrity Unit are seeking no costs.

It is acknowledged that Mr FAUSETT has admitted the breach at the first opportunity and has been fully co-operative throughout the process.

There were no sinister intentions in relation to the bets placed by Mr FAUSETT. He made no money from the bets placed.

Mr FAUSETT has not previously appeared.

Mr FAUSETT has been in the Harness Racing industry for a number of years and ignorance of the rules is no excuse.

Submissions on Penalty by Respondent

Mr Fausett made reference to the other penalties imposed on Harness Drivers and in particular Ms Rasmussen’s case. He emphasised in Ms Rasmussen’s case a $750 fine was imposed when she placed 1 bet on the horse she drove in a race.

Reasons for Penalty

The Committee carefully considered the evidence and submissions presented. The mitigating factors are Mr Fausett’s admission of the breach, his clear record under this Rule and his co-operation with the RIU during their investigations for which he has been given credit. However, this has to be balanced against the charge which is described as a serious racing offence and in our view one of several aggravating factors. Breaches of this nature can create a perception that goes to the heart and integrity of racing. Serious racing offence provisions are put in place to protect this integrity and are paramount for public confidence in Harness racing.

The Committee accepts that there were no sinister intentions in relation to the 10 multi bets placed by Mr Fausett on his horse POCKET MAJOR. However, it is important to recognise that the number of bets placed is clearly at the high end and in stark contrast to the other 4 Harness Drivers referred to by the RIU in their penalty submissions. It is also relevant that Mr Fausett placed his bets over 2 days. We consider these are further aggravating factors which warrants an uplift from the penalties imposed on those particular Drivers.

The Committee took guidance from Ms Rasmussen’s recent charges which were well publicised in the media. We note 1 of the charges incurred a $750 fine for placing 1 bet on a horse she drove in a race. However, it is significant in this case Mr Fausett placed 10 separate multi bets on his horse. Mr Fausett is fortunate the RIU elected to make only the 1 ‘representative charge’ and not 10 separate charges.

The current Penalty Guide for Judicial Committees does not classify a starting point for a breach of this Rule.

We note that Mr Fausett has been involved in the industry for approximately 27 years. Mr Fausett has an obligation to be conversant with the Rules of Harness Racing, which has led him to be in breach of this Rule.

We also make reference to Rule 1114(2) which states:

In imposing a penalty or affecting any remedy provided in these Rules the Judicial Committee may have regard to such matters as they consider appropriate including:

(c) any consequential effects upon any person or horse as a result of breach of the Rule;

(d) the need to maintain integrity and public confidence in Harness Racing.

Penalty

After taking into account all of the above factors we consider a fine is an appropriate penalty and Mr Fausett is fined $1,400.

Costs

The RIU made no application for costs.

As this charge was heard on a raceday, there will be no order for JCA costs.

AJ Dooley        BJ Scott

Chairman        Committee Member

11 July 2016

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: