Non-Raceday Inquiry – S Hale

hearingid: 03ae41769c7134cbd5eec43f4f9e20fa

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing

startdate: 01/01/2001

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Non-Raceday Inquiry - S Hale

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

IN THE MATTER of a charge against Shelley Ann Hale that she breached Rule 1004(2) of the Rules of Racing.

AND IN THE MATTER of a request for a ruling under Rule 1004(1) of the Rules of Racing.

NON-RACEDAY INQUIRY

IN THE MATTER of a charge against Shelley Ann Hale that she breached Rule 1004(2) of the Rules of Racing.

AND IN THE MATTER of a request for a ruling under Rule 1004(1) of the Rules of Racing.

Held at Te Rapa Racecourse on Thursday, 8 June 2006 at 1.30 pm.

PRESENT:

Judicial Committee:                Mr R M Seabrook (Chairman)

                                                   Mr B R Tims

Mr J W McKenzie                   Chief Racecourse Inspector

Ms S Hale                                Defendant

Mr P Fraser                             Veterinarian

Mrs P Laboyrie                        Registrar

The charge read:

?THAT the horse TALKEETNA was brought to the racecourse at Paeroa for the purpose of engaging in the Majestic Horse Floats Limited 1670 race at the meeting of the Paeroa Racing Club on Wednesday 29 March 2006, (in which said race such horse stated) AND THAT such horse had had administered to it a prohibited substance, namely the anti-inflammatory agent Phenylbutazone, capable of affecting its speed, stamina, courage or conduct in breach of Rule 1004(2) AND THAT you were the Trainer of the horse AND THAT by virtue thereof you are liable to the penalty or penalties which may be imposed upon you pursuant to Rule 1004(3) of the New Zealand Rules of Racing unless you satisfy the Committee that you had taken all proper precautions to prevent the administration of such prohibited substance.

The following matter was also put before the Committee by Racecourse Inspector R P Bevege as a Request for a Ruling:

THAT the horse TALKEETNA was brought to the Racecourse at Paeroa and started in the Majestic Horse Floats Limited 1670 race at the meeting of the Paeroa Racing Club on Wednesday 29 March 2006, AND THAT such horse had had administered to it a prohibited substance, namely the anti-inflammatory agent Phenylbutazone capable of affecting its speed, stamina, courage or conduct in breach of Rule 1004(2) AND THAT by virtue thereof and of the provisions of Rule 1004(1) of the New Zealand Rules of Racing the said horse shall be disqualified.?

Ms Hale admitted the breach and the presence of Phenylbutazone in the sample.  By reason of the change to Rule 1004(1) which was amended in 2000 a horse which is found to have administered to it a prohibited substance capable of affecting its speed, stamina, courage or conduct must be disqualified.

Ms Hale confirmed that she had admitted the breach and that she had been served in writing with a copy of the charge and the request for a ruling.  She also confirmed she had been served a copy of the Rules pertaining to the matters against her.

Mr J McKenzie produced a summary of facts which reads as follows: 

?TALKEETNA is a 5 year old brown gelding, who is trained at Cambridge by licensed trainer Miss Shelley Hale who appears before the Tribunal today.  The horse is owned by Mr G J McCarthy, Mrs H A McCarthy and Miss Hale.

TALKEETNA was started in race 8 in the Majestic Horse Floats Limited 1670 at the Paeroa Racing Club meeting run at the Paeroa Racecourse on Wednesday 29 March 2006.  The horse won the race and was then taken to the swabbing box for swabbing.

The horse was accompanied to the swab box by Miss Hale, the trainer.  The swabbing was carried out in accordance with the directives of NZTR with the collection of the urine sample and the relative documentation attended to before the sealing of the samples for dispatch to New Zealand Racing Laboratory Services.  The urine sample collected from TALKEETNA was issued with swab card record number 3731.

On 21 April 2006, the official Racing Analyst, by way of letter identified that the urine sample NZTR 3731 was received in the laboratory with all seals intact on 30 March 2006 and was given laboratory number 06/1792.  His findings were that the urine sample contained Phenylbutazone.  The control sample was negative. 

Phenylbutazone is a prohibited substance as defined under Rule 105 of the New Zealand Rules of Racing and Dr Andrew Grierson, New Zealand Veterinary Consultant for New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing confirmed that fact.

On 28 April 2006, Racecourse Inspectors J W McKenzie and R P Bevege went to the training premises of Miss S A Hale at Cambridge to speak to her about the Analyst's finding.  Miss Hale was advised of the positive swab and given a copy of the Certificate of Analysis.

Miss Hale expressed surprise and denied having any knowledge of how the horse TALKEETNA could have returned a positive sample.

Miss Hale produced to the Inspectors a syringe containing ?P-Butazone?, an oral paste containing Phenylbutazone and from her house she produced 6 sachets of ?Myoton? Phenylbutazone granules.

Miss Hale also stated to the Inspectors that on 28 March another horse in her stables, WITCHES BRITCHES, had been treated by her vet after cutting her leg.  She had been treated with Phenylbutazone granules which had been administered with her feed in her box.

The following morning the horse TALKEETNA, who is paddock trained, had been placed in the box that had the night before been used by WITCHES BRITCHES.  He had been put into the box while awaiting the float to arrive to transport him to the races at Paeroa.

Miss Hale stated that she believes that while awaiting preparation to be taken away in the float that TALKEETNA has put his mouth into the feed bin and then licked or eaten the residue from therein which may have contained granules of Phenylbutazone left over from what was given to WITCHES BRITCHES the night before.

Miss Hale supplied a written statement and a copy of that is now read and produced as an Exhibit.

Miss Hale fully understands the stand down period required for the drug Phenylbutazone but not believing that the horse had ever had it administered to it had no cause for concern.

It should be pointed out that Miss Hale and her staff fully co-operated with the Racecourse Inspectors and that she has accepted the findings of the Racing Laboratory.?

Miss Hale then produced her Statement of Facts and emphasized how devastated she was when finding out her horse, TALKEETNA, had produced a positive swab.  She categorically stated that the horse was not administered with Phenylbutazone deliberately.  The only explanation she could think of was that TALKEETNA must have licked a feed bowl which may have contained some residue of Phenylbutazone left over from another horse's feed bowl.  TALKEETNA was put in the same box while awaiting transport to the Paeroa races.

Miss Hale expressed extreme remorse over the incident and acknowledged that it was a very serious matter.  However, she swore that it had occurred through human error and not through trying to cheat.  She apologized for accidentally causing the event and any repercussions to the racing industry from it.

Mr P Fraser, veterinary surgeon for Miss Hale for many years, spoke of Miss Hale's integrity and competence within the racing industry.  He could not speak more highly of Miss Hale as an operator and said she would be a loss to the industry if penalised too severely thus causing her to consider her continued future.

PENALTY:

Mr J McKenzie produced extensive penalty submissions which are summarised as follows:

The exact cause of the drug being found in the horse's metabolism may never be known, but the explanation given by Ms Hale is accepted. 

It was accepted that Miss Hale did not have any intent to contaminate her horse with a view to enhancing its performance.  If that was the case she would have been facing a charge under the serious racing offence provisions.

Mr McKenzie said to Miss Hale's credit she had been totally co-operative from the outset in the inquiry.  He said she was respected by the industry as a hard working, diligent trainer, and her staff spoke very highly of her ethics and the way she treats her horses and employees.  He believed this was a case of misfortune, but nevertheless negligence at the low end of the scale.  He submitted a fine in the region of $3,000 to $4,000 would be appropriate.  In this case he produced a copy of the costs incurred in the inquiry to date.

PENALTY DECISION:

We now turn to the question of penalty.  We do not believe after carefully considering the evidence of Mr McKenzie, Miss Hale and the veterinary surgeon Mr P Fraser, that there was any improper intent to breach the Rules.  Indeed the only charge against Miss Hale is under the prohibited substance negligence Rule.  We are satisfied the prohibited substance detected in this case comes within Rule 105 and for the purposes of Rule 1004(1).

We accept Miss Hales' evidence that the only explanation for the horse TALKEETNA to return a positive swab was by licking a feed bowl used by the horse WITCHES BRITCHES who had been treated the previous night with Phenylbutazone.

It is obvious to us from Mr McKenzie's submissions that Miss Hale has been fully co-operative from the outset in this matter and runs a very competent operation.

We believe this is a case of misfortune and agree with Mr McKenzie it is negligence at the lower end of the scale.  Nonetheless TALKEETNA was taken to the races to compete with a substance in its system which is a prohibited substance within the meaning of the Rules.  The Rules are designed to prevent horses racing with prohibited substances in their system.  The clear objective is to ensure fair competition and maintain the integrity of racing.

To impose a fair and consistent penalty we must consider similar such cases in recent times.  Penalties for the breach of this Rule have increased to the point where they have involved fines of $2,750, $3,500 and $4,000.

We see no need to deviate from Mr McKenzie's submissions on penalty and accordingly impose a fine of $3,500.  In addition Miss Hale is to pay laboratory costs of $1,126.47 and further costs of $600 to New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing.  We order a further amount of $500 to be paid for Judicial Control Authority costs.

Turning to the request for a ruling the owners accept the horse must be disqualified.  This is mandatory since the 2000 amendment to Rule 1004(1).  Accordingly we direct TALKEETNA is disqualified from the Majestic Horse Floats Limited 1670 and the placings are amended to:

1^st            GENERATED

2^nd            STARKY?S STAR

3^rd            HAVASCOTCH

4^th            ANNE BOLEYN

5^th            BANDITS PISTOL

R M Seabrook                                           B R Tims

CHAIRMAN

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 1004.2, 1004.1, 1004.3

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: