NZ Metro TC – 10 August 2006 – Race 1
ID: JCA18636
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Meet Title:
NZ Metro TC - 10 August 2006
Race Date:
2006/08/10
Race Number:
Race 1
Decision: --
Following the running of Race 1, the Frost Compaction Services Ltd Mobile Pace, an information was laid by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Mr A. Beecroft, Junior Horseman, the driver of "Lily Belle", alleging a breach of Rule 857(7)(g).
--
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 1, the Frost Compaction Services Ltd Mobile Pace, an information was laid by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Mr A. Beecroft, Junior Horseman, the driver of "Lily Belle", alleging a breach of Rule 857(7)(g). The charge reads as follows.
------"I the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant committed a breach Rule 857(7)(g) in that A. Beecroft (Lily Belle) failed to come up / maintain his [position] on the mobile gate."
--The rule reads as follows.
--"(7) No horseman shall:-
--(g) fail to come up into and/or maintain his position."
--Mr Beecroft had indicated on the information that he did not admit the breach
--of this rule, and he confirmed this at the hearing.
--When this hearing first commenced Mr Beecroft was asked if he wanted the assistance of a Senior Horseman, and he said that he did. This matter was then adjourned to enable him to seek this assistance. When the hearing resumed Mr Beecroft was again on his own, and he advised that he could not find a Senior Horseman to assist him. He then advised that he wanted to continue the hearing without assistance.
--Video coverage of the start of this mobile 2600 metre race was shown. Mr Beecroft started from gate 7 on the front line. Prior to the start Mr Beecroft was hanging back and he never had his horse up to the mobile starting gate, being about two lengths away when the start was indicated. Mr Escott said that Mr Beecroft had made no apparent effort to put his horse in its correct position behind the gate.
--Mr Beecroft did not dispute these facts. He said that his horse was "hitching" just before the start and that he was trying to balance it in case it broke. It was Mr Beecroft's evidence that his horse was not pacing well and that to put pressure on it to move up to the gate may have caused it to break.
--In response to this evidence Mr Escott said that his own observations and the video coverage did not support Mr Beecrost's evidence. Mr Escott did not agree that Mr Beecroft's horse was "half hitching" and said that it was pacing "squarely".
--After hearing the evidence I adjourned to consider my decision.
--It was clear from the evidence and from the video coverage that Mr Beecroft's horse Lily Belle was two lengths behind the mobile starting gate when the start was indicated. Mr Beecroft's contention that his horse was not pacing well was not supported by the video coverage or the evidence of the Stipendiary Stewards. I am satisfied that there is no evidence to support Mr Beecroft's case, and I reject his claim that his horse was pacing roughly. I was also satisfied that no effort was made by Mr Beecroft to comply with this rule.
--On returning to the Enquiry Room I advised the parties that a full decision would be completed later, and I gave the following oral decision.
--"Having seen the video coverage of this incident, and having heard the evidence, I am satisfied that you made insufficient effort to comply with this Rule. I also reject your excuses about why you didn?t do that and I find the charge proved."
--PENALTY: In relation to penalty Mr Escott advised that Mr Beecroft had not breached this rule previously, and recommended a fine of $100-00. Mr Beecroft had no relevant submissions to make regarding penalty. Having looked at previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule I was satisfied that a fine of $100-00 was appropriate and Mr Beecroft was fined this amount.
----
JM Phelan
--CHAIRMAN
----
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: 14fa31a30c95c05675a7ba50fd5ce2c3
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 10/08/2006
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: NZ Metro TC - 10 August 2006 - Race 1
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--Following the running of Race 1, the Frost Compaction Services Ltd Mobile Pace, an information was laid by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Mr A. Beecroft, Junior Horseman, the driver of "Lily Belle", alleging a breach of Rule 857(7)(g).
--
DECISION AND REASONS:
--Following the running of Race 1, the Frost Compaction Services Ltd Mobile Pace, an information was laid by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Mr A. Beecroft, Junior Horseman, the driver of "Lily Belle", alleging a breach of Rule 857(7)(g). The charge reads as follows.
------"I the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant committed a breach Rule 857(7)(g) in that A. Beecroft (Lily Belle) failed to come up / maintain his [position] on the mobile gate."
--The rule reads as follows.
--"(7) No horseman shall:-
--(g) fail to come up into and/or maintain his position."
--Mr Beecroft had indicated on the information that he did not admit the breach
--of this rule, and he confirmed this at the hearing.
--When this hearing first commenced Mr Beecroft was asked if he wanted the assistance of a Senior Horseman, and he said that he did. This matter was then adjourned to enable him to seek this assistance. When the hearing resumed Mr Beecroft was again on his own, and he advised that he could not find a Senior Horseman to assist him. He then advised that he wanted to continue the hearing without assistance.
--Video coverage of the start of this mobile 2600 metre race was shown. Mr Beecroft started from gate 7 on the front line. Prior to the start Mr Beecroft was hanging back and he never had his horse up to the mobile starting gate, being about two lengths away when the start was indicated. Mr Escott said that Mr Beecroft had made no apparent effort to put his horse in its correct position behind the gate.
--Mr Beecroft did not dispute these facts. He said that his horse was "hitching" just before the start and that he was trying to balance it in case it broke. It was Mr Beecroft's evidence that his horse was not pacing well and that to put pressure on it to move up to the gate may have caused it to break.
--In response to this evidence Mr Escott said that his own observations and the video coverage did not support Mr Beecrost's evidence. Mr Escott did not agree that Mr Beecroft's horse was "half hitching" and said that it was pacing "squarely".
--After hearing the evidence I adjourned to consider my decision.
--It was clear from the evidence and from the video coverage that Mr Beecroft's horse Lily Belle was two lengths behind the mobile starting gate when the start was indicated. Mr Beecroft's contention that his horse was not pacing well was not supported by the video coverage or the evidence of the Stipendiary Stewards. I am satisfied that there is no evidence to support Mr Beecroft's case, and I reject his claim that his horse was pacing roughly. I was also satisfied that no effort was made by Mr Beecroft to comply with this rule.
--On returning to the Enquiry Room I advised the parties that a full decision would be completed later, and I gave the following oral decision.
--"Having seen the video coverage of this incident, and having heard the evidence, I am satisfied that you made insufficient effort to comply with this Rule. I also reject your excuses about why you didn?t do that and I find the charge proved."
--PENALTY:
In relation to penalty Mr Escott advised that Mr Beecroft had not breached this rule previously, and recommended a fine of $100-00. Mr Beecroft had no relevant submissions to make regarding penalty. Having looked at previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule I was satisfied that a fine of $100-00 was appropriate and Mr Beecroft was fined this amount.----
JM Phelan
--CHAIRMAN
----
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 857.7.g
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 53c607a9dde6fd1bfbe1d31bb33bd545
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 2e34cb0b381c87f2d882b7e91be85ea7
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 10/08/2006
meet_title: NZ Metro TC - 10 August 2006
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: nz-metro-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: NZ Metro TC