Pakuranga HC 4 October 2020 – R 4 – Chair, Mr G Jones
ID: JCA14983
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Pakuranga HC - 4 October 2020
Meet Chair:
GJones
Meet Committee Member 1:
ASmith
Race Date:
2020/10/04
Race Number:
R 4
Decision:
The Committee found the charge proved.
Penalty:
The Committee granted Mr Innes a deferment to his suspension pursuant to Rule 1106(2). Accordingly, his licence to ride in races is suspended for a period of 5 days commencing after racing on 7 October 2020 and concluding after racing on 16 October 2020.
Facts:
This charge arises from the running of Race 4, the Veterinary Associates 2100. Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Oatham filed an Information pursuant to Rule 638 (1)(d) alleging the rider of CAUTIOUS APPROACH (L Innes), allowed his mount to shift in when not clear of RELIABLE HUNTER (S Weatherley) which was crowded and checked near the 1900 metres.
Mr Innes endorsed the Information “I do not admit the breach of the rule”. He also indicated on the Information that he did not wish to be present at the hearing. However, when advised by the Committee that the charge would be heard in his absence, he confirmed that he wished to remain and be present at the hearing.
Rule 638(1) (d) provides: A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.
Submissions for Decision:
At the outset the Committee outlined the proposed conduct for the defended hearing.
Informant's Evidence
Mr Oatham advised that he would call two witnesses to prove the Informant's case. Jockey, Mr S Weatherley and Stipendiary Steward, Mr A Coles.
Mr Weatherley was called first because he had a commitment to ride in the next due race. It was Mr Weatherley’s evidence that his mount (RELIABLE HUNTER) suffered interference shortly after the start of the race. He said that his mount jumped okay from the barrier and it was his instructions that he should lead. He said that he tried to get to the front, but there was pressure from the outside, which he confirmed as having come from Mr Innes’ mount. He said that he could not get to the front as instructed, and his mount raced greenly thereafter. He said that Mr Innes’ mount was no more than a length in front when crossing; and he confirmed this when Mr Oatham referred him to the race films of the incident.
Mr Innes had no questions of Mr Weatherley in cross examination.
In his evidence, Stipendiary Steward Mr Coles demonstrated the various race films which included front, side and rear-on. Mr Coles said that CAUTIOUS APPROACH jumped from an outside barrier at the 2100 metre mark and Mr Innes rode his mount forward looking to improve. He said that as Mr Innes shifted across, he placed RELIABLE HUNTER in restricted room, and Mr Weatherley had to take hold of his mount due to being crowded and checked. Mr Coles said that CAUTIOUS APPROACH may have bumped into RELIABLE HUNTER, although he could not be certain. At the time of the incident, Mr Coles said that Mr Innes’ mount was barely ½ to ¾ length clear of RELIABLE HUNTER. In concluding his evidence Mr Coles identified the horse racing to the inside of RELIABLE HUNTER, namely RISING RISK (T Yanagida). He said that this horse did not contribute to the incident; and it may have shifted out slightly after Mr Innes’ mount had made contact with RELIABLE HUNTER. Finally, he estimated the check cost RELIABLE HUNTER 1 ¼ to 1 ½ lengths.
Under cross examination from Mr Innes, it was put to Mr Coles that RISING RISK had shifted out. Mr Coles disagreed.
Respondent's Evidence
It was Mr Innes’ evidence that his mount was erratic during its preliminary - down the straight to the barrier. He referred to the films of the horses preliminary to demonstrate this. He said that he had ridden the horse at its previous start, and today it was not quite right and this, he said was confirmed by the horse’s trainer, Mr Treweek. Mr Innes said that the point he was making was that his mount's manners contributed. He said that he was tardy out of the barrier and did his best to restrain his mount from interfering with RELIABLE HUNTER. He added that he did not think RELIABLE HUNTER received a bad check and RISING RISK shifted inward and contributed. In concluding his evidence Mr Innes said that after the incident his mount continued to race erratically and in 9 out of 10 times an incident such as this would have resulted in him receiving a Stewards' warning.
Summing up – Informant
In summing up, Mr Oatham submitted that Stewards accept that the behaviour of CAUTIOUS APPROACH may have been erratic. He submitted that although Mr Weatherley’s mount dwelt slightly at the start, he had established himself in the gap and then ran out of room. He submitted this was because Mr Innes allowed his mount to shift across when barely ½ a length in front. He submitted that Mr Innes did take corrective action, but it was too late. Finally, Mr Oatham said that RISING RISK was always shifting inwards and he invited the Committee to view the mowing strip on the track. He added if that horse did shift out it was after the interference had occurred.
Summing up – Respondent
In summing up Mr Innes submitted that he would have pleaded guilty if he believed that he caused the interference. He said that the shift inwards was due to his horse's racing manners and he did his best to stay off Mr Weatherley’s mount. He concluded by adding that RISING RISK had shifted out and contributed.
Reasons for Decision:
After considering the evidence and reviewing the race film, the Committee determined that the charge was proved.
The available films established that CAUTIOUS APPROACH did jump awkwardly from its outside barrier and Mr Innes was clearly intent on taking up a handy position. In furtherance of this, he angled his mount inwards. In doing so, when barely 1 length clear of RELIABLE HUNTER he placed that horse in restricted room causing it to be checked. We do not believe that RISING RISK contributed; and at the point of interference there was at least a horse width gap between RISING RISK and RELIABLE HUNTER. That horse did later shift out marginally, but that occurred after RELIABLE HUNTER had been checked. At the time of the inward shift Mr Innes failed to take all reasonable steps to avoid causing interference to RELIABLE HUNTER. The Committee is therefore satisfied, Mr Innes at the time of the shift did not exercise the degree of care that a rider of his considerable experience should have exercised under the circumstances.
Submissions for Penalty:
Mr Oatham produced Mr Innes’ riding record which indicated 2 previous breaches under the careless riding Rule in the last 12 months. The most recent being at the Auckland RC meeting on 15 February 2020.
Mr Oatham said Stewards assessed the level of carelessness in the low to mid-range. He said that actual damage caused to Mr Weatherley’s mount was at the lower end but he was more concerned about the shift and the possible consequences it may have had. He submitted that a suspension would be an appropriate penalty.
Mr Innes sought a deferment to any proposed suspension until after racing at Avondale on 7 October 2020.
Mr Innes submitted that a suspension would inevitably result in him missing a Saturday race meeting. He said that he has many good rides pending for his owners/trainers and they would be inconvenienced due to his unavailability. He asked that the Committee consider a 2-day suspension plus a fine due to limited opportunities arising from the impacts of COVID-19, including reduced race days.
Reasons for Penalty:
After hearing and considering the submissions the Committee determined Mr Innes’ carelessness to be in the low range and adopted a 6-day starting point. This is in conformity with the Penalty Guide for Judicial Committees which recommends a 6-day starting point for low range carelessness.
There are no particular aggravating factors associated with the breach. The mitigating factors we considered were Mr Innes’ riding record which we assessed as being good for a busy senior rider. For that we afforded him a 1-day reduction from the 6-day starting point.
The Committee considered and dismissed Mr Innes’ request for a combined fine and 2-day suspension. It is very rare that a combined fine and suspension is considered. For this to occur there would need to be significant compelling reasons. In this case, Mr Innes did not advance any sufficient cogent reasons to enable, or persuade the Committee to issue a combined fine and suspension.
After taking into account all the above factors the Committee considered that an appropriate suspension was 5 (national) days.
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: 95209311ae0bc9d89f5637132e831ab8
informantnumber: A13421
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge: Careless Riding
plea: denied
penaltyrequired: 1
decisiondate: 05/10/2020
hearing_title: Pakuranga HC 4 October 2020 – R 4 – Chair, Mr G Jones
charge:
facts:
This charge arises from the running of Race 4, the Veterinary Associates 2100. Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Oatham filed an Information pursuant to Rule 638 (1)(d) alleging the rider of CAUTIOUS APPROACH (L Innes), allowed his mount to shift in when not clear of RELIABLE HUNTER (S Weatherley) which was crowded and checked near the 1900 metres.
Mr Innes endorsed the Information “I do not admit the breach of the rule”. He also indicated on the Information that he did not wish to be present at the hearing. However, when advised by the Committee that the charge would be heard in his absence, he confirmed that he wished to remain and be present at the hearing.
Rule 638(1) (d) provides: A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be careless.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
At the outset the Committee outlined the proposed conduct for the defended hearing.
Informant's Evidence
Mr Oatham advised that he would call two witnesses to prove the Informant's case. Jockey, Mr S Weatherley and Stipendiary Steward, Mr A Coles.
Mr Weatherley was called first because he had a commitment to ride in the next due race. It was Mr Weatherley’s evidence that his mount (RELIABLE HUNTER) suffered interference shortly after the start of the race. He said that his mount jumped okay from the barrier and it was his instructions that he should lead. He said that he tried to get to the front, but there was pressure from the outside, which he confirmed as having come from Mr Innes’ mount. He said that he could not get to the front as instructed, and his mount raced greenly thereafter. He said that Mr Innes’ mount was no more than a length in front when crossing; and he confirmed this when Mr Oatham referred him to the race films of the incident.
Mr Innes had no questions of Mr Weatherley in cross examination.
In his evidence, Stipendiary Steward Mr Coles demonstrated the various race films which included front, side and rear-on. Mr Coles said that CAUTIOUS APPROACH jumped from an outside barrier at the 2100 metre mark and Mr Innes rode his mount forward looking to improve. He said that as Mr Innes shifted across, he placed RELIABLE HUNTER in restricted room, and Mr Weatherley had to take hold of his mount due to being crowded and checked. Mr Coles said that CAUTIOUS APPROACH may have bumped into RELIABLE HUNTER, although he could not be certain. At the time of the incident, Mr Coles said that Mr Innes’ mount was barely ½ to ¾ length clear of RELIABLE HUNTER. In concluding his evidence Mr Coles identified the horse racing to the inside of RELIABLE HUNTER, namely RISING RISK (T Yanagida). He said that this horse did not contribute to the incident; and it may have shifted out slightly after Mr Innes’ mount had made contact with RELIABLE HUNTER. Finally, he estimated the check cost RELIABLE HUNTER 1 ¼ to 1 ½ lengths.
Under cross examination from Mr Innes, it was put to Mr Coles that RISING RISK had shifted out. Mr Coles disagreed.
Respondent's Evidence
It was Mr Innes’ evidence that his mount was erratic during its preliminary - down the straight to the barrier. He referred to the films of the horses preliminary to demonstrate this. He said that he had ridden the horse at its previous start, and today it was not quite right and this, he said was confirmed by the horse’s trainer, Mr Treweek. Mr Innes said that the point he was making was that his mount's manners contributed. He said that he was tardy out of the barrier and did his best to restrain his mount from interfering with RELIABLE HUNTER. He added that he did not think RELIABLE HUNTER received a bad check and RISING RISK shifted inward and contributed. In concluding his evidence Mr Innes said that after the incident his mount continued to race erratically and in 9 out of 10 times an incident such as this would have resulted in him receiving a Stewards' warning.
Summing up – Informant
In summing up, Mr Oatham submitted that Stewards accept that the behaviour of CAUTIOUS APPROACH may have been erratic. He submitted that although Mr Weatherley’s mount dwelt slightly at the start, he had established himself in the gap and then ran out of room. He submitted this was because Mr Innes allowed his mount to shift across when barely ½ a length in front. He submitted that Mr Innes did take corrective action, but it was too late. Finally, Mr Oatham said that RISING RISK was always shifting inwards and he invited the Committee to view the mowing strip on the track. He added if that horse did shift out it was after the interference had occurred.
Summing up – Respondent
In summing up Mr Innes submitted that he would have pleaded guilty if he believed that he caused the interference. He said that the shift inwards was due to his horse's racing manners and he did his best to stay off Mr Weatherley’s mount. He concluded by adding that RISING RISK had shifted out and contributed.
reasonsfordecision:
After considering the evidence and reviewing the race film, the Committee determined that the charge was proved.
The available films established that CAUTIOUS APPROACH did jump awkwardly from its outside barrier and Mr Innes was clearly intent on taking up a handy position. In furtherance of this, he angled his mount inwards. In doing so, when barely 1 length clear of RELIABLE HUNTER he placed that horse in restricted room causing it to be checked. We do not believe that RISING RISK contributed; and at the point of interference there was at least a horse width gap between RISING RISK and RELIABLE HUNTER. That horse did later shift out marginally, but that occurred after RELIABLE HUNTER had been checked. At the time of the inward shift Mr Innes failed to take all reasonable steps to avoid causing interference to RELIABLE HUNTER. The Committee is therefore satisfied, Mr Innes at the time of the shift did not exercise the degree of care that a rider of his considerable experience should have exercised under the circumstances.
Decision:
The Committee found the charge proved.
sumissionsforpenalty:
Mr Oatham produced Mr Innes’ riding record which indicated 2 previous breaches under the careless riding Rule in the last 12 months. The most recent being at the Auckland RC meeting on 15 February 2020.
Mr Oatham said Stewards assessed the level of carelessness in the low to mid-range. He said that actual damage caused to Mr Weatherley’s mount was at the lower end but he was more concerned about the shift and the possible consequences it may have had. He submitted that a suspension would be an appropriate penalty.
Mr Innes sought a deferment to any proposed suspension until after racing at Avondale on 7 October 2020.
Mr Innes submitted that a suspension would inevitably result in him missing a Saturday race meeting. He said that he has many good rides pending for his owners/trainers and they would be inconvenienced due to his unavailability. He asked that the Committee consider a 2-day suspension plus a fine due to limited opportunities arising from the impacts of COVID-19, including reduced race days.
reasonsforpenalty:
After hearing and considering the submissions the Committee determined Mr Innes’ carelessness to be in the low range and adopted a 6-day starting point. This is in conformity with the Penalty Guide for Judicial Committees which recommends a 6-day starting point for low range carelessness.
There are no particular aggravating factors associated with the breach. The mitigating factors we considered were Mr Innes’ riding record which we assessed as being good for a busy senior rider. For that we afforded him a 1-day reduction from the 6-day starting point.
The Committee considered and dismissed Mr Innes’ request for a combined fine and 2-day suspension. It is very rare that a combined fine and suspension is considered. For this to occur there would need to be significant compelling reasons. In this case, Mr Innes did not advance any sufficient cogent reasons to enable, or persuade the Committee to issue a combined fine and suspension.
After taking into account all the above factors the Committee considered that an appropriate suspension was 5 (national) days.
penalty:
The Committee granted Mr Innes a deferment to his suspension pursuant to Rule 1106(2). Accordingly, his licence to ride in races is suspended for a period of 5 days commencing after racing on 7 October 2020 and concluding after racing on 16 October 2020.
hearing_type: Hearing
Rules: 638 (1)(d)
Informant: Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer: Mr Innes (rider of CAUTIOUS APPROACH)
Otherperson: Mr A Coles - Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Weatherley - Rider of RELIABLE HUNTER
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 55829442be1ba11f440a07f52e1db2f5
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 4
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: a346c672c30da9810726169c44e1fc4a
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 04/10/2020
meet_title: Pakuranga HC - 4 October 2020
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: pakuranga-hc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: GJones
meet_pm1: ASmith
meet_pm2: none
name: Pakuranga HC