South Canterbury RC – 13 September 2009 – Race 6
ID: JCA20602
Code:
Thoroughbred
Hearing Type (Code):
thoroughbred-racing
Meet Title:
South Canterbury RC - 13 September 2009
Race Date:
2009/09/13
Race Number:
Race 6
Decision:
Following the running of Race 6, the Coupland’s Bakery Geraldine Cup, Stipendiary Steward Mr S. C. Ching filed an information pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) alleging careless riding by Apprentice Jockey Miss N. L. Collett. Miss Collett was assisted at this hearing by Licensed Trainer Mr. S. J. Kennedy.
--
Following the running of Race 6, the Coupland’s Bakery Geraldine Cup, Stipendiary Steward Mr S. C. Ching filed an information pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) alleging careless riding by Apprentice Jockey Miss N. L. Collett. Miss Collett was assisted at this hearing by Licensed Trainer Mr. S. J. Kennedy.
--The information reads as follows.
--“I the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant
committed a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) in that N. Collett (Jack Attack) allowed her mount to shift in when not clear causing K. Williams (Keepitinthefamily) to check. This incident happened inside the final 200mts.”
Rule 871(1)(d) reads as follows.
--“(1) Every rider commits a breach of these Rules who in the opinion of the
Judicial Committee is guilty of riding which was:
(d) Careless….”
Miss Collett had indicated on the information that she did not admit this breach and she confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Collett agreed that she understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.
--There had been a previous hearing into a protest in this race where Miss Collett’s mount had been relegated from 2nd to 3rd. Before this hearing commenced we advised the parties that although we had decided that there had been interference during that hearing, we had made no finding as to whether Miss Collett had been careless or not.
--Stipendiary Steward Mr Ching used video coverage of the incident, which showed that at about the 200 metre mark Miss Collett’s mount (“Jack Attack”) had moved inwards taking the line of Miss Williams’ mount (“Keepitinthefamily”), there being a resultant check to Miss Williams’ horse. It was Mr Ching’s evidence that Miss Collett was riding with the whip at the time, and that although she put the whip away she kept pushing her horse out. It was contended that Miss Collett should have put her whip away, straightened her mount, and then recommenced riding. Mr Ching also said that Miss Collett did not do enough and that her riding was therefore careless.
--On behalf of Miss Collett Mr Kennedy gave evidence that her horse had ducked in quite quickly, in that it happened in one stride. She had immediately put her whip away and took hold of her horse to straighten it. Mr Kennedy also pointed out that after Miss Collett took hold, her horses’ head was turned towards the outside of the track, and this indicated that there was pressure on the right hand rein. It was also relevant, Mr Kennedy said, that after this incident Miss Collett had run in a straight line to the winning post.
--Miss Collett concurred with this interpretation given by Mr Kennedy. She also said for a good eight strides after the incident she had made an effort to keep her horse straight before using her whip again. She had put her whip away and taken her reins in both hands to do this.
--In summing up Mr Ching said that he disagreed that this movement had taken place quickly, and said he believed it had taken place over 2 – 3 strides. Mr Ching also repeated that he did not believe that Miss Collect had done enough to correct the situation.
--After hearing the evidence we adjourned to consider our decision. We were satisfied that Miss Collett’s mount had moved in quite quickly and that she immediately stopped using her whip. We were also satisfied that she had made an effort to straighten her horse.
--On returning to the enquiry room we advised that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage, we are satisfied that “Jack Attack”, ridden by Miss Collett, caused interference to “Keepitinthefamily” at about the 200 metre mark.
--Mr Ching’s case was that, although Miss Collett stopped using her whip at the time of the incident, she kept pushing her horse. Mr Ching said she should have done more to correct her line.
--Miss Collett and Mr Kennedy gave evidence that the initial movement of “Jack Attack” took place in one stride, and that Miss Collett then put her whip away and straightened her horse.
--We are satisfied that this incident occurred very quickly. We also find that the damage to “Keepitinthefamily” was also done quite quickly, and no amount of remedial action by Miss Collett would have changed the situation.
--In this case the evidence is not clear cut, and we have decided to give Miss Collett the benefit of the doubt and the charge is dismissed.’
----
J. M. Phelan P. J. Rosanowski
CHAIR Committee Member
6945
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: a965a5486dee617ef26f743b610ab46a
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
startdate: 13/09/2009
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: South Canterbury RC - 13 September 2009 - Race 6
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Following the running of Race 6, the Coupland’s Bakery Geraldine Cup, Stipendiary Steward Mr S. C. Ching filed an information pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) alleging careless riding by Apprentice Jockey Miss N. L. Collett. Miss Collett was assisted at this hearing by Licensed Trainer Mr. S. J. Kennedy.
--
Following the running of Race 6, the Coupland’s Bakery Geraldine Cup, Stipendiary Steward Mr S. C. Ching filed an information pursuant to Rule 871(1)(d) alleging careless riding by Apprentice Jockey Miss N. L. Collett. Miss Collett was assisted at this hearing by Licensed Trainer Mr. S. J. Kennedy.
--The information reads as follows.
--“I the abovenamed informant allege that the abovenamed Defendant
committed a breach of Rule 871(1)(d) in that N. Collett (Jack Attack) allowed her mount to shift in when not clear causing K. Williams (Keepitinthefamily) to check. This incident happened inside the final 200mts.”
Rule 871(1)(d) reads as follows.
--“(1) Every rider commits a breach of these Rules who in the opinion of the
Judicial Committee is guilty of riding which was:
(d) Careless….”
Miss Collett had indicated on the information that she did not admit this breach and she confirmed this at the hearing. Mr Collett agreed that she understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.
--There had been a previous hearing into a protest in this race where Miss Collett’s mount had been relegated from 2nd to 3rd. Before this hearing commenced we advised the parties that although we had decided that there had been interference during that hearing, we had made no finding as to whether Miss Collett had been careless or not.
--Stipendiary Steward Mr Ching used video coverage of the incident, which showed that at about the 200 metre mark Miss Collett’s mount (“Jack Attack”) had moved inwards taking the line of Miss Williams’ mount (“Keepitinthefamily”), there being a resultant check to Miss Williams’ horse. It was Mr Ching’s evidence that Miss Collett was riding with the whip at the time, and that although she put the whip away she kept pushing her horse out. It was contended that Miss Collett should have put her whip away, straightened her mount, and then recommenced riding. Mr Ching also said that Miss Collett did not do enough and that her riding was therefore careless.
--On behalf of Miss Collett Mr Kennedy gave evidence that her horse had ducked in quite quickly, in that it happened in one stride. She had immediately put her whip away and took hold of her horse to straighten it. Mr Kennedy also pointed out that after Miss Collett took hold, her horses’ head was turned towards the outside of the track, and this indicated that there was pressure on the right hand rein. It was also relevant, Mr Kennedy said, that after this incident Miss Collett had run in a straight line to the winning post.
--Miss Collett concurred with this interpretation given by Mr Kennedy. She also said for a good eight strides after the incident she had made an effort to keep her horse straight before using her whip again. She had put her whip away and taken her reins in both hands to do this.
--In summing up Mr Ching said that he disagreed that this movement had taken place quickly, and said he believed it had taken place over 2 – 3 strides. Mr Ching also repeated that he did not believe that Miss Collect had done enough to correct the situation.
--After hearing the evidence we adjourned to consider our decision. We were satisfied that Miss Collett’s mount had moved in quite quickly and that she immediately stopped using her whip. We were also satisfied that she had made an effort to straighten her horse.
--On returning to the enquiry room we advised that a full written decision would be given later, and we gave the following oral decision.
--“Having heard the evidence and having seen the video coverage, we are satisfied that “Jack Attack”, ridden by Miss Collett, caused interference to “Keepitinthefamily” at about the 200 metre mark.
--Mr Ching’s case was that, although Miss Collett stopped using her whip at the time of the incident, she kept pushing her horse. Mr Ching said she should have done more to correct her line.
--Miss Collett and Mr Kennedy gave evidence that the initial movement of “Jack Attack” took place in one stride, and that Miss Collett then put her whip away and straightened her horse.
--We are satisfied that this incident occurred very quickly. We also find that the damage to “Keepitinthefamily” was also done quite quickly, and no amount of remedial action by Miss Collett would have changed the situation.
--In this case the evidence is not clear cut, and we have decided to give Miss Collett the benefit of the doubt and the charge is dismissed.’
----
J. M. Phelan P. J. Rosanowski
CHAIR Committee Member
6945
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 871.1.d
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: c7f7141e64863d6c67a7c38f1c54bf2b
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: Race 6
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 375f648968770567db4bcfe96b0b1193
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 13/09/2009
meet_title: South Canterbury RC - 13 September 2009
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: south-canterbury-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: South Canterbury RC