Timaru HRC 14 October 2012 – R 10 (instigating a protest)
ID: JCA17589
Meet Title:
Timaru HRC - 14 October 2012
Meet Chair:
JPhelan
Meet Committee Member 1:
JMillar
Race Date:
2012/10/14
Race Number:
R1
Decision:
On resuming the hearing we advised the parties that full reasons would be given in our written decision (see above). We advised that we found that GRESHEES ANGEL did cross TOMSINCHARGE when not clear and affected that horse’s chances. The protest was therefore upheld and GRESHEES ANGEL was relegated from 3rd to 4th place. We also advised that dividends were to be paid in accordance with the amended placings, which were as follows:-
1st – Bettors Lad (9)
2nd – Comenche (8)
3rd – Tomsincharge (11)
4th – Greshees Angel (5)
5th – Mac’s Wee Pea (1)
6th – Roman Affair (3)
Facts:
Following the running of Race 10, the Family Xmas Meeting Saturday 8 December Mobile Pace, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren against the 3rd placing of GRESHEES ANGEL (5) for allegedly causing interference to “TOMSINCHARGE (11) which finished 4th in the race. The official margin between 3rd and 4th was a neck.
The Judge’s placings in this race were as follows.
1st – Bettors Lad (9)
2nd – Comenche (8)
3rd – Greshees Angel (5)
4th – Tomsincharge (11)
5th – Mac’s Wee Pea (1)
6th – Roman Affair (3)
The Information reads as follows.
“I the above named informant allege that horse number (5) or its driver placed 3rd by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse number (11) placed 4th by the Judge – in the early stages TOMSINCHARGE was crowded for running room by GRESHEES ANGEL.”
Rule 869(8) provides as follows.
“The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty which may be imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which:
(a) may have gained an advantage by any conduct or interference prohibited by any preceding provision of this Rule and/or
(b) may have interfered with, or whose horseman may have interfered with, the progress or chance of any other horse or horses, -
immediately after any horse from which it may have gained an advantage or whose chances or progress may have been affected thereby.”
The connections of TOMSINCHARGE were represented at this hearing by the driver, Junior Horsewoman Ms S. M. Hickman, and she was assisted by Open Horseman Mr C. J. DeFilippi. Mr G. C. Telfer the driver, trainer and part owner of GRESHEES ANGEL represented the interests of that horse.
Submissions for Decision:
Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren gave evidence and used video coverage to show that shortly after the start of this 2000 metre mobile start race GRESHEES ANGEL and TOMSINCHARGE made movements inwards towards the marker line. GRESHEES ANGEL had drawn barrier (5) on the front line, and TOMSINCHARGE had drawn barrier (2) on the second line. It was illustrated that before Mr Telfer could complete his movement onto the marker line Ms Hickman had moved TOMSINCHARGE“Tomsincharge” inside it and was well established in that position. However Mr Telfer had continued his movement inwards, and as a result Ms Hickman had to restrain her horse and had lost the position she was entitled to.
At the end of the race there was a neck between 3rd and 4th and it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Telfer’s driving had interfered with the progress or chances of TOMSINCHARGE.
Ms Hickman confirmed this evidence and said that she had called out to Mr Telfer before the incident occurred.
Mr Telfer accepted that he had moved down on Ms Hickman’s horse, but said that at the time he thought he was clear to do so. He also said that he believed Ms Hickman should have eased her horse to allow him to complete the movement. He also accepted that Ms Hickman had called out to him, but said that he did not hear her.
Mr DeFilippi made submissions that Ms Hickman was under no obligation to take hold of her horse, as she was entitled to be where she was.
We adjourned to consider our decision.
Reasons for Decision:
After seeing the video coverage and hearing the evidence we were satisfied that Mr Telfer did move onto the marker line when he was not clear of Ms Hickman. We were also satisfied that Mr Telfer’s actions had caused interference and that the progress and/or chances of TOMSINCHARGE had been affected. We also took into account the small margin (a neck) and decided that the protest would be upheld.
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: f63e083975478b33f646067ae2ba77de
informantnumber: A5560
horsename: GRESHEES ANGEL
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 04/10/2012
hearing_title: Timaru HRC 14 October 2012 - R 10 (instigating a protest)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 10, the Family Xmas Meeting Saturday 8 December Mobile Pace, an Information Instigating a Protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren against the 3rd placing of GRESHEES ANGEL (5) for allegedly causing interference to “TOMSINCHARGE (11) which finished 4th in the race. The official margin between 3rd and 4th was a neck.
The Judge’s placings in this race were as follows.
1st – Bettors Lad (9)
2nd – Comenche (8)
3rd – Greshees Angel (5)
4th – Tomsincharge (11)
5th – Mac’s Wee Pea (1)
6th – Roman Affair (3)
The Information reads as follows.
“I the above named informant allege that horse number (5) or its driver placed 3rd by the Judge interfered with the chances of horse number (11) placed 4th by the Judge – in the early stages TOMSINCHARGE was crowded for running room by GRESHEES ANGEL.”
Rule 869(8) provides as follows.
“The Judicial Committee may in addition to any other penalty which may be imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 thereof place any horse which:
(a) may have gained an advantage by any conduct or interference prohibited by any preceding provision of this Rule and/or
(b) may have interfered with, or whose horseman may have interfered with, the progress or chance of any other horse or horses, -
immediately after any horse from which it may have gained an advantage or whose chances or progress may have been affected thereby.”
The connections of TOMSINCHARGE were represented at this hearing by the driver, Junior Horsewoman Ms S. M. Hickman, and she was assisted by Open Horseman Mr C. J. DeFilippi. Mr G. C. Telfer the driver, trainer and part owner of GRESHEES ANGEL represented the interests of that horse.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Stipendiary Steward Mr N. M. Ydgren gave evidence and used video coverage to show that shortly after the start of this 2000 metre mobile start race GRESHEES ANGEL and TOMSINCHARGE made movements inwards towards the marker line. GRESHEES ANGEL had drawn barrier (5) on the front line, and TOMSINCHARGE had drawn barrier (2) on the second line. It was illustrated that before Mr Telfer could complete his movement onto the marker line Ms Hickman had moved TOMSINCHARGE“Tomsincharge” inside it and was well established in that position. However Mr Telfer had continued his movement inwards, and as a result Ms Hickman had to restrain her horse and had lost the position she was entitled to.
At the end of the race there was a neck between 3rd and 4th and it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ case that Mr Telfer’s driving had interfered with the progress or chances of TOMSINCHARGE.
Ms Hickman confirmed this evidence and said that she had called out to Mr Telfer before the incident occurred.
Mr Telfer accepted that he had moved down on Ms Hickman’s horse, but said that at the time he thought he was clear to do so. He also said that he believed Ms Hickman should have eased her horse to allow him to complete the movement. He also accepted that Ms Hickman had called out to him, but said that he did not hear her.
Mr DeFilippi made submissions that Ms Hickman was under no obligation to take hold of her horse, as she was entitled to be where she was.
We adjourned to consider our decision.
reasonsfordecision:
After seeing the video coverage and hearing the evidence we were satisfied that Mr Telfer did move onto the marker line when he was not clear of Ms Hickman. We were also satisfied that Mr Telfer’s actions had caused interference and that the progress and/or chances of TOMSINCHARGE had been affected. We also took into account the small margin (a neck) and decided that the protest would be upheld.
Decision:
On resuming the hearing we advised the parties that full reasons would be given in our written decision (see above). We advised that we found that GRESHEES ANGEL did cross TOMSINCHARGE when not clear and affected that horse’s chances. The protest was therefore upheld and GRESHEES ANGEL was relegated from 3rd to 4th place. We also advised that dividends were to be paid in accordance with the amended placings, which were as follows:-
1st – Bettors Lad (9)
2nd – Comenche (8)
3rd – Tomsincharge (11)
4th – Greshees Angel (5)
5th – Mac’s Wee Pea (1)
6th – Roman Affair (3)
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: Rule 869(8)
Informant: Mr N. M. Ydgren - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Ms S. M. Hickman - Junior Horsewoman driver of TOMSINCHARGE, Mr C. J. DeFilippi - Open Horseman assisting Ms Hickman
Respondent: Mr G. C. Telfer - Graduation Horseman
StipendSteward:
raceid: e246c9d5bc5dc7fd2cdbc6b7d865ccc0
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R1
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 940c0ec649e0a5a329d71586b95bc470
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 14/10/2012
meet_title: Timaru HRC - 14 October 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: timaru-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: JPhelan
meet_pm1: JMillar
meet_pm2: none
name: Timaru HRC