Westport Tc 28 December 2010 – R 9 (instigating a protest 2)
ID: JCA16561
Meet Title:
Westport TC - 28 December 2010
Meet Chair:
JPhelan
Meet Committee Member 1:
SChing
Race Date:
2010/12/28
Race Number:
R 9
Decision:
On resuming the hearing the 10th race was about to start and none of the parties were present. We advised that the protest was upheld, with the amended placings being as follows.
1st – Neville Vaughan (12)
2nd – Game As Ned Kelly (2)
3rd – Zealous Lady (5)
4th – Millwood Munchin (3)
5th – Major Domus (10)
6th – Wax And Wane (6)
Facts:
Following the running of Race 9, the Criterion Hotel Keith Powell Memorial Trot, an information Instigating a Protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mrs K. R. Williams alleging “Lindt” (13), driven by Mr R. T. May had caused interference to “Medora” (15) driven by Mr K. D. Townley.
The Judge’s official placings, after a previous protest relating to 5th placing had been upheld, were as follows –
1st – Neville Vaughan (12)
2nd – Game As Ned Kelly (2)
3rd – Lindt (13)
4th – Zealous Lady (5)
5th – Millwood Munchin (3)
6th – Major Domus (10)
The Information reads as follows.
“This is a protest against horse number (13) placed 3rd by the Judge on the grounds of interference to No. 15 after approx. 250 metres.”
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.
This hearing was delayed for a considerable time because Mr May could not be made aware that he was needed in the Enquiry Room. There was also a delay in having Ms K. A. Hill attend the Enquiry Room to deal with a protest (uncontested) against the 5th placing of her horse, “Ruby N Diamonds” in this race.
Mr May was asked if the trainer and owners of “Lindt” were on the course, and he said that they were. As they had not attended the Enquiry Room by this late stage Mr May was asked if he would represent the interests of the connections, and he agreed that he would. Mr K. D. Townley, the trainer and driver of “Medora”, represented the interests of that horse. All parties indicated that they understood the Rule and the nature of the protest.
Submissions for Decision:
Mrs Williams gave evidence and used video coverage to show that about 250 metres after the start “Lindt” broke free of interference and was restrained by driver Mr R. T. May. At this time “Medora” was trailing “Lindt”, and when “Lindt” came back on his horse driver Mr K. D. Townley took evasive action, which resulted in his horse breaking and loosing its chance.
Mrs Williams called Mr K. D. Townley, the driver of “Medora”, to give evidence. He said that he was trailing “Lindt” about 250 metres after the start when that horse broke. As result he took evasive action and his horse broke and lost its chance. In answer to a question from Mrs Williams, Mr Townley said that his horse would not have broken had he not had to take evasive action to avoid “Lindt”.
Mr May said that when his horse broke he restrained his horse and moved it wider on the track. Mr May said that he thought he had done all he could in the circumstances
We adjourned to consider our decision.
Reasons for Decision:
We carefully considered the evidence and the video coverage of the incident. We were satisfied that “Medora” broke and lost its chance because of interference from “Lindt”. Although there was no contact between the two horses Mr Townley had to take evasive action when “Lindt” broke and came back on him, and this amounted to interference. It follows that the progress or chances of “Medora” had been affected.
Accordingly we decided that the protest should be upheld and that “Lindt” would be relegated to 9th place behind “Medora”.
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: c61493129a76e9b28baa15a7a7883c89
informantnumber: 13773
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 31/12/2010
hearing_title: Westport Tc 28 December 2010 - R 9 (instigating a protest 2)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 9, the Criterion Hotel Keith Powell Memorial Trot, an information Instigating a Protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward Mrs K. R. Williams alleging “Lindt” (13), driven by Mr R. T. May had caused interference to “Medora” (15) driven by Mr K. D. Townley.
The Judge’s official placings, after a previous protest relating to 5th placing had been upheld, were as follows –
1st – Neville Vaughan (12)
2nd – Game As Ned Kelly (2)
3rd – Lindt (13)
4th – Zealous Lady (5)
5th – Millwood Munchin (3)
6th – Major Domus (10)
The Information reads as follows.
“This is a protest against horse number (13) placed 3rd by the Judge on the grounds of interference to No. 15 after approx. 250 metres.”
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.
This hearing was delayed for a considerable time because Mr May could not be made aware that he was needed in the Enquiry Room. There was also a delay in having Ms K. A. Hill attend the Enquiry Room to deal with a protest (uncontested) against the 5th placing of her horse, “Ruby N Diamonds” in this race.
Mr May was asked if the trainer and owners of “Lindt” were on the course, and he said that they were. As they had not attended the Enquiry Room by this late stage Mr May was asked if he would represent the interests of the connections, and he agreed that he would. Mr K. D. Townley, the trainer and driver of “Medora”, represented the interests of that horse. All parties indicated that they understood the Rule and the nature of the protest.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mrs Williams gave evidence and used video coverage to show that about 250 metres after the start “Lindt” broke free of interference and was restrained by driver Mr R. T. May. At this time “Medora” was trailing “Lindt”, and when “Lindt” came back on his horse driver Mr K. D. Townley took evasive action, which resulted in his horse breaking and loosing its chance.
Mrs Williams called Mr K. D. Townley, the driver of “Medora”, to give evidence. He said that he was trailing “Lindt” about 250 metres after the start when that horse broke. As result he took evasive action and his horse broke and lost its chance. In answer to a question from Mrs Williams, Mr Townley said that his horse would not have broken had he not had to take evasive action to avoid “Lindt”.
Mr May said that when his horse broke he restrained his horse and moved it wider on the track. Mr May said that he thought he had done all he could in the circumstances
We adjourned to consider our decision.
reasonsfordecision:
We carefully considered the evidence and the video coverage of the incident. We were satisfied that “Medora” broke and lost its chance because of interference from “Lindt”. Although there was no contact between the two horses Mr Townley had to take evasive action when “Lindt” broke and came back on him, and this amounted to interference. It follows that the progress or chances of “Medora” had been affected.
Accordingly we decided that the protest should be upheld and that “Lindt” would be relegated to 9th place behind “Medora”.
Decision:
On resuming the hearing the 10th race was about to start and none of the parties were present. We advised that the protest was upheld, with the amended placings being as follows.
1st – Neville Vaughan (12)
2nd – Game As Ned Kelly (2)
3rd – Zealous Lady (5)
4th – Millwood Munchin (3)
5th – Major Domus (10)
6th – Wax And Wane (6)
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules:
Informant: Mrs KR Williams - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr KD Townley - driver of MEDORA
Respondent: Mr RT May - driver of LINDT
StipendSteward:
raceid: fa5d6ba712e8196b3c40d10f0e73dd10
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 2bc1255e73386564233d6fbc41b4cb49
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 28/12/2010
meet_title: Westport TC - 28 December 2010
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: westport-tc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: JPhelan
meet_pm1: SChing
meet_pm2: none
name: Westport TC