RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Informant: S P Renault Stipendiary Steward

Defendant: M P Jones

Information No: 68558

Meeting: New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club

Date: 16 July 2010

Venue: Addington Raceway, Christchurch

Race: 5

Rule No: 849 (2)

Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman – J Millar, Chairman

Plea: Admitted

FACTS:

Following the running of Race 5, Neutrogena Norwegian Formula Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr N R Escott, against Licensed Public Trainer, Mr M P Jones, alleging a breach of Rule 849 (2) in that Mr Jones, as the trainer of SKIP BO in the race, “presented the gelding to race with the incorrect number on”.

Mr Jones had signed the Statement by the Defendant on the information form indicating, firstly, that he admitted the breach and, secondly, that he did not wish to be present at the hearing of the information.

Rule 849 provides as follows:

(2)     The trainer, horseman or person in control of each horse in the race shall ensure that the proper numbered saddlecloth is attached prior to the horse parading in the assembly area.

SUBMISSION(S):

Mr Escott, Chief Stipendiary Steward, informed the Committee that Mr Jones had presented SKIP BO on to the track for Race 5 wearing saddlecloth number 15 instead of the horse’s correct saddlecloth, number 12.

Mr Jones’ explanation to the Stewards was that he had a runner in Race 8 which was to wear saddlecloth 15. He had put the incorrect saddlecloth on SKIP BO for Race 5.

REASON(S):

The Committee was satisfied that Mr Jones had presented SKIP BO on to the track wearing the incorrect saddlecloth number, in breach of Rule 849 (2). It noted Mr Jones’ admission of the breach.

DECISION:

The charge was found proved.

SUBMISSIONS ON PENALTY:

Mr Escott submitted that a fine of $200 was appropriate. He pointed out that the horse had been presented on the track before the error was noticed. This was more serious than where the error is detected in the assembly area or before the horse’s going on to the track.

REASONS FOR PENALTY:

The Committee noted Mr Jones’ admission of the breach. The Committee further noted that the Penalty Guide recommended a fine of $150 for a breach of the Rule and that the range of fines actually imposed for breaches of the Rule ranged from $100 to $300. The Committee agreed that the breach was more serious in a case where, as in the present case, the horse actually gets on to the track wearing the incorrect number.

PENALTY:

Mr Jones was fined the sum of $200.

R G McKenzie                             J Millar

Chairman                                  Committee Member

68558