You are here: Home / NZ Metro TC - 24 August 2010 / NZ Metro TC - 24 August 2010 - R 2

NZ Metro TC - 24 August 2010 - R 2



869(2)(a)

RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Informant:  Mr N. R. Escott, Chief Stipendiary Steward

Defendant:  Mr A. K. Beecroft – Graduation Horseman

Information No:  68819

Meeting:  New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club    

Date:  24 August 2010

Venue:  Addington Raceway                                      

Race No. 2:  Ohoka Arizona Mobile Pace

Rule No:  869(2)(a)

Judicial Committee:  J. M. Phelan, Chairman - S. C. Ching, Committee Member                   

Plea:  Admitted.

 

Charge:

Following the running of Race 2, the Ohoka Arizona Mobile Pace, an Information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr N. R. Escott against Graduation Horseman Mr A. K. Beecroft alleging a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that he used his whip excessively.

 

The charge reads as follows.

 

“I the above named informant allege that the above named Defendant committed a breach of Rule 869(2)(a) in that whilst driving “Missy Elliott” in the run home Mr Beecroft has used his whip on approximately 26 occasions which Stewards deem to be excessive.”

 

Rule 869(2)(a) reads as follows.

 

“(2) No horseman shall during any race:-

(a) use his whip in an unnecessary, excessive or improper manner.”

 

Facts:

Mr Beecroft had indicated on the Information that this breach of the Rules was admitted, and also that he did not wish to attend the hearing.

 

Mr Escott gave evidence and used video coverage to show that Mr Beecroft had used his whip on approximately 26 occasions in the run home.

 

Decision:

As Mr Beecroft had admitted this breach of the Rules it was found to be proved in accordance with Rule 1111(1)(d).

 

Submissions on Penalty:

In relation to penalty Mr Escott advised that Mr Beecroft had no relevant previous convictions, and as he had admitted the breach submitted that a fine of between $200-00 and $250-00 would be appropriate in this case.   

 

Reasons:

We were satisfied, in line with previous penalties imposed for similar breaches of this Rule, and after hearing submissions, that a fine of $200-00 was appropriate in this case.

 

Penalty:

Accordingly Mr Beecroft was fined the sum of $200-00.

 

 

 

 

 

Document Actions
« May 2012 »
May
MoTuWeThFrSaSu
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31