IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT 2000, S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THOROUGHBRED JOCKEY ELDRIDGE LINDSAY
Thoroughbred Jockey Eldridge Lindsay appealed the ruling of the Industry Board of Appeal dated June 15, 2005, which had upheld Stewards' Ruling Number TB 2914/2005 issued against him on May 2, 2005, wherein he was suspended for 3 days for violation of Rules 11.07, 11.09.01, 11.09.03 and 11.09.05 of the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing for coming in with his mount APPEALING CLASS and interfering with COMEDY FLYER in the first race on May 1, 2005 at Fort Erie Racetrack.
The ORC Panel hearing the matter consisted of Chair Tanaka and Commissioners David Gorman and George Kelly. The Panel convened on September 21, 2005. Aaron Dantowitz appeared as counsel for the Administration and Irwin Driedger appeared as agent for Eldridge Lindsay.
On hearing the evidence of Steward William McMahon, Dale Helmsley, and Eldridge Lindsay, and on reviewing the videotape of the race and the Exhibits, and on hearing the submissions of counsel for the Administration and the agent for Mr. Lindsay, the Panel found that the actions of Mr. Lindsay in attempting to prevent the interference were appropriate and expected in the circumstances. Accordingly, the Panel allowed Mr. Lindsay's appeal and removed the suspension.
The Panel found that disqualification of placement of APPEALING CLASS by the stewards to third place had been correct, and accordingly did not disturb the final order of placement.
The Panel's reasons for decision form part of the transcript of the hearing, and are attached to this ruling.
DATED this 16th day of November 2005.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
John L. Blakney
Executive Director
TRANSCRIPT
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
THOROUGHBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF THOROUGHBRED JOCKEY
ELDRIDGE LINDSAY
REASONS FOR DECISION
Hearing conducted in the Hearing Room of the Ontario Racing Commission, 7th Floor, 20 Dundas Street West, Toronto, Ontario, on Wednesday the 21st day of September, 2005.
DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE PANEL:
L. Tanaka Chair
G. Kelly
D. Gorman
APPEARANCES:
Aaron Dantowitz Counsel for the Administration
Irwin Driedger For the Appellant
Also Present:
Ed Hall
--- Upon resuming at 12:14 p. m.
REASONS FOR DECISION:
THE CHAIR: Now, we're going to deal, at this point, with the appeal of Eldridge Lindsay. Mr. Lindsay appealed his three-day suspension for a violation of Rules 11.07, ll.09.01, 11.09.03, and 11.09.05.
With respect to the first race on May 1, 2005 on opening day at Fort Erie Racetrack this year, the horse, APPEALING CLASS, ridden by Mr. Lindsay was disqualified from second position and placed third, and there is no dispute that the horse was promptly disqualified and placed.
The presentation of the case by the Administration was that Mr. Lindsay was guilty of careless driving under Rule 11.09.03 for fouling, interference, or careless driving, a rider may be fined or suspended or both by the stewards according to the nature and seriousness of the offence.
The actual ruling by the stewards was that jockey Lindsay was suspended for coming in with his mount and interfering with COMEDY FLYER, but there's nothing in the ruling to indicate that he was being penalized for careless riding and we note that the rules make a distinction between interference and careless riding. We are satisfied that the disqualification of placement was correct and we're very reluctant to interfere with the experienced judgement of both the stewards and the Industry Appeal Board, but this an interference case, not a careless riding case.
In our view, based on the review of the tapes and testimony the jockeys gave, including Mr. Hemsley's initial assessment in his report to the judges that the jockey was trying to hold the horse, and bearing in mind the evidence of the jockey today, we do not agree that this is a case for a three day suspension which can result in a significant financial penalty for a jockey.
We were told by the steward that their view was that he had not made sufficient to prevent the horse interfering and, in our view on the evidence we had, there simply was not sufficient particulars about what else the jockey could have done. His whipping and his pulling of the horse's head to the right were all the appropriate and expected steps when you have a horse bearing in, and we were not, in our view, given sufficient basis to find that there was something else that he could have done, given the timing in the race and the very short time period in which he had to make a decision in this matter, so we're granting the appeal. The horse's disqualification and placement stands, but the jockey in this case we do not believe should have been suspended for the three days.
MR. DRIEDGER: Thank you.
--- Whereupon proceedings adjourned at 12:15 p. m.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING
to be a true and accurate transcription
of a cassette tape recording
to the best of my skill and ability.
MAUREEN BYNOE, Stenomask Reporter
B. A., Commissioner of Oaths