Ontario
Racing
Commission
TB
RULING NUMBER COM SB 015/2010
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – MARCH 17, 2010
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER IN THE APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF
STANDARDBRED LICENSEE RANDALL WAPLES
On January 23, 2010, the Judges issued Standardbred Official Ruling SB42016 wherein Mr. Waples was fined $100 and the horse PANMUNJOM was placed from 1st to 2nd, for violation of ORC Rule 18.08.02 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing (driving inside 1 pylon in the stretch and gaining an unfair advantage on another horse during the 8th race at Woodbine Raceway on January 23, 2010).
On January 24, 2010, Mr. Waples filed a Notice of Appeal, pursuant to Rule 24.01(b) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.
On March 17, 2010, a Panel of the ORC, comprised of Commissioner Brenda Walker, convened for the purposes of hearing this matter.
Tom Miller appeared on behalf of the Administration of the ORC. Mr. Waples attended the Hearing and was unrepresented.
After reviewing the evidence, hearing the testimony of Judge Doug Hopkins, and upon considering the closing submissions, the Panel denied the appeal.
The Transcript with the Panel’s Reasons for Decision is attached to this Ruling.
DATED at Toronto this 17th day of March 2010.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
John L. Blakney Executive Director ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
STANDARDBRED INDUSTRY APPEAL HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF RANDALL WAPLES
This is an excerpt of the hearing of the Ontario Racing Commission re: RANDALL WAPLES, in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, on the 17th day of March, 2010.
Heard before: Brenda Walker, Commissioner
Appearances:
Tom Miller & Neil McCoag, Representatives for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration,
Hearing continued ...
MR. MILLER: All rise please. The appeals before the Commission are back in session.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for coming today and we can do an oral decision and after reviewing the tapes and listening to the evidence of the witnesses and after close consideration of all points the appeal has been disallowed. Very good arguments though, Randy but from the evidence that I have seen I am going to have to disallow the appeal.
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
CERTIFIED CORRECT:_________________________________
RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR Commissioner of Oaths