RULING NUMBER COM TB 021/2012
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – NOVEMBER 21, 2012
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c. 20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF THOROUGHBRED LICENSEES DON HINDMARCH AND MICHELLE RAINFORD
On September 12, 2012, the Stewards issued Thoroughbred Official Ruling TB 7776 wherein Jockey Michelle Rainford (“Rainford”) was given the penalty of a three-day riding suspension and the horse, “Rising Dough”, was placed from 1st position to 4th position for causing interference to the horse, “Meys Rocket”, a violation of TB Rules 11.07, 11.09.01, 11.09.03,11.09.05,11.12 and 11.14.
On September 12, 2012, Rainford filed a Notice of Appeal, pursuant to Rule 13.17(b) of the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing.
On November 21, 2012 a Panel of the Ontario Racing Commission (“ORC”), comprised of Commissioner John Macdonald, convened for the purpose of hearing this matter.
Neil McCoag appeared on behalf of the Administration of the ORC. Rainford attended the Hearing and was unrepresented.
After reviewing the evidence, hearing the testimony of Senior Steward William McMahon, Jockey Jesse Campbell, Rainford and Trainer Scott Fairlie and upon considering the closing submissions, the Panel denied the appeal but changed the order of finish of the top four finishers as the Panel felt that the #9 horse, Sir Lowry’s Pass, ridden by James Mcaleney, interfered with the #10 horse, Mey’s Rocket, ridden by Jesse Campbell which also suffered interference from the #11 horse, Rising Dough, ridden by Rainford. The new order of finish of the top four finishers of Race #7 on September 9, 2012 is as follows:
1st #6 Steeley’s Bay
2nd #10 Mey’s Rocket
3rd #11 Rising Dough
4th #9 Sir Lowry’s Pass
The three-day riding penalty for Rainford will be served November 25, 28 and 29, 2012.
A transcript of the Panel’s Oral Decision is attached to this Ruling.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 28th day of November 2012.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION ____________________________
Steven Lehman
Executive Director
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
THOROUGHBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF DON HINDMARCH and MICHELLE RAINFORD
Held Before:
John Macdonald, Commissioner
These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: DON HINDMARCH and MICHELLE RAINFORD, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 21st day of November, 2012.
Appearances:
Neil McCoag,
agent for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: First of all, thank you all for your presentation. I understand where the stewards are coming from. The difficulty I have is the same as the appellant is Mr. McAleney's horse while not involved at the end of the stretch certainly caused enough problems initially. I can't totally see where the horse bumped enough that he changed the direction of Ms. Rainford's horse. I do also see that Ms. Rainford's horse was going from what looked like three wide to two wide and was coming in. On her part I would deny the appeal as far as the suspension goes, three days. So that will stay. However, I am concerned with the placing. I feel Mr. McAleney's horse should have been moved back and when it comes to the placing I note that the 6 horse SEELEY'S BAY was 2nd and placed 1st, the horse driven by Mr. McAleney the 9 horse was 3rd placed 2nd. I would have placed Mr. McAleney's horse as 4th and I would have moved up the 10 horse which was the horse placed 3rd and finished 2nd and notwithstanding the interference the horse RISING DOUGH finished 1st and was placed 4th and I would move that horse up to 3rd. Now I realize that this is not significant. It may not be what all you saw but I was concerned about the fact that Mr. McAleney's horse seemed to be allowed to do a small bump and that's fine but the second one seemed to me it was an interference and we have had the advantage of seeing the videos a number of times. They don't have the advantage, the stewards, when they saw it live but this is a trial de novo. The witnesses have all had their own views and their own opinions and I'm substituting my opinion as far as the finish goes for the first four placings. I will not change the suspension because I did see that Ms. Rainford did come over at the time when had she been driving straight a lot of this wouldn't have happened. Thank you. Any further questions?
MR. MCCOAG: Sir, I just want a clarification. Ms. Rainford'sappeal ‑‑
MR. CHAIRMAN: The suspension.
MR. MCCOAG: The suspension appeal is denied. The three days to serve. You are changing the order of the race?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. MCCOAG: The order of the race shall now be the winner being?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The 6 horse which finished 2nd was placed 1st.
MR. MCCOAG: SEELEY'S BAY finished 2nd placed 1st?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Correct.
MR. MCCOAG: Mr. McAleney finished 3, p. 2 and is going to be placed 4th?
MR. CHAIRMAN: 4th.
MR. MCCOAG: MEY'S ROCKET was 4th placed 3rd?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Will be now 2nd.
MR. MCCOAG: Placed 2nd and RISING DOUGH is 1st placed 3rd?
MR. CHAIRMAN: 3rd. I don't think, counsel, this is a significant change as far as the horses go but from what I can see there was interference by two horses in that race and I couldn't tell whether or not the 9 horse was the one that caused all the problem but Ms. Rainford's horse did definitely come over. The three day suspension will be either arranged by the stewards or effective at the current Woodbine meet.
MR. MCCOAG: Okay.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Anything further? This matter is terminated.
CERTIFIED CORRECT:_________________________________
RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR
Commissioner of Oaths