AMENDED RULING NUMBER COM SB 010/2013
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – MARCH 26, 2013
NOTICE OF DECISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE NICHOLAS BOYD APPEAL
Nicholas Boyd appealed against Ruling Number SB 45130/2012.
Date of Hearing: March 26, 2013
ORC Panel Members: Chair Rod Seiling
Representative for Appellant: Self-represented
Representative for the Administration: Craig Walker
The Panel denied the appeal but varied the penalty to a fine of $300 and 7 days driving suspension to be served from March 31 to April 6, 2013 inclusively.
A transcript with the Panel’s oral Reasons for Decision is attached to this Notice.
DATED at Toronto this 2nd day of April 2013.
Steven Lehman
Executive Director
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
STANDARDBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, 2000, S.O. C.20 AND THE RULES OF STANDARDBRED RACING:
AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF NICHOLAS BOYD:
Held Before:
Rod Seiling Chairman
These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: NICHOLAS BOYD, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 26th day of March, 2013.
Appearances:
Craig Walker,
agent for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: The issue before me is did the appellant Nicholas Boyd violate SB rule 22.23.03 (a), (b) and (c) and 22.23.05 (a), (b) and (c) on November 4th, 2012 at Georgian Downs in race 6. After carefully listening to the testimony and reviewing the evidence and documents filed the panel denies the appeal. The standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities with the onus of proof on the Administration of the ORC. Based on the evidence it is reasonable to conclude the appellant Nicholas Boyd violated rules SB 22.23.03 (a), (b) and (c) and 22.23.05 (a), (b) and (c). The video of the race supports that his hand was raised above his head in violation of the rule. The testimony of Judge Lawrence on a balance of probabilities supports the video evidence. The panel took into account the penalty based on the ORC/RCI penalty guidelines. The penalty assessed by the judges is varied and is set at seven days with the fine of $300.00. Mr. Boyd raised serious allegations of bias against him. The panel directs Managing Director Stone to investigate this serious allegation. Furthermore the panel urges the ORC Administration to ensure there is strict enforcement of the urging rules, in particular, no loose lining. This is a safety matter as well as it possibly may mitigate the objectives of the urging rule. As to Mr. Boyd's claim others are breaking the rules, his assertion is akin to the speeder who gets caught by the police for speeding whose defence is simply others were speeding as well. Whether others were breaking the rule is irrelevant as it relates to Mr. Boyd's violation of the urging rule. For certainty, the film review did not conclusively show any other driver in the race violated the urging rule. Thank you. Mr. Boyd can work out with the judges his penalty.
MR. WALKER: Thank you, sir.
CERTIFIED CORRECT_________________________________
RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CAR
Commissioner of Oaths