RULING NUMBER COM SB 011/2014
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – MAY 14, 2014
NOTICE OF DECISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF KAREN CARROLL AND MIKE BISHOP
Karen Carroll, licence # K63988, and Mike Bishop, licence # 027F56, appealed against Ruling Number SB 34067.
ORC Panel Members: Commissioner John W. Macdonald
Representative for Appellant: Self represented
Agent for the Administration: Thomas Miller
Decision: The Panel allowed the appeal and ordered the redistribution of purse money to reflect the new order of finish as follows:
1Putmeintogo 1st
2Foolish Mind 3rd/DH
3I Got To Boogie 8th
4Bestulldotanite 6th
5Lyonssweetie 7th
6True Reflection 3rd/DH
7Call It Courage 2nd
8D Gs Pesquero 5th
A transcript with the Panel’s oral Reasons for Decision is attached to this Notice.
DATED at Toronto this 21st day of May 2014.
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 KAREN CARROLL and MIKE BISHOP:
Held Before:
John Macdonald Chairman
These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: KAREN CARROLL and MIKE BISHOP, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 14th day of May, 2014.
Appearances:
Tom Miller, for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I'm mindful that the Rule 33.09, the camera is an aid to the placing judges. In all cases the cameras were only an aid and the decision of the judges shall be final. I have a bit of an advantage over the judges, although, I do have to respect their opinions and take some deference from them most of the time but I also have a little discretion and I wish I knew what was protruding there. I'm sorry but I'm not convinced on that. The Administration has the onus to establish what that is. I'm not a judge and I don't pretend to be but I am the judge in these proceedings and I'm of the opinion and notwithstanding the view of the judges, because I can't tell what that is, that it is basically a dead heat for 3rd. I'm obviously concerned with the amount of money involved obviously in placing the horses and in a race of any size is a questionable decision. Now I appreciate what the judges have done but I have a concern and the Administration, in my view, had the onus and the obligation to determine what that was. If there was a veterinarian who could tell me if a horse's nostril could flare that much that would be a conclusion there but whatever that is it obviously would indicate that the 2 over the 6 would be the logical result but I can't tell and since I can't tell I will use my discretion and rule that this race ended up in a dead heat. Thank you, gentlemen.
CERTIFIED ORRECT_______________________________
RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR
Commissioner of Oaths