RULING NUMBER COM SB 032/2015

COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – DECEMBER 15, 2015

NOTICE OF DECISION

IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c.20;

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL AND HEARING OF ROGER MAYOTTE

AGAINST RULING SB 47904

Date of Hearing: December 15, 2015

ORC Panel: John W. Macdonald, Commissioner

Representative for the Appellant: Self-represented

Agent for the Administration: David Stewart

Decision:

The Panel denied the appeal.

A transcript with the Panel’s oral Reasons for Decision is attached to this Notice.

DATED at Toronto this 17^th^ day of December 2015.

Jean Major

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 ROGER MAYOTTE:

Held Before:

John Macdonald Commissioner

These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: ROGER MAYOTTE, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 15th day of December, 2015.

Appearances:

David Stewart Agent for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration

Hearing continued ...

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you gentlemen. While I have some sympathy for what turned out to be somewhat unique based on the whip being caught up in the sulky that is the responsibility of the driver. The driver controls the whip. The fact that it got stuck in someone else’s equipment is unfortunate and slightly unusual. I haven’t had any personal experience of seeing that happen. I’m sure it could. The difficulty here is that there was interference as a result of this circumstance pushing the horse driven by Jody Jamieson DANIEL HALL out. We don’t know what the outcome would have been in the race if that had not occurred but we do know that when it came to the judges’ decision as far as placing because of the interference that ELOQUENT SERENTITY the horse driven by Mr. Mayotte was placed back a notch and I realize that the significance here is the funds for a Breeders Crown race finishing 5^th^ or 6^th^ as a result of which the appeal is going to be denied. The interference was shown and it is worth noting from Mr. Mayotte that the judges did not impose any fine or suspension or anything for you for the interference, understanding that the circumstances were such that the loss of the placing was something of a penalty, something that couldn’t be determined ahead of time. You wouldn’t expect something like this to happen. In any event, the appeal will be denied. Thank you gentlemen.

CERTIFIED CORRECT:_________________________________

RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR

Commissioner of Oaths