Whangarei RC 3 August 2024 – R1 – Triston Moodley

Evidence

Following the running of Race 1, the Respondent Apprentice Rider Triston Moodley, admitted a charge alleging that he struck his mount CHICAGO JACK in the vicinity of the head near the 100 metres.

His Employer, Trainer Mr Danny Walker assisted Mr Moodley at the hearing.

Mr Moodley was charged under Rule 638(3)(f)(i).  This Rule provides that in a Flat Race a Rider must not use his or her whip:

• forward of the Rider’s horse’s shoulder or in the vicinity of its head;

Using the available race films, Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr Jones, demonstrated that Mr Moodley struck his mount behind the saddle nearing the 100 metres and then raised his whip and appeared to make contact near his mount’s head when applying the next strike.

In response, Mr Moodley said that he agreed with the Stewards’ interpretation of the incident. By way of explanation, he said that he was about to change whip hands from ‘right to left hand’ and then changed his mind and applied one further strike with his right hand and in doing so, made contact with the side of his mount’s head.

At this point, the Adjudicative Committee queried Stewards as to whether they believed the strike to the vicinity of the head was deliberate.  Mr Jones responded that although he could not say what Mr Moodley was thinking, he accepted it may not have been intentional strike to the head.  He also accepted that it could have happened as explained by Mr Moodley.

Decision

As the Respondent admitted the breach, the Adjudicative Committee finds the breach proved.

Submissions for Penalty

Mr Jones produced the Respondent’s record, which indicated no previous breaches of this category of the Whip Rules.  But he pointed out that Mr Moodley did have one previous breach relating to excessive whip use, (9 strikes), on 4 May 2024, resulting in a 5 day suspension.

Mr Jones advised that charges under this Rule are rare.  He probed the NZTR database and found one breach by Rider M Du Plessis, which resulted in a $500 fine when he admitted kicking his mount in the vicinity of the head at the barrier.  Another case was identified, R Stam, several years ago, (approximately 2008) which resulted in a 5 day suspension. The circumstances of the Stam case were not known.

Mr Jones submitted that Mr Moodley’s mount dead-heated for first place and he recommended that a fine of approximately $750 be imposed.

Mr Moodley had nothing further to add and accepted that the fine recommended by Stewards was fair.

Mr Walker said that he recalled the facts of the Stam case, and that it was quite different from the circumstances of this matter.

Reasons for Penalty

The Penalty Guide does not provide a starting point for a breach of this nature, as each breach under this particular category of the Whip Rule is dealt with on a fact dependent basis.

The first task for the Adjudicative Committee in assessing penalty, was to determine Mr Moodley’s culpability.  In that regard, the Adjudicative Committee had to determine whether the one strike, in the vicinity of his mount’s head, was a deliberate act, or the result of poor or careless execution.

Mr Moodley submitted that he was about to change his whip hand from ‘right to left.’  But he said, he changed his mind after commencing the manoeuvre and simultaneously, applied one downward strike, which he accepts made contact (brushed) the side of his mount’s head.

The films depict CHICAGO JACK, on the rails, fighting out the finish with I’M ALL IN (S Spratt) on its outer.  Both horses were racing ‘neck and neck’ over the concluding stages of the race, and dead heated for first place. CHICAGO JACK did lay out slightly when struck with the whip, so it is quite conceivable that Mr Moodley was of a mind to change his whip hand.  Ultimately, the films show that one of Mr Moodley’s strikes was applied near his mount’s head. Therefore, having considered Mr Moodley’s explanation and after considering the supporting film evidence, the Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that, it was more probable than not, the strike was not an intentional blow to the horses’ head, but rather the result of a clumsy misguided strike.

Mr Jones advised that there are no useful comparable cases.  The only recent charge under  Rule 638(3)(f)(i) relates to Rider K Wiles, who admitted a breach under this Rule, on 24 April 2024, and was fined $300.  But the circumstances were different in the Wiles’ case, as the strike applied was forward of the horse’s shoulder, as opposed to in the vicinity of the horse’s head.

Although there are no like cases that assist in calibrating penalty, the Adjudicative Committee determined a fine to be appropriate in the circumstances.  Therefore, after deliberation and having due regard for the facts and in particular noting that the force applied in the one strike was minimal, a fine of $750 was imposed.

Mr Moodley was reminded that animal welfare is paramount and had there been the slightest hint that his one strike was intentional, he would have faced a lengthy suspension, as opposed to a fine. On that basis, he was advised that he must take more care when applying his whip.

Conclusion

Mr Moodley is fined $750.