Waikato TR 5 July 2025 – R7 – Jasmine Fawcett

ID: RIB56750

Respondent(s):
Jasmine Jade Fawcett - Jockey

Applicant:
Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward

Adjudicators:
Mr A Smith (Chair), Mr I McHardy

Persons Present:
Mr J Oatham - Chief Stipendiary Steward

Information Number:
A19066

Decision Type:
Race Related Charge

Charge:
Whip Breach (Arm over shoulder height)

Rule(s):
638(3)(f)(ii) - Contravention whip rule

Plea:
Admitted

Animal Name:
SOLIDIFY

Code:
Thoroughbred

Race Date:
05/07/2025

Race Club:
Waikato Thoroughbred Racing

Race Location:
Te Rapa Racecourse - Te Rapa Road, Hamilton, 3200

Race Number:
R7

Hearing Date:
05/07/2025

Hearing Location:
Te Rapa Racecourse

Outcome: Proved

Penalty: Jockey Jasmine Fawcett is fined $450

INTRODUCTION:

Following the running of Race 7,  the Respondent, Class A Rider Jasmine Fawcett, admitted a charge alleging that she used her whip with an action which raised her arm above shoulder height.

Rule 638(3)(f)(ii) provides:

Without limiting the generality of subrule 638(3)(e), in a Flat Race or Jumping Race, a trial (including jump-outs and/or tests for certification purposes) a Rider must not use his or her whip:
(ii) using an action that raises the Rider’s arm above shoulder height;

EVIDENCE:

Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Oatham demonstrated the breach using available race films.  He identified Ms Fawcett riding SOLIDIFY upon entering the home straight. He said that Ms Fawcett used the whip on one occasion in the backhand, before pulling her whip through to the forehand and striking her mount a further 6 times. He said that all 6 strikes were in breach of the Whip Rule, in that Ms Fawcett’s arm was raised above her shoulder.

Ms Fawcett said that this wasn’t a riding/whipping style that she usually adopted and was trying to get her horse to respond to stronger riding. She also indicated that she would go back to the trials to practice this whipping style, prior to adopting in the future.

DECISION:

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

SUBMISSIONS FOR PENALTY:

Mr Oatham said that the Respondent had a clear record under this Rule and the starting point penalty for a first breach was a $250 fine.  He said that given the number of strikes, the Stewards would be seeking an uplift in penalty and believed that a fine in the vicinity of $400 – $500 was appropriate. The Adjudicative Committee requested that the Stewards provide recent relevant penalties to support the uplifted penalty range.

The penalties referred to by the Stewards, imposed for similar breaches, ranged from $400 – $800.

REASONS FOR PENALTY:

The Penalty Guidelines provide for a starting point fine of $250 for breaches of Rule 638(3)(f)(ii).

The strikes were not forceful, however the number of strikes outside of the Guidelines was an aggravating factor, which necessitated an uplift from the starting point.

CONCLUSION:

Having considered all factors, the Adjudicative Committee determined a penalty of $450 was appropriate, given the circumstances.

Decision Date: 05/07/2025

Publish Date: 07/07/2025