Levin RC 19 December 2025 – R5 – Leah Hemi

Facts:

Following the running of Race 5, Rider Ms L Hemi defended a charge of careless riding laid under Rule 638(1)(d) of the Rules of Racing. The Information alleged that she permitted her mount, GOLDEN, to shift outwards when not sufficiently clear of FREEBELLE, which was checked near the 800-metre mark.

Ms Hemi confirmed that she understood the Rule and that she would be defending the charge.

Rule 638(1)(d) provides that:

A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Adjudicative Committee considers to be careless.

Evidence from Stewards

Using the available race films, Chief Stipendiary Steward Mr Oatham demonstrated the incident and identified the horses and Riders involved. The films showed GOLDEN (Ms Hemi) racing adjacent to the running rail, with FREEBELLE (Mr J Chung) positioned behind and to her outside. GALLANT HERO (Ms K Myers) was racing to the outside of FREEBELLE.

Mr Oatham submitted that Ms Hemi shifted her mount outwards when not the required distance clear of FREEBELLE, causing Mr Chung’s mount to be checked. Because GALLANT HERO was outside of FREEBELLE, Mr Chung was unable to move wider and was forced to check backwards.

Mr Chung, appearing as a witness for the Stewards, stated that near the 800-metre mark, his mount suffered interference when GOLDEN came outwards into his line. He denied there was any pressure from his outside.

Evidence from Respondent

In her defence, Ms Hemi said that prior to the interference, FREEBELLE had been “floating in and out” and in doing so, created a marginal gap that she attempted to take. She maintained that GALLANT HERO shifted slightly inward at the same time, which contributed to the incident.

Ms Myers, appearing as a witness for Ms Hemi, stated that the film angles made it difficult to clearly see the cause of the interference. She believed that Mr Chung was “sweating for a run” on FREEBELLE and was contemplating coming out, but couldn’t because there was no room, so he decided to check back.

Ms Selvakumaran, for the Stewards, submitted that the films clearly showed GOLDEN moving outwards when not clear of FREEBELLE and that Ms Myers had maintained her line at the relevant time.

Ms Hemi concluded by stating that, in her opinion, Mr Chung had checked his mount of his own accord rather than as a result of any outward movement by herself on GOLDEN.

Reasons for Decision:

The Adjudicative Committee had careful regard to the race films and the oral evidence of all parties. The films showed GOLDEN shifting outwards from the rail near the 800-metre mark, when not sufficiently clear of FREEBELLE. That movement resulted in FREEBELLE being checked and losing ground. The Adjudicative Committee was satisfied that GALLANT HERO maintained its line throughout, leaving no opportunity for FREEBELLE to shift wider.

The Adjudicative Committee did not accept the Respondent’s submission that the interference was caused by inward pressure from GALLANT HERO, or that Mr Chung checked unnecessarily of his own accord. The films did not support these claims.

Interference, as defined under Rule 642(i), includes “a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing.” Ms Hemi was at best, only one length clear of Mr Chung, when shifting outwards.

Decision:

For these reasons, the Adjudicative Committee found the charge of careless riding proved.

Submissions for Penalty:

Ms Selvakumaran produced Ms Hemi’s riding record, which showed only one previous breach of the Careless Riding Rule during the past 12 months — a 5-day suspension imposed on 5 January 2025. During that period, Ms Hemi had a total of 594 race rides.

The Stewards submitted that the level of carelessness in the present case should be assessed in the low to medium range.

In response, Ms Hemi asked the Adjudicative Committee to take into account her very good riding record and the fact that she rides extensively throughout the country. She also advised of existing riding commitments through until 28 December 2025 and sought a deferment of any suspension until after that date.

Reasons for Penalty:

After considering the evidence and submissions, the Adjudicative Committee determined that the Respondent’s level of carelessness was at the low end of the scale. The Adjudicative Committee adopted a starting point of five (5) national riding days, in accordance with the NZTR Penalty Guide.

In mitigation, the Adjudicative Committee placed significant weight on Ms Hemi’s excellent riding record, noting that she has had a high number of rides with only one previous breach in the past year, almost 12 months ago. As such, the Adjudicative Committee considered it appropriate to apply a one-day reduction to the starting point.

After consideration of the above factors, a 4-day suspension was imposed.

Conclusion:

The Respondent’s request for a deferment is granted and her Licence to ride in races is suspended for a period of 4 days, commencing after racing on 28/12/25 and concluding after racing on 2/1/26.