Auckland TC 29 June 2023 – R2 – Nicky Chilcott

Summary of Facts:

Following the running of Race 2, the Respondent N Chilcott, admitted a breach of Rule 869(3)(b); in that she drove carelessly entering the home straight, when allowing her drive to move up the track, which presented an inside run to the trailing MIKI MIKSTA.

The Respondent endorsed the Information ‘I do admit the breach of the rule’ and confirmed she  understood the Rule and the nature of the charge.

Rule 869(3)(b) provides:

No Driver in any race shall drive carelessly.

Using available video footage, Senior Stipendiary Steward S Mulcay identified Ms Chilcott’s runner PRIVATE EYE. He said that PRIVATE EYE was leading the field around the final corner, and trailing was the runner MIKI MIKSTA (Trained by Ms Chilcott). Mr Mulcay said that when PRIVATE EYE came under pressure when being urged forward, he wanted to “get up the track”, as a result he came off the running line and presented a run to the trailing MIKI MIKSTA, approximately 20m before the passing lane. He said that PRIVATE EYE had been racing ungenerously, however Ms Chilcott should have shown greater care to keep her runner straight. After a question from the Adjudicative Committee, Mr Mulcay showed PRIVATE EYE in the back straight and around the back corner, to illustrate the tendency it had to lay out and confirmed that it was the Stipendiary Stewards’ view that the horse’s manners were a contributing factor to the incident.

In explanation, Ms Chilcott said she agreed with Mr Mulcay’s interpretation of the incident and instead of trying to keep him going as strongly as she was, she should have focused on keeping him straight.

Decision:

The charge is admitted by the Respondent and is therefore deemed proved.

Submission for Penalty:

Senior Stipendiary Steward S Mulcay produced the Respondent’s record which was clear under this Rule.  He said Ms Chilcott would be considered a busy Driver and the Adjudicative Committee might like to consider the mitigating factors, namely Ms Chilcott’s good record, admission of the breach and PRIVATE EYE’S racing manners.

Mr Mulcay suggested an aggravating factor could be the public’s perception of the incident, as the trailing runner was trainer by Ms Chilcott, however concluded that it was the Stewards’ position that there was no sinister intent on the part of Ms Chilcott in breaching the Rule.

Mr Mulcay said Stewards assessed the breach as mid range and a starting point of a 3 day suspension was outlined in the Penalty Guide for a breach of this nature.

The Respondent submitted that there were some mitigating factors as outlined by the Stewards, and she would look to take any suspension immediately.

Reasons for Penalty:

The Penalty Guide provides a penalty starting point of 3 days.

After taking into account the submissions of both the Applicant and Respondent; noting the race film and the resultant impact on the affected runner(s), the Adjudicative Committee assessed the breach as medium and adopted a 3 day suspension as the starting point.

The Respondent was given credit for her good record and admission of the breach, and this, combined with mitigation in relation to PRIVATE EYE’S racing manners, resulted in a 1 day reduction from the starting point.

After evaluating all of the factors, the Adjudicative Committee determined a 2 day suspension to be an appropriate penalty in the circumstances of this case.

Conclusion:

Ms Chilcott was suspended for 2 Northern Driving Days.

6th July 2023 – Cambridge

14th July 2023 – Auckland