NZ Metro TC 2 February 2024 – R6 (heard 9 February 2024 at Addington) – James Stormont

Summary of Facts:

This was an adjourned hearing from the NZMTC meeting on 2 February 2024.

Following the running of Race 6, the Respondent Open Driver James Stormont admitted a breach of Whip Rule 869(2).  The particulars of the charge are that when driving HEY BARTENDER he used his whip with more than a wrist flicking motion in the run home. 

Rule 869 provides that:

(2) No driver shall during any race use a whip in a manner in contravention of the Use of the Whip Regulations made by the Board.

Stipendiary Steward Shane Renault used available video footage to demonstrate the breach. He pointed out Mr Stormont driving HEY BARTENDER racing in the lead position on the pylons as the field turned for home. Mr Renault showed that Mr Stormont drew his whip and used it on 7 to 8 occasions with more than a wrist flicking motion over the concluding stages. Mr Stormont then reverted back to a compliant style of whip use for the remainder of the race.

Mr Stormont stated that after driving for 40 years, he was still having issues adjusting to the new Whip Regulations.

Decision:

The charge is admitted and therefore proved.

Submissions for Penalty:

Mr Renault produced the Respondent’s record, which indicated a clear record.

Mr Renault said that Stewards assessed the breach to be mid-level with the Penalty Guide providing a starting point of a $500 fine or 2 day suspension as penalty. He submitted that Mr Stormont be given credit for his frank admission and good record.

Mr Stormont submitted that a fine was preferred as penalty and requested a fine as low as possible be imposed.

Reasons for Penalty:

After consideration of the evidence from all parties concerned and viewing the race films of the concluding stages of the race, the Adjudicative Committee also assessed the breach as mid-level.

The Penalty Guide provides a $500 fine or 2-day suspension starting point for an initial breach of this Rule.

After taking consideration of all factors, it was determined that a fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.

It was determined that there were no aggravating factors to consider, therefore no uplift was warranted.

There were however, mitigating factors to consider, being Mr Stormont’s frank admission of the breach and his good record, which warranted a combined discount which was set at $100.

The Respondent is therefore fined the sum of $400.

Conclusion:

Mr Stormont is fined the sum of $400.