NZ Metro TC 23 June 2023 – R1 – Cheree Wigg

Summary of Facts:

Following the running of Race 1,  the Respondent Cheree Wigg admitted a breach of Whip Rule 869(2).

The particulars of the charge are that when driving RAGING ON, she used the 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.

Regulation 3.1 reads as follows;

3. USE OF THE WHIP

 3.1 A driver may only apply the whip in a wrist only flicking motion whilst holding a rein in each hand with the tip of the whip pointed forward in an action which does not engage the shoulder.

Stipendiary Steward Paul Williams used available video footage to demonstrate the alleged breach. Mr Williams pointed out Ms Wigg draw her whip and use it in more than a wrist flicking motion on 10 occasions in the run home.

The Respondent elected to make no submissions in regard to the breach.

Decision:

As the charge was admitted, it was deemed proved.

Submission For Penalty:

Mr Williams stated that Ms Wigg had a clear record in regard to this Rule, apart from a warning 2 drives ago at Addington. He stated that this breach was mid level due to the number of strikes, and with the Penalty Guide providing a $500 fine or a 2 day suspension as penalty for a first breach-mid range, submitted that a fine be considered as penalty.

The Respondent, Ms Wigg, submitted that she would prefer a fine as she was keen to continue race driving.

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 agreed with the Stewards and also assessed the breach as mid level.

The Penalty Guide provides, for a 1st offence, mid-level breach of this Rule, a $500 fine or 2 day suspension.

Having considered all factors, the Adjudicative Committee deemed a fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.

As this was Ms Wigg’s first offence and that the breach was mid-level, with no aggravating factors, only mitigating factors to consider, being Ms Wiggs’ frank admission and her good record, it was determined that a $400 fine was appropriate in this case.

Conclusion:

The Respondent is fined $400.