NZ Metro TC 28 June 2024 – R5 – Samantha Ottley

BACKGROUND:

Following the running of Race 5, Open Driver, Samantha Ottley denied a charge of careless driving in that, as the Driver of PARAMOUNT LADY in the race, she “drove carelessly near the 700m when allowing her horse to strike the sulky wheel of MAVIS JONES, driven by Ben Hope, resulting in her runner breaking and losing all chance.”

Rule 869 provides as follows:

(3)   No driver in any race shall drive:-

       (b)  carelessly.

EVIDENCE:

Stipendiary Steward, Shane Renault, showed the available video replays of the incident, as the field turned into the back straight for the final time. He pointed out PARAMOUNT LADY, driven by Ms Ottley, 4 back on the markers trailing MAVIS JONES, with OUR PEGASUS PEARL, driven by Don Morrison, racing to the outside of Ms Ottley.

Mr Renault showed that approaching the 700m, Ms Ottley, who had the advantage on Mr Morrison to her outside, shifted out, forcing Mr Morrison to a 3 wide position, as she was entitled to do and in doing so, got too close to the off side sulky wheel of MAVIS JONES, striking the wheel and as a result, PARAMOUNT LADY broke, losing all chance. He said that it was reported that the sulky wheel of MAVIS JONES had punctured, but did not deflate until after the race.

The Respondent said that she had the advantage on Mr Morrison and was shifting him wider on the track to improve into the 2 wide line near the 700m. Ms Ottley said that Mr Morrison was reluctant to relinquish his position and she was concerned that she was getting very close to OUR PEGASUS PEARL, which put her in restricted room and this was why she had struck the sulky wheel of MAVIS JONES. She added that Mr Morrison should have conceded his position more readily, as any prudent Driver would do in similar circumstances.

REASONS FOR DECISION:

The Adjudicative Committee was satisfied that near the 700m, Miss Ottley was racing in a 4 back, pylons position, trailing Mr Hope, with Mr Morrison racing to her outside. Ms Ottley had the advantage on Mr Morrison and she decided to shift him wider on the track as she was entitled to do. In this movement, the Adjudicative Committee found that Miss Ottley allowed her drive to get too close to Mr Hope’s off side sulky wheel and as a result, her horse struck the wheel, causing her own horse to break, losing all chance. The Adjudicative Committee was satisfied that Mr Morrison may have been slow to shift out with Miss Ottley’s movement, but determined that the onus was on Ms Ottley to ensure the movement was done safely and without causing interference.

The Adjudicative Committee therefore found that Ms Ottley had driven carelessly on this occasion and accordingly, found the charge proved.

DECISION:

The charge was found proved.

SUBMISSIONS FOR PENALTY:

Mr Renault said that the Respondent had a clear record in regard to this Rule. He referred to the Penalty Guide starting point for an initial breach of careless driving, striking a wheel, of a $300 fine.

Stewards recognised that there were some mitigating factors, with Mr Morrison’s reluctance to shift wider on the track and Ms Ottley’s good record.

Aggravating factor, Mr Renault said, was the fact that PARAMAOUNT LADY broke and lost all chance.

The Respondent stated that Mr Morrison’s reluctance to move out was a mitigating factor to be considered.

REASONS FOR PENALTY:

The RIB Harness Racing Penalty Guide provides a starting point for penalty for an initial careless driving breach of striking a wheel, of a $300 fine. That is for a mid-range breach. This breach is assessed as mid-range and, in the Adjudicative Committee’s view, there were consequences of Ms Ottley’s carelessness, being that PARAMOUNT LADY broke and lost all chance at a crucial stage of the race.

In adopting the starting point of a $300 fine, mitigating factors being Ms Ottley’s good record and Mr Morrison’s degree of contribution to the incident, affords a discount which was set at $100.

The aggravating factor was the fact that PARAMOUNT LADY broke and lost all chance, which warranted an uplift in penalty. This uplift was set at $100.

It was therefore determined that a $300 fine was an appropriate penalty in this case.

CONCLUSION:

Ms Ottley is fined the sum of $300.