HRV RAD Board Panel – Brian Collis QC, Rod Osborne
The Harness Racing Victoria (HRV) Racing Appeals and Disciplinary (RAD) Board today considered charges issued by HRV Stewards against Mr David Beer.
The charges arose from an incident that occurred at the Tabcorp Park Melton harness trial meeting on Tuesday 26 April 2016.
Mr Beer pleaded not guilty to a charge under Australian Rule of Harness Racing (ARHR) 213(a) which reads:
A person shall not:-
(a) by use of harness, gear, equipment, device, substance or any other thing inflict suffering on a horse
The particulars of the charge being that at the Tabcorp Park harness trial meeting on 26 April 2016, that in the stabling area after the completion of trial 7, Mr Beer struck the horse Auntie Poppy in the head region of the filly.
Mr Beer also pleaded not guilty to a charge under ARHR 243 which reads:
A person employed, engaged or participating in the harness racing industry shall not behave in a way which is prejudicial or detrimental to the industry.
The particulars of the charge being that Mr Beer’s conduct in striking the horse Auntie Poppy, was behavior and an action considered to be detrimental to the harness racing industry.
After considering evidence from Mr Beer and HRV Stewards, which included CCTV footage of the incident, the HRV RAD Board determined that the charges issued against Mr Beer were proven and he was found guilty on both accounts.
Upon hearing submissions from HRV Stewards and Mr Beer regarding penalty, the HRV RAD Board suspended Mr Beer’s trainers licence for a period of 3 months on both charges, with such penalty to be served concurrently and with immediate effect. The HRV RAD Board ordered that 1 month of the suspension was to be wholly suspended for a period of 12 months, provided Mr Beer does not reoffend under the associated rules during the 12 month period.
In imposing this penalty, the HRV RAD Board considered Mr Beers’ previous outstanding record and service to the industry, the financial impact of the penalty imposed against Mr Beer in view of his personal circumstances, the nature of the incident, as well as the need to protect the integrity of the harness racing industry, whilst ensuring a penalty for such actions provided a specific and general deterrent.
HRV Racing Appeals & Disciplinary Board