September date for Fallon disrepute charge
News of a possible date for the hearing came yesterday - on the day it was revealed that the champion jockey will not face charges of accepting money or benefit in kind for tips following allegations by a Sunday newspaper.
John Maxse, director of public relations at the Jockey Club, explained: “A letter was sent out earlier this week which would have contained the information that Rule 243 (a jockey shall not communicate directly or indirectly to any person for any material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind for information about a horse which is not publicly available) was not going to be inquired into.
“Kieren Fallon and John Egan’s solicitors have been given 30 days to prepare their responses now that they have been informed what the inquiry will involve. We are now hoping for an inquiry date in September.”
In a four-page article published on March 7 and described as the “sports scandal of the decade”, the News of the World alleged that Fallon told undercover journalists before a race at Lingfield that eventual winner Rye would beat his mount Ballinger Ridge.
Further material was published in the newspaper on March 14 and a dossier was delivered to the Jockey Club.
Both jockeys have insisted they are completely innocent of allegations of race-fixing.
However, in April, the pair were informed that they would have to attend a hearing to try to establish whether they had acted in a manner prejudicial to the integrity and good reputation of horseracing in respect of their dealings with, conversations with, and various statements made to undercover reporters.
The panel were also due to consider whether Fallon committed a breach of Rule 243 but this charge has now been dropped.
“There was one charge of him receiving reward for information but that has been dropped. The main issue in the inquiry is whether Kieren Fallon and John Egan brought racing into disrepute in their discussions and relationships with reporters from the News of the World. There will be an inquiry into this matter,” added Maxse.
“In looking through the material which was presented to us by the paper and in the articles published, there was the suggestion of potential rewards being made available but after consultation between the two parties that will not form part of the inquiry.”
