Four jockeys banned after BHA investigation
By far the heaviest punishment went to Fairley and Doe, both of whom quit riding earlier in the year, as they were handed bans of 12 years each, while Milczarek will be banned for two years and Quinn six months.
Milczarek intends to appeal against the findings, while Quinn, a veteran of the weighing room, does not.
The jockeys were found by the BHA disciplinary panel to have been involved in a betting ring masterminded by two registered owners, Maurice Sines and James Crickmore, from charges relating to 10 races between January 17, 2009 and August 15, 2009. Sines and Crickmore were each disqualified for 14 years and there were punishments for five other accomplices.
Former jockey Paul Fitzsimons, now a trainer, was found not guilty.
Doe and Fairley were the only two riders found guilty of deliberately ensuring horses did not run on their merits.
Quinn and Milczarek were found in breach of the old Rule 201 (v) ‘Guilty of or conspires with any other person for the commission of, or connives at any other person being guilty of, any corrupt or fraudulent practice in relation to racing in this or any other country’.
Both jockeys were in action today, with Milczarek riding a winner at Lingfield, but the penalties take effect from midnight and they cannot take other booked mounts. Milczarek was also found in breach of former Rule 243 ‘Passing information for reward’, but her solicitor, Christopher Stewart-Moore, said: “We think the Panel’s reasoning is flawed and we’re going to be appealing to the BHA appeal board as Kirsty was not involved in any conspiracy of any kind.”
Those disqualified have seven days, after the full reasons for findings and penalties are published, within which to appeal against the findings.
If an appeal is submitted, the penalty against them will remain in place unless the Appeal Board (Chairman) grants them a stay on the imposition of those penalties.
Quinn, who won a Group One in the 2007 Nunthorpe Stakes and is one of the most accomplished light-weight pilots, will not be appealing.
His solicitor Rory Mac Neice said: “The disciplinary panel found that Jimmy had ridden both horses on their merits and in their written reasons they went as far as saying that had he been asked not to ride them on their merits, he would have refused to have done so.
“That recognition by the Panel is very important because it underlines Jimmy’s commitment to riding each horse he rides on its merits and in order to achieve that horse’s best possible placing. The Panel in their decision made specific reference to his ride on Quince, a horse on which he won, given what the panel called ‘an astute ride’.
“By winning that race, the gamblers who were the subject of this inquiry lost £80,000. By imposing a six-month ban on Jimmy, the Panel imposed the absolute minimum ban they were able to.
“Mr Quinn hopes to resume riding after his six-month ban and is grateful for the great deal of support he has received from within racing.”
Doe was found in breach of former Rule 201 (v) and Rule 243, and two counts of former Rule 157 ‘Where, in the opinion of the Stewards or the BHA, a Rider has intentionally failed to ensure that his horse is run on its merits the Rider shall be deemed in breach of this Rule and guilty of an offence’.
Fairley was found in breach of the old Rule 201 (v) and Rule 243, and one count of former Rule 157. Sines and Crickmore were found by the BHA disciplinary panel to be in breach of former Rule 201 (v) and also Rule 247 – laying a horse they owned on a betting exchange.
