Fortune

PRESS RELEASE
RACING

Inquiry - Jockey Andrew Fortune


The National Horseracing Authority confirms that at an Inquiry held in Cape Town on 20 June 2008, which was adjourned and resumed on 27 August 2008, Jockey Andrew Fortune was charged with a contravention of Rule 62.2.1, in that, whilst riding STRIKE AGAIN in Race 7 at the Durbanville Racecourse on Tuesday 12 February 2008, he failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures throughout the race to ensure that STRIKE AGAIN was given a full opportunity to win, or obtain the best possible placing. More particularly, in that he failed to ride STRIKE AGAIN after entering the straight in a manner which would have afforded STRIKE AGAIN a full opportunity to either win, or to obtain the best possible placing in that race.

Mr Fortune pleaded not guilty to the charge.

After considering all the evidence the Inquiry Board found Mr Fortune guilty. It was the view of the Inquiry Board that he should be afforded the opportunity to remain active, and accordingly, the Inquiry Board determined that a penalty of a suspension from riding in or attending race meetings for a period of one month, which is wholly suspended for a period of two years, calculated from 27 August 2008, on condition that he is not found guilty of a contravention of Rule 62.2.1, over the two year suspended period. Furthermore, the Inquiry Board imposed a fine of R50,000.00 (Fifty thousand Rand).

Mr Fortune elected to exercise his right to be legally represented at this Inquiry and therefore has no right of appeal.

witch hunt

One word for the STIPES "PATHETIC".

What a %&#@*& joke!

I think the fact Andrew's 'whole' sentence has been 'suspened' is the interesting point in all of this. There have been some recent cases and I believe that the most that got suspended was half!

So rather than throw the case out and fully overturn the initial decision - they 'suspend' the whole sentence, thereby backing the stipes,but try to lessen the outcries - like Hibbys above - by suspending the whole sentence.

It seems, they tried to balance the books in terms of criticism of the stipes and wanting to punish Manna - question is however, has it just illustrated the short-comings of the current system?

Respectfully, Jim.

Jim

Without commenting on the rights and/or wrongs, I heard that it was part of Fortune's position that a suspension would be particularly harmful to him. It looks to me that they tried to 'accomodate' him in that the normal suspension was exchanged for a monetary value and the time was suspended.

Again, without commenting on the guilty decision, once he was found guilty I think he's done well to stay in the saddle and the R50G he can easily make in that month and not lose rides to competitors.

Just a thought and having no knowledge of enquiry criteria ... surely a 50 k fine would have been sufficient with out adding a two year suspended sentence.? Was the "crime so bad or was it because it was AF ?
isnt riding for 2 years under a 'microscope" going to be difficult ?

Jack what do you mean by Fortune's position?

gregbucks Wrote:

---

> Jack what do you mean by Fortune's position?

"It was the view of the Inquiry Board that he should be afforded the opportunity to remain active,"

I had heard that it was the view of Andrew Fortune that a suspension would be harsher on him than it would on other jockeys given his situation, so if you read the ruling "should be afforded the opportunity to remain active" I would say they structured a penalty to suit him.

Disclaimer: Please don't construe this as anti-Fortune in any way and then go dilly.

Methinks that Jack Dash is correct... and it seems that the Stipes did put some thought into Andrews personal situation. I have no opinion on the guilty/not guilty having not seen the race in question... and also not having all the facts

Watched the race a few times of a tape.Was a poor ride but two things stick out.
The horse Strike Again would appear to be no more than average as since then has not quickened in his races although he appears to be travelling like a winner.
At the time Fortune was pretty unfit and yes it was not a strong enough ride.
Also at that time the stipes appeared to be "looking for Fortune'but he has been behaving himself and in fairness I do not think that attitude prevails now.
A fine is a reasonable penalty and the suspended sentence is a further deterrant.
R50k a bit steep.

Hope the other jockeys take this as A Good lesson, unfortunately it had to be Fortune.