is jim mcgrath the one who had horses with fahey who tylici rode before or is he the aussie commentator

it's the posh one that used to do c4 racing not the aussie one

I know him I once had a conversation with him and made him walk into a lamppost

it's not as bad as "do you know who i am" though slippy

udge to deliver verdict on Tylicki-Gibbons case before Christmas
Freddy Tylicki: left paralysed after a fall at Kempton in 2016
Freddy Tylicki: left paralysed after a fall at Kempton in 2016
Edward Whitaker (racingpost.com/photos)
1 of 1
By Peter Scargill
UPDATED 6:22PM, DEC 3 2021
 
The £6 million High Court case brought by former jockey Freddy Tylicki against ex-weighing room colleague Graham Gibbons closed on Friday with judge Karen Walden-Smith informing the court of her intention to deliver a verdict before the Christmas break on December 21.

Closing arguments were heard for both the defence and the claimant after a week of evidence that laid bare the crucial decision-making required of jockeys in races, with the judge set to determine the role of Gibbons and his ride on October 31, 2016 in the fall that left Tylicki paralysed.

Edward Faulks QC, for Tylicki, told the court that this was “an exceptional case in terms of riding and the outcome” and that there had been “a breach of the standard of care” between competing jockeys which had caused Tylicki’s mount Nellie Deen to collide with Madame Butterfly, ridden by Gibbons, and subsequently led to the fall that paralysed Tylicki.

By contrast, Patrick Lawrence QC, for Gibbons, said in his closing argument that “if it was anything it was a momentary misjudgement coming around the bend with an ambitious move by Mr Tylicki when in hindsight he should have taken a pull” to avoid a coming together which Gibbons was unaware would happen.

Lawrence argued that the scenario fell “some way short of breaching the high bar set by Caldwell”, referring to the case brought by Peter Caldwell, a former jockey injured in a fall at Hexham, against Mick Fitzgerald and Adrian Maguire in 2001 in which the judge found in favour of the defendants.

Lawrence added: “One does need to show more than mere carelessness. In theory, these circumstances [at Kempton] were avoidable. But these sort of coming togethers around a bend is something that may happen from time to time no matter how careful your riding is.

“It comes down to a period of two to three seconds when horses are going around the bend when the gap wasn’t reasonably sufficient and there was a coming together.”

Lawrence said that a ruling against Gibbons had the potential to “open the floodgates” for similar claims in the future, but in his closing argument Faulks countered that the “circumstances are crucial” in the judge reaching her decision.

He added: “The question is really this: is this a racing incident with a momentary lapse of skill or error of judgement? If so, then there’s no breach. There’s no need for there to be reckless disregard [shown], but it must be above oversight, errors of judgement and lapses.

“This was not an everyday incident. This was a Flat race and it was very unusual for an incident of this nature to take place – maybe unprecedented. It cannot be said that this was an everyday incident and it is dangerous to draw a relationship between the [Caldwell and Tylicki] races.”

Faulks also questioned the reliability of the evidence provided by Gibbons, pointing to convictions for drink driving and his disqualification from riding, which he hopes to return to according to Lawrence, and the assertion by Jim Crowley during his testimony that he had smelt alcohol on the rider’s breath at Kempton.

When questioned by the judge, Faulks made it clear he was not asking for a decision to be made on whether the rider was under the influence of any substances when riding that day.

Summing up, Judge Walden-Smith said: “I cannot say for certain when I will make my judgement, but I shall do so as swiftly as I can. Hopefully before the [Christmas] vacation, that is my intention.”

Part of a piece by Greg Wood in yesterdays Guardian.


"For the claim to succeed, Tylicki and his legal team must satisfy Judge Karen Walden-Smith that Gibbons neglected his duty of care to fellow riders. The obvious precedent for the judge to consider as she weighs up the evidence is a case from 2001, in which a former jump jockey, Peter Caldwell, sued Adrian Maguire and Mick Fitzgerald over a fall at Hexham in 1994 which left him with career-ending spinal and head injuries.

At the time, the case was believed to be the first of its kind. Caldwell’s claim was rejected after the judge decided that the incident “reflected the cut and thrust of serious horse racing … in theory avoidable but in practice, something that is bound to occur from time to time, no matter how careful is the standard of riding.”

The judge in the Caldwell case also decided that “the relevant circumstances in many sports … mean that a mere error of judgment or skill will not suffice” to prove negligence, and that a case could require evidence of “reckless disregard” for the claimant’s safety to succeed. The decision was upheld on appeal, apparently setting what Patrick Lawrence QC, for Gibbons, suggested last week is a “high bar” for a rider seeking to show negligence by a fellow jockey.
A potentially significant difference between the Caldwell and Tylicki cases, meanwhile, is that while the Hexham stewards found Fitzgerald and Maguire guilty of careless riding, the officials at Kempton decided that Tylicki’s fall was the result of “accidental” interference and took no further action.

In terms of the wider implications of the case, and whatever its outcome might be, it seems inevitable that the decision of the stewards at Kempton will be closely scrutinised. They did not hear Tylicki’s account of events before deciding that the incident – in which four horses fell - was an accident, and more generally it remains the case that the last finding of dangerous riding by a jockey in the UK was in 2009.

Has the standard of riding improved so much over the last dozen years that dangerous riding is now a thing of the past? Or have racecourse stewards gradually adopted what the trainer John Berry recently suggested is “an unwritten policy that everything is just classified as careless riding, without thinking”? Just two of the many questions for racing to ponder when Judge Walden-Smith hands down her decision later this month".

And still there is hardly any mention of the Dangerous Riding Rule and why virtually everyone in racing seems to pretend it doesn't exist. At least John Berry has come out and asked the question.

pundits at weekend said this shouldnt be judged on what effect it has on the sport going forward,
but if he wins any interference in future which results in someone losing their right/ability to make a living because of the well used/known pundits comment, THE JOCKEY LET IT DRIFT ACROSS.will be open to a legal challenge,doesnt even have to be dramatic/on a tight bend etc
thinking crowley/moore in grade ones this season

ruk,atr,walsh,fitzy,AP will be out of a job everytime they say
he/she shut the door
he/she tightened him up
etc,etc their giving possible evidence to/against someone

i fail to see how an incident deemed 'accidental'by the kempton stewards can then deemed to be intentional by a judge.

so iyo my point is totally irrelevant?

then why hasnt the tylicki barrister come to this conclusion before this began?

freds bill wont be cheap.

Rico-Dangleflaps 07 Dec 21 22:41
i fail to see how an incident deemed 'accidental'by the kempton stewards can then deemed to be intentional by a judge.

While this is a reasonable point, the judge also has to consider what a vastly experienced top jockey thought happened:

Ryan Moore insisted he had remained unbiased throughout the process that led to him giving evidence as an expert witness at the High Court on Wednesday and confirmed his view that Graham Gibbons was at fault over the 2016 incident at Kempton when Freddy Tylicki suffered paralysing injuries.

Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki describes Gibbons as exerting "considerable tension on the right rein" while rounding the bend, and continues: "He would only have done that in order to encourage Madame Butterfly across Nellie Deen's racing line," a reference to the two horses involved.

So Rico, why should the judge take the view of the stewards over that of Moore's, iyo?

OR, he might have carefully studied the various angles, spotted the pressure being applied to the right rein to pull the horse back to the rail, and decided he would testify because he could see Gibbons was at fault?

Moore's report has not been made public but an excerpt in the published arguments for Tylicki...

So it sounds like Moore has had more to say about what he thought happened

How long  a ban did Aiden say Ryan deserved after taking Tarnawa right across the course in the Irish Champion??

Hypocrisy @ its finest.

Listen to me what i say not as i do.

COuld have a career in politics.

disciplinary hearing into allegations that Robbie Dunne bullied fellow rider Bryony Frost adjourned on Wednesday for the three-person panel to consider their verdict and a decision on the case is expected by noon on Thursday.

Dunne, 36, has been charged by the BHA on seven breaches of the rules of racing, four relating to conduct prejudicial to the integrity, proper conduct and good reputation of the sport, which he denies, and a further three of acting in a violent or improper manner, with one breach accepted although the wording used is disputed.

The incidents span a period between February 13, 2020 and September 3, 2020, and the culture of the weighing room and the manner in which jockeys address and behave towards each other was put firmly under the spotlight during the five days of evidence heard at the BHA’s headquarters in London.

Louis Weston, representing the BHA, said in closing submissions that Dunne had subjected Frost, 26, to a “vendetta” that included sexually inappropriate behaviour and foul language, and culminated in his alleged “promise” to put Frost “through a wing” after a race at Southwell in September last year.

Addressing the panel, Weston said: “If what is being said, when you come to determine this case, there is a weighing room culture that allows one jockey to threaten another with serious injury to them or their horse, or to call another a ****, a slut or a slag then that culture is one that is sour, rancid and one that we say should be thrown out and discarded. Its time, if ever it had its time, has gone.”

Countering Weston’s points on the weighing room, Roderick Moore told the panel that it would be “grossly unfair” to Dunne to judge him on anything other than how the weighing room is at present as opposed to any desire anyone might have for it to change.

“The way the weighing room is should not come as big news to anyone, there are BHA officials coming in and out all of the time,” he said. “What would be grossly unfair is to make a judgement of Mr Dunne against a scenario that isn't the real one.

“If something needs to change, that's for the future, that's a policy matter, a political matter. You can only judge Mr Dunne against the present weighing room.”

Moore further added that the "weapons grade language" used by riders also needed to be taken in the context of a dangerous profession.

He also outlined what he believed were failings in Frost’s “credibility”, primarily around her alleged “fear” of Dunne, with his highlighting the exchange in the Southwell changing room when she told Dunne to “f*** off” after their altercation.

“She gave back,” he said. "That's not a criticism but it stands ill alongside other matters that she fears him.”
Weston said the defence had sought to “overcomplicate” the case and that Frost had been targeted because she had “stepped up and confronted” Dunne on behaviour he likened to “1950s Carry On humour”.

He added: “It cannot be that Ms Frost can be allowed to compete on a racecourse on a level playing field only to find when she comes back to the weighing room she's met by Mr Dunne acting out a role of some patriarchy re-enacting social attitudes of the 1950s in his capacity of self-appointed enforcer of traditions he perceives to be put in place in the weighing room. It's just unacceptable.”

Following closing submissions, Brian Barker, chair of the disciplinary panel, said: "We have a number of matters to review. We hope to come to a decision by noon tomorrow."

dc

"Smelling alco" means nothing. He either passed/failed a breathalyser etc.. surely for it to be of any effect