Licensed Jockey Eddie Ahern, registered owner Neil Clement, licensed person James Clutterbuck and three unlicensed individuals – Paul Hill, Martin Raymond and Michael Turl – have been informed they will be required to attend a Disciplinary Panel Hearing to consider possible breaches of the Rules of Racing as below.
Please note that although the charges below specifically refer to Betting Exchange account holders, it is the BHA’s case that some of those account holders also used other betting platforms (including spread betting firms and fixed odds bookmakers) to place bets against the horses in question. The BHA sought and received significant cooperation from these firms.
Eddie Ahern
1. Did EDDIE AHERN on, and/or before, the date of the races identified in the Table of Races in which he was the jockey act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with Neil Clement and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse which was or included information (i) obtained in his capacity as a licensed person and (ii) which was not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case and knowing that such information would or might be used to gain an unfair advantage in the betting market?
and/or
2. Did EDDIE AHERN on, and/or before, the date of the races identified in the Table of Races in which he was the jockey act in breach of Rule (A)36.1 in that he communicated directly or indirectly to one or more account holders on betting exchanges, for material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind, information relating to the prospects of his rides, which was or included Inside Information, knowing such information was Inside Information?
3. In relation to JUDGETHEMOMENT when it ran on 21st January 2011 at Lingfield racecourse, the issue for Inquiry is, did EDDIE AHERN act in breach of Rule (B)59.2 by intentionally failing to ensure that the horse was run on its merits?
Neil Clement
1. Did NEIL CLEMENT on, and/or before, the date of the races in the Table of Races in which the jockey was Eddie Ahern act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with Eddie Ahern and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse Eddie Ahern rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey in his capacity as a licensed person which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
and/or
2. Did NEIL CLEMENT on, and/or before, the race of STONEACRE GARETH act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with James Clutterbuck and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on STONEACRE GARETH using information he had received directly or indirectly from the assistant trainer and owner relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the assistant trainer and/or owner in his capacity as a licensed person which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
3. Did Neil Clement on or before 2nd February 2011 act in breach of Rule (E)92.2 by placing a lay bet on HINDU KUSH, a horse which he then owned?
4. Did Neil Clement on or before December 2011 act in breach of Rule (A)50.2 by:
(a) Failing to provide telephone records to an Approved Person following a request made on 9th September 2011? and/or
(b) Failing to agree a time and place for an interview at the request of an Approved Person? and/or
(c) Failing to attend an interview at the request of an Approved Person?
James Clutterbuck
1. Did JAMES CLUTTERBUCK on, and/or before, the date of the race of STONEACRE GARETH which he owned, and in respect of which horse he was the assistant trainer, act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with Neil Clement and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse which was or included information (i) obtained in his capacity as a licensed person and (ii) which was not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case and knowing that such information would or might be used to gain an unfair advantage in the betting market?
and/or
2. Did JAMES CLUTTERBUCK on, and/or before, the date of the race of STONEACRE GARETH which he owned, and in respect of which horse he was the assistant trainer, act in breach of Rule (A)36.1 in that he communicated directly or indirectly to one or more account holders on betting exchanges, for material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind, information relating to the prospects of his rides, which was or included Inside Information knowing such information was Inside Information?
Paul Hill
1. Did PAUL HILL on, and/or before, the date of the race of STONEACRE GARETH act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with NEIL CLEMENT and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on STONEACRE GARETH using information he had received directly or indirectly from JAMES CLUTTERBUCK relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by JAMES CLUTTERBUCK in his capacity as a licensed person which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
Martin Raymond
1. Did MARTIN RAYMOND on, and/or before, the date of the race of STONEACRE GARETH act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with NEIL CLEMENT and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on STONEACRE GARETH using information he had received directly or indirectly from JAMES CLUTTERBUCK relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by JAMES CLUTTERBUCK in his capacity as a licensed person which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
Michael Turl
1. Did MICHAEL TURL on, and/or before, the date of the race of STONEACRE GARETH act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with NEIL CLEMENT and/or other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on STONEACRE GARETH using information he had received directly or indirectly from JAMES CLUTTERBUCK relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by JAMES CLUTTERBUCK in his capacity as a licensed person which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
