Post by SALFORD GIRL on Apr 14, 2023 12:48:16 GMT
The Disciplinary Committee of the GBGB was in attendance at a
meeting held on 23rd March 2023.
Those present:
Mr H Starte (in the chair)
Mr R Woodworth CBE
Dr J Hunt
Licensed Kennelhand Mr Mark Pierrepont
Licensed Kennelhand Mr Mark
Pierrepont was found in breach of
Rule 152 (ii) of the GBGB Rules
of Racing in that by conduct at
the annual GBGB Awards Dinner
held at the Royal Lancaster Hotel,
London, on 15 May 2022 he acted
in a manner prejudicial to the proper
conduct and to the good reputation
of greyhound racing as regulated by
GBGB.
Mr Pierrepont was in attendance at
the London offices of the GBGB as was the Board’s witness, greyhound owner Ms Kelly Searle.
The Committee heard that both Mr Pierrepont and Ms Searle attended
the awards dinner at the Royal Lancaster Hotel, London, on 15 May 2022. Mr Pierrepont was a
kennelhand of a greyhound that won an award. Ms Searle was an ownerof a greyhound that was nominated
for an award. The occasion had been compered by the well-known greyhound racing journalist and commentator, Mr Jonathan Hobbs.
It was an incident that had occurred between Mr Pierrepont and Mr Hobbs during an early interval in the
evening’s proceedings that resulted in the inquiry under considerationby the Disciplinary Committee.
The Committee heard two quite different and contradictory accounts of this incident from Mr Pierrepont and from
the Board’s witness, Ms Searle.
The Committee were able to consider Ms Searle’s statement provided to
the Local Inquiry held on 17 October 2022 and hear her oral evidence.
She told how, at an early interval in proceedings at the awards dinner,
she had left her table to go to the cloakroom. On her way back to her
table she encountered Mr Hobbs who was looking at the seating plan
at the end of the bar area. She was in conversation with Mr Hobbs when Mr Pierrepont approached him.
Ms Searle described how an exchange followed in which Mr
Pierrepont began telling Mr Hobbs that “people like him just took from the sport and gave nothing back”.
She said Mr Pierrepont had repeated this several times before Mr
Hobbs responded. When he did, he complained that Mr Pierrepont was “always on his case” making this
same charge. At this, Ms Searle said, Mr Pierrepont grabbed hold of Mr Hobbs’s tie by its knot and pushed
his face into Mr Hobbs’s.
He held Mr Hobbs so that their foreheads were together. Mr Pierrepont had then
said, “If you want to take this outside, I am happy to go outside with you”.
She said Mr Hobbs had turned his head away, towards her, as if to avoid a confrontation. She had
reacted by putting her hand on Mr Pierrepont’s hand that was grasping Mr Hobbs’ tie and had put her other
arm around Mr Pierrepont’s shoulder, speaking to him to try to defuse the situation. But Mr Pierrepont had
ignored her, she said, continuing to hold onto Mr Hobbs’s tie so thathe was “in his face”. Mr Pierrepont
repeated at least three times words to the effect “Let’s go outside”,before finally releasing Mr Hobbs
and walking away.
Ms Searle said Mr Pierrepont had spoken quietly and in a controlled way. He had not
been trying to throttle Mr Hobbs and had not struck him, but he had
been physically aggressive and threatening to Mr Hobbs and had left him shaken.
Mr Pierrepont chose not to give any statement to the Local Inquiry
or provide any statement putting his case as to what occurred until appearing before the Committee.
His evidence to the Committee was that it had been Mr Hobbs who had
called him over as he was returning to his table with two pints of beer that he had just bought at the bar.
He said he had known Mr Hobbs for some 20 years and they were on good terms, although they had
exchanged banter when they met at the track and he had previouslypublicly expressed the view that Mr
Hobbs was one of those who were “first in line” to get something outof greyhound racing, without “giving
back” to the sport.
He said he had been surprised by Mr Hobbs’s tone
when he had called out “Pierrepont, I want you” and that, despite holding a pint of beer in each hand, he had
approached and offered to shake Mr Hobbs’ hand.
He said Mr Hobbs had declined to do this and began
to complain that he had been “going on for months” about Mr Hobbs being “a taker” rather than “a giver” to the sport.
Mr Pierrepont said the conversation had continued on this
topic, “going round in circles” until he had suggested they “talk about it at some future date” and had walked away.
He said he had not taken hold of Mr Hobbs’s tie or pushed his face
into Mr Hobbs’s face or said anything to the effect that they should “take
this outside” or been in any way aggressive or threatening.
It was clear to the Committee that neither Mr Pierrepont nor Ms Searle
could be honestly mistaken about whether Mr Pierrepont took hold
of Mr Hobbs’s tie and made thesuggestion that he and Mr Hobbs “go outside”.
Mr Pierrepont maintained that this was a lie by Ms Searle. His case to
the Committee was that Ms Searle had made up this story as part of
a conspiracy to damage him that had been pursued by Ms Searle and others who, he suggested, had
been waging a campaign on the Greyhound Scene website, socialmedia and otherwise against him
and the trainer for whom he worked.
But Mr Pierrepont did not produce or refer to anything amounting to
credible evidence that any such conspiracy had occurred or that Ms Searle had been any part of any such conspiracy.
The Committee found Ms Searle to be an honest and conscientious
witness who had done her best to assist after she had been approached
in course of the GBGB inquiry into this incident. She had been doing her best to assist the Committee with a
careful and accurate recollection of what had happened. The Committee
unhesitatingly preferred her evidence to that of Mr Pierrepont.
It was also inherently unlikely that Mr
Hobbs would have chosen the short interval between carrying out his
duties as compere of the annual GBGB awards ceremony to pick an
argument or invite a confrontation with Mr Pierrepont. On the clear
and cogent evidence before it, the Committee concluded on the balance of probabilities that, sadly, Mr
Pierrepont was not telling the truth and that his conduct had been as described by Ms Searle.
The Board asked the Committee to find Mr Pierrepont in breach of
Rule 174 (xii) of the GBGB Rules of Racing. However, the Committee did
not think that the Royal Lancaster Hotel on the occasion of the annual awards dinner constituted “premises
… used by the GBGB” for the purposes of Rule 174 (xii) properly construed.
Nevertheless, it was very clear that, on the balance of probabilities,
Mr Pierrepont’s conduct on this occasion had been in breach of Rule
152 (ii). It was not suggested that there had been any serious physical
assault or any physical injury caused to Mr Hobbs, but this was wholly
unacceptable, seriously threatening behaviour towards the person engaged by the GBGB to present
its major, high profile annual event, celebrating the achievements of the sport and participants in the sport.
meeting held on 23rd March 2023.
Those present:
Mr H Starte (in the chair)
Mr R Woodworth CBE
Dr J Hunt
Licensed Kennelhand Mr Mark Pierrepont
Licensed Kennelhand Mr Mark
Pierrepont was found in breach of
Rule 152 (ii) of the GBGB Rules
of Racing in that by conduct at
the annual GBGB Awards Dinner
held at the Royal Lancaster Hotel,
London, on 15 May 2022 he acted
in a manner prejudicial to the proper
conduct and to the good reputation
of greyhound racing as regulated by
GBGB.
Mr Pierrepont was in attendance at
the London offices of the GBGB as was the Board’s witness, greyhound owner Ms Kelly Searle.
The Committee heard that both Mr Pierrepont and Ms Searle attended
the awards dinner at the Royal Lancaster Hotel, London, on 15 May 2022. Mr Pierrepont was a
kennelhand of a greyhound that won an award. Ms Searle was an ownerof a greyhound that was nominated
for an award. The occasion had been compered by the well-known greyhound racing journalist and commentator, Mr Jonathan Hobbs.
It was an incident that had occurred between Mr Pierrepont and Mr Hobbs during an early interval in the
evening’s proceedings that resulted in the inquiry under considerationby the Disciplinary Committee.
The Committee heard two quite different and contradictory accounts of this incident from Mr Pierrepont and from
the Board’s witness, Ms Searle.
The Committee were able to consider Ms Searle’s statement provided to
the Local Inquiry held on 17 October 2022 and hear her oral evidence.
She told how, at an early interval in proceedings at the awards dinner,
she had left her table to go to the cloakroom. On her way back to her
table she encountered Mr Hobbs who was looking at the seating plan
at the end of the bar area. She was in conversation with Mr Hobbs when Mr Pierrepont approached him.
Ms Searle described how an exchange followed in which Mr
Pierrepont began telling Mr Hobbs that “people like him just took from the sport and gave nothing back”.
She said Mr Pierrepont had repeated this several times before Mr
Hobbs responded. When he did, he complained that Mr Pierrepont was “always on his case” making this
same charge. At this, Ms Searle said, Mr Pierrepont grabbed hold of Mr Hobbs’s tie by its knot and pushed
his face into Mr Hobbs’s.
He held Mr Hobbs so that their foreheads were together. Mr Pierrepont had then
said, “If you want to take this outside, I am happy to go outside with you”.
She said Mr Hobbs had turned his head away, towards her, as if to avoid a confrontation. She had
reacted by putting her hand on Mr Pierrepont’s hand that was grasping Mr Hobbs’ tie and had put her other
arm around Mr Pierrepont’s shoulder, speaking to him to try to defuse the situation. But Mr Pierrepont had
ignored her, she said, continuing to hold onto Mr Hobbs’s tie so thathe was “in his face”. Mr Pierrepont
repeated at least three times words to the effect “Let’s go outside”,before finally releasing Mr Hobbs
and walking away.
Ms Searle said Mr Pierrepont had spoken quietly and in a controlled way. He had not
been trying to throttle Mr Hobbs and had not struck him, but he had
been physically aggressive and threatening to Mr Hobbs and had left him shaken.
Mr Pierrepont chose not to give any statement to the Local Inquiry
or provide any statement putting his case as to what occurred until appearing before the Committee.
His evidence to the Committee was that it had been Mr Hobbs who had
called him over as he was returning to his table with two pints of beer that he had just bought at the bar.
He said he had known Mr Hobbs for some 20 years and they were on good terms, although they had
exchanged banter when they met at the track and he had previouslypublicly expressed the view that Mr
Hobbs was one of those who were “first in line” to get something outof greyhound racing, without “giving
back” to the sport.
He said he had been surprised by Mr Hobbs’s tone
when he had called out “Pierrepont, I want you” and that, despite holding a pint of beer in each hand, he had
approached and offered to shake Mr Hobbs’ hand.
He said Mr Hobbs had declined to do this and began
to complain that he had been “going on for months” about Mr Hobbs being “a taker” rather than “a giver” to the sport.
Mr Pierrepont said the conversation had continued on this
topic, “going round in circles” until he had suggested they “talk about it at some future date” and had walked away.
He said he had not taken hold of Mr Hobbs’s tie or pushed his face
into Mr Hobbs’s face or said anything to the effect that they should “take
this outside” or been in any way aggressive or threatening.
It was clear to the Committee that neither Mr Pierrepont nor Ms Searle
could be honestly mistaken about whether Mr Pierrepont took hold
of Mr Hobbs’s tie and made thesuggestion that he and Mr Hobbs “go outside”.
Mr Pierrepont maintained that this was a lie by Ms Searle. His case to
the Committee was that Ms Searle had made up this story as part of
a conspiracy to damage him that had been pursued by Ms Searle and others who, he suggested, had
been waging a campaign on the Greyhound Scene website, socialmedia and otherwise against him
and the trainer for whom he worked.
But Mr Pierrepont did not produce or refer to anything amounting to
credible evidence that any such conspiracy had occurred or that Ms Searle had been any part of any such conspiracy.
The Committee found Ms Searle to be an honest and conscientious
witness who had done her best to assist after she had been approached
in course of the GBGB inquiry into this incident. She had been doing her best to assist the Committee with a
careful and accurate recollection of what had happened. The Committee
unhesitatingly preferred her evidence to that of Mr Pierrepont.
It was also inherently unlikely that Mr
Hobbs would have chosen the short interval between carrying out his
duties as compere of the annual GBGB awards ceremony to pick an
argument or invite a confrontation with Mr Pierrepont. On the clear
and cogent evidence before it, the Committee concluded on the balance of probabilities that, sadly, Mr
Pierrepont was not telling the truth and that his conduct had been as described by Ms Searle.
The Board asked the Committee to find Mr Pierrepont in breach of
Rule 174 (xii) of the GBGB Rules of Racing. However, the Committee did
not think that the Royal Lancaster Hotel on the occasion of the annual awards dinner constituted “premises
… used by the GBGB” for the purposes of Rule 174 (xii) properly construed.
Nevertheless, it was very clear that, on the balance of probabilities,
Mr Pierrepont’s conduct on this occasion had been in breach of Rule
152 (ii). It was not suggested that there had been any serious physical
assault or any physical injury caused to Mr Hobbs, but this was wholly
unacceptable, seriously threatening behaviour towards the person engaged by the GBGB to present
its major, high profile annual event, celebrating the achievements of the sport and participants in the sport.
Mr Pierrepont acted in a manner that was seriously prejudicial to the
proper conduct and to the good reputation of greyhound racing as
regulated by GBGB. The Committee ordered that Mr Pierrepont receive a
Caution and be required to pay a fine of £200.
proper conduct and to the good reputation of greyhound racing as
regulated by GBGB. The Committee ordered that Mr Pierrepont receive a
Caution and be required to pay a fine of £200.
