Fradd cleared of fixing race but denied costs
Former champion jockey Robbie Fradd was acquitted of race-fixing yesterday when a judge found that the prosecution had failed to provide a convincing case against him.
But the South African rider was denied legal costs and told by Deputy Judge Colin Mackintosh that his actions in holding back his mount had brought 'heavy suspicion' on him. He rejected the defence's argument that the holding back had been tactical.
Deputy Judge Mackintosh said in the District Court the Independent Commission Against Corruption had failed to prove Fradd had either won money for himself or other people on the outcome of the race on January 16.
Fradd, 37, who has been riding for about 20 years and was a champion jockey two years ago, was cleared of one count of cheating at gambling. He was accused of having won money for himself or others by placing bets on the outcome of the race. He was alleged to have prevented his horse, Winning Dragon, 'from running to the best of its natural ability'.
Deputy Judge Mackintosh accepted the prosecution's expert witness, New Zealander Gavin John Whiterod, saying he was 'balanced and careful' in giving his evidence and that his comments were 'moderate, logical and entirely consistent'.
The judge accepted Mr Whiterod's comment that 'it should have been no question for Winning Dragon to fill in the gap behind Victory Marble [the leading horse]', and believed Fradd 'was deliberate in not allowing the horse to run to the best of its natural ability'.
Deputy Judge Mackintosh added: 'I simply don't know why he [Fradd] was holding back [the horse at that time].'
Mr Whiterod had earlier told the court that Fradd had failed to take advantage of the opportunity 'to move the horse forward to the gap behind the leading horse', adding that the horse should have been able to grab second place.
Deputy Judge Mackintosh also rejected the assertion of defence expert witness John Matthew Schreck, the chief stipendiary steward of the Hong Kong Jockey Club, that Fradd's restraining of his horse had been 'tactical'.
Mr Schreck and four other Jockey Club stipendiary stewards testified that they believed the rider was 'merely settling the horse'.
However, the deputy judge accepted defence barrister Kevin Egan's argument that 'not allowing a horse to run to its best ability' was not a crime, but should be a disciplinary issue to be dealt with within the jurisdiction of horse racing.
After the acquittal, Deputy Judge Mackintosh rejected Mr Egan's application for legal costs, saying Fradd's behaviour 'had brought heavy suspicion on him'.
Outside court, asked by reporters how he felt about the verdict, Fradd replied: 'We won! We won!'
However, he said he was disappointed with the decision made on his ride and would be returning to South Africa tonight.
He refused to comment on the legal costs, which are believed to be $1 million.
The Hong Kong Jockey Club's executive director of security and corporate legal services responded to the judge's comments last night, saying: 'The only evidence of criminal activity afoot was opinion evidence from a former stipendiary steward who had no prior experience or direct knowledge of Hong Kong racing. He also revealed little awareness of the prior form or tactics used in racing Winning Dragon.'
