Despite exercising leniency in reducing Samantha Fletcher’s suspension by five days, Clovis Metcalfe, chairman of both the Jamaica Racing Commission (JRC) and the Betting, Gaming, and Lotteries Commission (BGLC), is adamant that the initial 25 days handed down was by no means harsh.

Additionally, he insists the process through which the punishment was administered was transparent and fair.

Metcalfe’s comments are in response to those of Fletcher’s legal team, who expressed that the leading female rider was not given a fair shot at proving her innocence after she was found guilty by stewards of not riding her mount, Gone A Negril, on its merit.

The incident occurred on February 4 and Fletcher was suspended on March 7 and though successful in receiving the five-day reduction, Fletcher’s team of Ed Barnes and attorney-at-law Douglas Thompson are in the process of appealing the ruling in the Supreme Court.

“The reason for the reduction of five days was based on Samantha’s response that over the years she has had a series of incidents and accidents. She was afraid to ride the horse, and so she was pleading for herself in terms of her safety, and so we took that into consideration. Based on what had happened to her in the past with the many injuries that she has had and the fact she could be a little bit cautious in the handling of the horse, we took that into consideration and took off five days,” Metcalfe told the Jamaica Observer.

“The stewards investigated the riding of Samantha Fletcher in the race, and after questioning her about her riding, they found her guilty. In that she did not ride the horse on its merit, and as such, they gave her a 25-day suspension, which is the maximum that a steward can give.

“The rules said up to 25 days. It can come to the board, and she could be warned off; she could get 50 days. The stewards could only go to 25 days, so we cannot consider it harsh because the stewards thought that it warranted more than 25 days in their opinion.

“We have to ensure the integrity of horse racing in Jamaica and we have to protect all stakeholders, so transparency is critical in the industry and we want to make sure that everybody plays according to the rules,” the chairman insisted.

Metcalfe stated that the commission has an in-and-out committee which is to assist in terms of the integrity of the sport and to protect the stakeholders to ensure that the races are run in a fair manner.

“The in-and-out committee has no power to investigate or hand down a penalty. The in-and-out committee’s responsibility, similar to the steward’s, is to review races during the week after the event. The in-and-out committee saw what they considered Samantha Fletcher might not have ridden the horse on its merit, and they brought it to the attention of the commission and the chairman that they thought this matter could be investigated.

“This is then passed on to the stewards, and the stewards make a decision. The person found guilty now has the opportunity to appeal, and that was done. Now the appeal goes to the board of commissioners, and they are seeing the incident for the first time based on the transcript that is brought to them.

“And based on how the appellant and defendant saw the incident, the stewards also get an opportunity to present their case, and both our appellant and defendant can question the stewards. The commission can question the stewards, and thereafter the commission can question the defence, and after that, the board will make a decision on whether the penalty was fair or not,” Metcalfe explained.

Metcalfe further stated: “What is alarming to me is that her [Fletcher’s] defence came to an appeal, and they said absolutely nothing about the infringement, in other words, the penalty. They said nothing at all about the incident, whether she rode the horse on merit or not. As a matter of fact, what was alarming is that during the appeal, the attorney who represented Samantha Fletcher admitted that he had not seen the race until we showed it to him during the appeal.”