Please note the following amendment to the British Horseracing Authority investigations update, distributed earlier today.
In relation to George Prodromou, Charlotte Kerton, Gary Banham, Stuart Compton, Filippos Sergides, John Hogan and Alexander Starret, the original release stated that:
“The Disciplinary Panel will also consider whether or not Gary Banham, Stuart Compton, Filippos Sergides and Alexander Starret (both races) and John Hogan (the first race only) are in breach of Rule (C)64.1 by placing a lay bet on the horse to lose the race using a Betting Exchange account registered in his name whilst that horse was under his care or control.”
The correct rule reference was, in fact, Rule (A)41.2 not Rule (C)64.1.
As such the paragraphs which originally read:
In relation to the running and riding of TIMETEAM (IRE) on 22nd January 2010 and/or TRIP SWITCH on 27th January 2010 at 1.30 pm, the Disciplinary Panel will consider whether or not Filippos Sergides is in breach of:
Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing lay bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place lay bets on the horse TIMETEAM (IRE) and/or TRIP SWITCH (the “Named Horse”) not to win (and/or be placed in) the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person in the race relating to the prospects in the race of the Named Horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons 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, or being reckless as to whether this was so and knowing that, or being reckless as to whether, such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market
The Disciplinary Panel will also consider whether or not Gary Banham, Stuart Compton, Filippos Sergides and Alexander Starret (both races) and John Hogan (the first race only) are in breach of Rule (C)64.1 by placing a lay bet on the horse to lose the race using a Betting Exchange account registered in his name whilst that horse was under his care or control.
Should actually read:
In relation to the running and riding of TIMETEAM (IRE) on 22nd January 2010 and TRIP SWITCH on 27th January 2010 at 1.30 pm, the Disciplinary Panel will consider whether or not Filippos Sergides, Gary Banham and Stuart Compton are in breach of:
Rule (A)41.2 in that they conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing lay bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place lay bets on the horse TIMETEAM (IRE) and TRIP SWITCH (the “Named Horse”) not to win (and/or be placed in) the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person in the race relating to the prospects in the race of the Named Horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons 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, or being reckless as to whether this was so and knowing that, or being reckless as to whether, such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market
In relation to the running and riding of TIMETEAM (IRE) on 22nd January 2010 at 1.30 pm, the Disciplinary Panel will consider whether or not John Hogan and Alexander Starret are in breach of:
Rule (A)41.2 in that they conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing lay bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place lay bets on the horse TIMETEAM (IRE) (the “Named Horse”) not to win (and/or be placed in) the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person in the race relating to the prospects in the race of the Named Horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons 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, or being reckless as to whether this was so and knowing that, or being reckless as to whether, such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market
