Jamie Kah has been charged with conduct prejudicial to the interests of racing, effectively bringing the sport of disrepute, for the pictures and video that did the rounds in traditional and social media of Kah with what appeared to be an illicit substance at a house gathering.
The charges laid against Kah and stable hand Ruby McIntyre, who was also in attendance, were stated as follows by Racing Victoria stewards:
Ms Kah and Ms McIntyre were each charged with breaching Australian Rule of Racing AR 228(a) which reads as follows:
A person must not engage in:
(a) conduct prejudicial to the image, interests, integrity, or welfare of racing, whether or not that conduct takes place within a racecourse or elsewhere.
A combined summary of the particulars of their charges is as follows:
- Ms Kah is, and was at all relevant times, a Jockey licensed by Racing Victoria and a person bound by the Rules of Racing. Ms McIntyre was, at all relevant times, a ‘relevant person’ (as defined by Victorian Local Rule of Racing LR 2) and bound by the Rules of Racing.
- Between 17 and 18 June 2023, Ms Kah attended a gathering at her residential premises which was also attended by Ms McIntyre and one other person (the Gathering).
- At the Gathering, Ms McIntyre recorded Ms Kah using an identification card in her hand to arrange a white powder substance into three lines (the Recordings).
- Ms McIntyre shared the Recordings with a person/s not in attendance at the Gathering.
- The Recordings have been widely reported both in the media and on social media, with the perception amongst persons commenting on the posts being that those in attendance at the Gathering used an illicit substance.
The Stewards allege that Ms Kah and Ms McIntyre’s conduct, as outlined in the particulars, was prejudicial to the image, interests, integrity and/or welfare of racing.
As a breach of AR 228(a) is defined as a Serious Offence pursuant to LR 7(3) of the Rules of Racing and sections 50C(c) and 50O(1) of the Racing Act 1958, the charges must be heard and determined by the Victorian Racing Tribunal (VRT), as opposed to the Stewards.
The charges will be heard before the Victorian Racing Tribunal on a date to be fixed.
When the news broke, Kah posted how “disappointed” she was in the story, and that she was “determined to focus on my health and recovery following my race fall in March”.
This will be an interesting case for the RV stewards to prosecute, and for any judiciary to grapple with the morality of privacy, given that Kah was in her own home. Kah did not film the footage or spread it, so there is a reasonable case that she has done nothing wrong in terms of acting against the best interests of racing.
If Kah is proven to have acted illegally in any way, then that must be a matter for police, but that is not where the line is being drawn here by the stewards.
This is a murky area for the stewards to delve into, with lots of grey. What is responsible administration and what is overreach? What is private and what is public? How much responsiblity is on the individual? Where does the blame truly lie when we are dealing with a transgression around the optics?
There is still plenty to play out here.
5 Comments
The pic showed what appeared to be dividing a substance ,how r they going to prove it was drugs and she hasnt provided a positive and i dont think she was tested . Good luck proving this remembering it was in her home .John Davey
The pic showed what appeared to be dividing a substance ,how r they going to prove it was drugs and she hasnt provided a positive and i dont think she was tested . Good luck proving this remembering it was in her home .
This is very interesting. I am an "old codger" from the old school. But this is also 2023. I have always lived within the law an d encouraged my family to do also with success. However, for somw years now I have wondered how will the Racing industry continue to attract young people to the industry with such antiquated and out of date rules applied to the participants. I don't think the "priesthood" expects behaviour to the degree that the Racing Authorities expect. I personally don't condone anti social behavour any more than the next. But what is anti social nowadays is far different to what it was in 1950 when most of the Racing rules were written. These young people only work in the industry...they are not owned by it... and what happens in a private home is bloody nothing to do with the.
Has she tested positive no
Doesn’t matter .no one wants to see this weather it’s in private or not .would you feel the same if she was shooting up heroin .I remember Pearce from the roosters loosing his job for mucking around in private .these athletes work hard but earn fantastic money .all they have to do is behave in a respectful manner. I don’t care how good Jamie is as a jockey I wouldn’t want my children growing up thinking it’s ok to snort cocaine or do any drugs just because they are famous