Racing’s ruling body has caused further controversy in relation to the vexed Jim Best case by telling a defence witness that his application for a jockey’s licence would not be considered until the case was concluded, a position that it has now abandoned. Paul Cooley, who works as head lad at Best’s Lewes stable, applied in January for a licence to ride as an apprentice in Flat races but has been repeatedly told to wait, even though there is no suggestion of wrongdoing against him.
However, in response to an approach by the Guardian, the British Horseracing Authority has now said Cooley’s application is being considered. The licensing committee’s position, restated this month, has been that the matter remained “on hold”. It was a position that risked being seen as a reminder to Cooley, before he gives evidence at the rehearing, that the BHA holds significant power over him.
The 22-year-old Cooley has had three rides over the past two years and would like to try his luck in the saddle once more. When he was first told, in January, that he had been placed on hold, there were some grounds for hope that the Best case could be concluded in the following weeks and certainly before the Flat season began in April.
Since then the case has turned into a saga that has filled many a newspaper column as Best was found guilty and then had that verdict quashed because of extraordinary procedural irregularities. It emerged that the panel which heard the case had been chaired by a man who had also been paid for years to advise the British Horseracing Authority, giving rise to the appearance of bias. Further, the reasons published by the panel were found, on appeal, to be insufficient to support its verdict. No date has yet been set for a rehearing, which is not thought likely to take place before September.
The BHA’s reason for delay over Cooley’s application, stated in January, was that the final verdict could be relevant in relation to Best’s duty to train apprentice jockeys in accordance with BHA expectations. That delay continued after the BHA accepted, on 13 May, that the verdict against Best would have to be quashed.
However, in response to the Guardian’s approach, a BHA spokesman said the matter would now be dealt with. “The BHA is currently considering the licence application separately to the rehearing, as a date for the rehearing has yet to be finalised,” said Gavin Jefferies in a statement.
Cooley gave evidence to the Best hearing about the character of Paul John, the sole prosecution witness, whose credibility was a key issue. John, a jockey, claims Best told him to stop two horses in December. Best denies the allegation and his defence at the hearing was that John is an unreliable witness.
Cooley was not mentioned by name in the reasons published by the original disciplinary panel in the Best case. When an appeal board quashed that panel’s verdict, partly because of the insufficient reasons, the board said: “A considerable volume of evidence was placed before the panel in order to cast doubt on Mr John’s credibility … The disciplinary panel dealt with this evidence in a cursory fashion.”
The BHA’s delay provoked anger from Best’s solicitor, Harry Stewart-Moore, who said: “There is no justification whatsoever for the BHA to refuse even to consider Mr Cooley’s application.
“This no doubt explains why the BHA has so far refused to engage with us on this subject or to provide any proper explanation for their refusal to Mr Cooley.
“It seems that, as far as they are concerned, it is perfectly acceptable that Mr Cooley, in relation to whom there is no suggestion of any wrongdoing, is to be prevented from riding for the best part of a year while Paul John, a man who has supposedly admitted to stopping two horses in December, was allowed to reapply for his licence after less than five months.
“We have explained to the BHA that this does not look good when considered in light of the fact that Mr Cooley gave evidence in support of Mr Best and will no doubt do so again at the rehearing. However, they do not appear concerned by being seen to treat one of Mr Best’s supporting witnesses in such a heavy-handed manner.”
Jefferies said in his statement: “The BHA considers each application for an apprentice jockey’s licence on its own individual merits, but within the framework of the ‘Applications for Jockey Licences Guidance Notes’ with due regard to all relevant factors. A joint application from Paul Cooley and Jim Best for the renewal of an apprentice jockey’s licence was received on 5 January and was initially held pending the outcome of the impending disciplinary proceedings against Mr Best, which was considered to be a relevant factor. The BHA is currently considering the licence application separately to the rehearing, as a date for the rehearing has yet to be finalised.”
