I received an answer to the RRS69- case against Brass Spiderman from Mike. He send me the following:
- Was a competitor
- Was during the event
- Had committed an actionable breach. Rule, Good Manners or Sportsmanship, or sport into disrepute.
- Protest committee of 3
- Correct information to competitor
- Time given for preparation
- Notification given of time and place of hearing.
Dear Brass Spiderman,
NOTIFICATION OF ACTION UNDER RULE 69.1
I am writing to inform you that the Protest Committee of this event has received a report under rule 69.1 alleging that you have committed Gross Misconduct under the Racing Rules of Sailing.
The report alleges that you made improper sexual advances to the Commodores’s wife and daughter, followed by an assault on the Club’s doorman, and made remarks concerning international judges.
The Protest Committee has decided to conduct a hearing under rule 69.1 to determine if these allegations are true, and if so, to decide what action to take.
You are required to attend a hearing on [date] at [time] in [location].
You may bring someone to represent you at the hearing. You are also entitled to call our own witnesses, but it is your responsibility to ensure that the witnesses are present at the time of the hearing.
If you have any questions concerning the hearing or any other aspect of the rule 69 process, please ask the chairman.
For the actions stated, I would not have considered a hearing unless repeated. The actions in the bar are regrettable, and can be dealt with by the house committee.
The struggle was not vindictive, and the comments on the Jury were generic rather than directed to the event jury or individuals.
If there was to be a hearing then the interested party (relative) should be excluded, this still leaves 3 and the committee member who was a witness could remain.
If my view was in the minority (and it must have been if there was a hearing) then, a suitable result would be:
- A voluntary apology (which would not need to be reported)
- At worst a warning
- I believe the finding could have been a gross breach of good manners, but not bringing the sport into disrepute.
This does not comply with what the House committee recommended but the protest committee should not be influenced by this. With respect to future events their club can adopt RRS 76 to exclude and they could be advised of this.