WPBSA Disciplinary Hearing Finding
After an investigation by the WPBSA Integrity Unit supported by Sportradar and the UK Gambling Commission SBIU, David John and Jamie Jones were found to have a case to answer for serious breaches of the WPBSA Members Rules. The full charges are shown at Appendix 1.
On 18th December 2018 the case was heard before the WPBSA Disciplinary Committee.
Prior to the hearing, David John had admitted to fixing his matches against Graeme Dott played on 29th September 2016 and against Joe Perry played on 24th January 2017, and failing to cooperate with the WPBSA investigation. At the hearing Jamie Jones admitted to failing to report an approach to David John to fix his match with Graeme Dott played on 29th September 2018. He denied the further charges under the WPBSA Betting Rules.
On Friday 11th January 2019 the WPBSA Disciplinary Committee found:
That Jamie Jones was not in breach of the WPBSA Betting Rules and found on the basis of his admission and other evidence that he had failed to report the approach to David John to fix his match with Graeme Dott.
The Committee considered this to be an extremely serious matter in itself particularly in the context of the responsibility of a professional player to ensure as far as possible the integrity of the game.
The full findings of the WPBSA Disciplinary Committee can be found here.
The Committee will make its decision on the sanction that the Players will face after a further hearing on a date to be arranged.
David John charges admitted:
- That you agreed to fix the outcome of your match with Graeme Dott at the International Championship Qualifiers in the UK on 29th September 2016 in breach of Rule 188.8.131.52 ;
- That you agreed to fix the outcome of your match with Joe Perry at the China Open Qualifiers on 24th January 2017 in breach of Rule 184.108.40.206 ;
- That you failed to cooperate with the investigation by failing to provide mobile phone itemised billing that was requested of you during the investigation in breach of Rule 4.4 of the WPBSA Members Rules
Jamie Jones charges:
- Charge 1 On 29 September 2016, in breach of Betting Rule 220.127.116.11, you solicited, enticed, facilitated or encouraged David John to fix the result or score of a Match between John and Graeme Dott by: (i) Informing him that ‘A’ was looking for players to fix matches, and/or (ii) Informing John that he would be paid £5,000 for doing so and/or (iii) Then making a call on speaker phone to ‘A’ for that matter to be discussed.
- On 29 September 2016, in breach of Betting Rule 18.104.22.168, you contrived or were a party to an effort to fix or contrive to fix the outcome of a Match between John and Graeme Dott by telephoning ‘A’ and engaging in a telephone conversation with him and David John in respect of the fixing of that match.
- On or around 29 September 2016, in breach of Betting Rule 22.214.171.124, you accepted a bribe or other reward from ‘A’ or ‘B’ for influencing improperly the result or score of a Match between David John and Graeme Dott played on 29 September 2016.
- On 29 September 2016, in breach of Betting Rule 126.96.36.199, you solicited, enticed, facilitated or encouraged David John to fix the result or score of a Match by informing him following the Match between David John and Graeme Dott that you would assist in the fixing of a future Match.
- On and after 29 September 2016, in breach of Rule 4.2, you failed to report the approach of ‘A’ to David John to influence the outcome of David John’s match with Graeme Dott as soon as was reasonably practicable.
- On 29 September 2016, in breach of Betting Rule 188.8.131.52, you solicited, encouraged or facilitated David John to engage in a fix of the result or score of the Match between David John and Graeme Dott by informing him that ‘A’ was seeking to find out if David John if he was prepared to make it happen that David John would not win 2 frames in that Match.
WPBSA Betting Rules extracts:
- Betting misconduct
184.108.40.206 to fix or contrive, or to be a party to any effort to fix or contrive, the result, score, progress, conduct or any other aspect of the Tour and/or any Tournament or Match;
- Reporting Breaches
- In the event that a Member is approached or solicited in any way (whether directly or indirectly) to influence the outcome or conduct of any game of snooker or billiards whether or not in return for payment or any other form of remuneration or benefit (an “Approach”), that Member (the “Reporting Member”) shall report such an Approach to the WPBSA (via the Company Secretary or a Tournament Official) as soon as reasonably practicable and in any event not later than 24 hours after any such Approach being made. Further, the Reporting Member shall provide the WPBSA (via the Company Secretary or a Tournament Official) with all information in his or her knowledge relating to the Approach and shall co-operate in any subsequent investigation and/or other action(s) arising out of such a report.
- Each Member shall co-operate with the WPBSA in any investigation carried out by the WPBSA under the provisions of these Rules including (but not limited to):
- Providing a written statement setting out in detail all of the facts and circumstances with respect to any alleged breach;
- Attending to answer questions and provide such information at a time and place determined by the WPBSA
- Providing to the WPBSA upon its request any documents, information or any other material of any nature whatsoever held by the Member; and
- Procuring and providing to the WPBSA upon its request any documents, information or any other material of any nature whatsoever not held by the Member which the Member has the power to obtain.
- Providing the WPBSA with access to all records relating to the alleged breach. This includes, but is not limited to; betting accounts, bank records, telephone records, internet service records, social media accounts, email and other records stored on phones, tablets, electronic devices, computer hard drives or To facilitate this, the Member will surrender any such devices for examination by the WPBSA or its representative.