Witness Statement of Charlie Boss and Exhibit CB1

Docusign Envelope ID: ABA671A3-E271-4EC4-AB06-1088FEC37456

12. Moreover, the angles of the Race Track mean that acts of trespass during a race are

particularly dangerous for all those present – human and equine. This is because there are

several ‘b l ind corners’, which mean that a protester may be unable to see the horses and

jockeys running at pace down the track, and vice versa. Indeed, the suffragette, Emily

Davison, lost her life on one such blind corner in 1913.

13. I also confirm that, as set out at paragraphs 28 to 34 of Truesdale 1, equine safety remains

fundamental to everything the Claimant does and to the sport of horse racing. The Claimant

continues to invest in its facilities to ensure it offers equine participants the best, and safest

possible experience. This ranges from investments in safe racing surfaces and cushioned

horsewalks to state-of-the-art misting fans, washdown areas, appropriate trot up areas to

allow for detailed veterinary evaluations and padded hurdles. Every aspect of care and

safety is considered. The racing industry has heavily invested in statistical analysis of falls

and fatalities in order that we can understand where the risks are and improve safety. A

recent British Horseracing Authority report found that 99.5% of horses that race finish safely i.e., without any form of long-term injury 14 .

The continued compelling need for an injunction

14. As noted above, animal rights protesters affiliated with AR caused significant disruption to

numerous racing events in 2022 and 2023. Such disruption continued even with the interim

injunction in place, which Mr Newman knowingly breached (as he admitted in the Committal

Proceedings) on 3 June 2023. It was not until after the successful Committal Proceedings

against Mr Newman in October 2023, that I believe the full force of the injunction was

understood by prospective protesters, such that no disruptions have since occurred at the

Racecourse. In my view, this shows that the injunction is working, and that if it were no

longer in place, there would be a real and imminent threat of further disruption to the races

at the Racecourse.

15. Disruptive protests were not staged at the Grand National held this year on 5 April 2025, or

the Epsom Derby on 7 June 2025. In that respect, the situation remains the same as it was

in July 2024, when the five-year injunction was granted over the Epsom Racecourse, shortly

after the running of the 2024 Grand National and the 2024 Epsom Derby without disruption.

AR has, however, continued publicly to call for an end to horseracing, and to celebrate

direct protest action at horseracing events, as set out below. Accordingly, I do not consider

that the threat of disruptive protests, absent an injunction, has truly gone away.

16. As addressed in paragraphs 6 to 9 of Diaz-Rainey 2, AR updated its website shortly before

the Final Injunction hearing on 8 July 2024, removing references to its plans to disrupt

horse-racing activities (as referenced in paragraph 22 of Truesdale 2). However, AR

continued at that time to trumpet its disruptions of horseracing in the “ previous campaigns ”

14 Pages 19 – 59 of CB1

5

Made with FlippingBook Digital Proposal Creator