Forum menu
You have no real problem with hunting? its deliberately cruel and has zero utility. the intent is to chase a fox to exhaustion then have it torn apart by dogs. Its just an exercise in sadism. Hunts ensure a good supply of foxes for killing by feeding them and creating artificial earths for them. they could easily reduce the population of foxes if they wanted as they know where the natural earths are
would you want someone who behaved like that teaching children? I wouldn't - and if I had behaved like that I would very probably have lost my job.
Losing a job due to unproven accusations and allegations shouldn’t happen but several posters seem to think it’s acceptable.
Hardly unproven accusations and allegations. The video evidence is clear to see, the horse was under control and she chose to attack it. She should not have been cleared of that for any reason so the fact she lost her job goes some way to make up for that as a form of justice where the courts have clearly failed.
Or, to put it another way, it's not an unproven accusation or allegation that she hit and kicked the horse - this was incontrovertibly shown on the video. It was however not proven that this was a criminal act.
thecaptain - agree - obviously there is no discussion about what she did. Agreeing or disagreeing with hunting is another matter, and I think anyone who feels it’s fine to be abused online and to lose a job in an unrelated field is out of order.
Are the hunting brigade mostly an entitled bunch of bellends that protect their own and look down on the rest of us? Almost certainly, which is what I think raises questions in this case as to whether it was a fair and impartial trial.
I think anyone who feels it’s fine to be abused online and to lose a job in an unrelated field is out of order.
Many professions have a set of standards of behaviour that need to be adhered to to keep your job
If I had done what she had done I would probably have been in disciplinary trouble at work
Her behaviour has been acceptable to a majority of equine vets in bygone decades because it supposedly mimics the dam chastising her foal. I'm not a horsey-person but it doesn't seem to be necessary; the RSPCA and more modern vets agree
Some of you may remember a royal televised kicking a horse in the late 70s/early 80s. I can't remember who it was but Not The Nine O Clock News satirised it at the time and that person was vilified even then, but not prosecuted
As far as sacking is concerned that's a matter for the education authority, but you don't need a conviction to read the room and the video
I certainly would but then I am a vet!
Old money
Jealousy.
When we arrived in France we had a cycle touring bike each and 50 000 francs (so about £5 000 at the time) made from teaching to start a business with the initial rent payment on premises taking most of that. All the people we ride with are regular people with day jobs - working on the checkout at Lidl isn't old money. Even the ferme équestre where we keep the horse is new money, owned by a guy who did a load of different day jobs to make the money.
In Wales my colleague bought a horse for his step daughter. Madame rode a borrowed horse which is quite common in the UK. Look after it and you can ride it.
The common factor in all the people I know who ride is a passion for horses. I enjoy walking, running, mtbing and riding a horse along the same trails - same environment, different ways of enjoying it.
MTBers lose their rag and abuse animals too - see how they deal with errant dogs on such threads. Perhaps I should start to take more interest in trail dog threads and threads where people are leaving their dogs alone in the house while at work. But live and let live eh, besides the animals humans are cruelest to IME are their fellow humans.
Jealousy
Not sure about the jealousy comment but everyone is entitled to an opinion! Yes plenty of people ride horses without being idiots or particularly well off. Not sure many of them dress up and go on fox hunts though.
I think on balance that she is guilty of being an unpleasant person but that it stopped short of criminal behaviour. Not guilty doesn’t mean blameless, although that is how she is spinning it now. She would have been better advised to keep quiet rather than stoke the fire I would think.
"Jealousy" was a direct reply to "old money", I think that's clear, it's quoted. It's at the bottom of the previous page, a two-word post from petrolhead-rejoice-in-CO2-emissions rustynissanprairie. 🙂 If people were really interested in animal welfare they're stop oil first and worry about a silly tantrum second.
You know how many animals have died in drought or forest fires this year, and it's our fault. It's been over 40°C for far longer periods than usual in this part of the world, both animals and humans are suffering and dying (30 excess deaths in July, no doubt more this month in Provence-Alpes-Côtes d’Azur).
Perspective man, perspective.
If you're really worried about animal welfare do your bit and stop using fossil fuels.
The video suggests she has a bit of an anger management problem. Whether that makes her compatible with a job in primary education is a matter for her employer. Perhaps there are other factors which have influenced their decision, we don't know. If she feels hard done by, she is welcome to challenge that decision at a tribunal.
The failure to convict is simply because the laws covering assaults on animals are framed differently to those dealing with assaults on humans. We've moved on from being able to beat your kids in public (or private), hopefully the law regarding animal welfare will catch up at some point.
"moved on" -nope
888 women killed by their spouse in the last 10 years in the UK, a child a week killed, only one in how many rapes prosecuted? How many parents convicted of child abuse compared to abuse cases?
I'd argue we've move on much further in terms of animal protection and welfare than we have in human safety and welfare.
The outrage of some on this thread is proof enough.
Yes plenty of people ride horses without being idiots or particularly well off. Not sure many of them dress up and go on fox hunts though.
The vast majority of riders don't ride with hunts. And the vast majority who do ride with hunts don't got for the hunting. They go for an exciting ride in the countryside on terrain and land they'd not normally be able to ride. The ones who 'hunt' to actually kill foxes are the minority. Hunts are also in decline because riders don't want to be associated with them.
We are of course forgetting that hunting with hounds has been illegal for nearly 2 decades now. But I'm not blind to the fact there are elements in the scene that bend the rules to suit their aims. IMO they should now ban riding with packs of dogs to remove the grey areas being exploited. There are other ways now to enjoy riding in the countryside without the hunt element. My wife does endurance rides which are often over land they'd not normally have access too.
Fox control should be done by licensed marksmen only.
If it makes people responsible for animals think hard about their lifestyle choices and duties, then it's a good thing.
I've no jealousy to people who own horses or their class but in this instance
hunting = old money = entitlement = it's my horse I'll punch it if I want to.
petrolhead-rejoice-in-CO2-emissions rustynissanprairie
Petrolhead?😂 19 year old Volvo and a 19year old Berlingo!
Which are both, filthy ICE cars, greenhousing the planet and making it uninhabitable for animals and ultimately humans, or did you miss that thread?
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/petrolhead
You're all over petrolhead threads on here. 🙂
Well that went random quickly!
I have an electric car so does that mean I can say what I like?
You're a vet, andylc, so have more credibility on this thread than some who have never been near a horse.
The electric car is probably essential to your job and if you really need a car and EV is as good as you'll get. I have no idea how polluting the rest of your lifestyle is in terms of air miles, gas consumption, eating habits etc. .
Our respective carbon footprints are not really relevant to whether it’s OK to kick a horse.
Back on subject I do think it’s a bad precedent that her defence rests on the claim that her behaviour was reasonable, normal and appropriate to the situation, which presumably the jury agreed with.
I have an electric car so does that mean I can say what I like?
Probably some human rights abuses and environmental damage involved in the extraction of the lithium for your car batteries, so if we're going full whataboutery, your right to have an opinion is as dubious as the rest of us.
Indeed!
Wasn’t sure where the discussion would go but I certainly didn’t expect it to end in a discussion about what sort of car people drive!!
You're way off track. I like to repair and reuse items/cars as long as possible and Im an engineer so have a love of all things mechanical/electrical
Anyway back to punching horses, case law has been set so I'm off out to go **** a horse in its face.
The defence isn't the only thing the jury takes into considereation. My reasoning was:
The kick: if that's not allowed then imposing a similar impact on a horses leg wahtever the cause should also be banned: horse jumping, cross country, trek, jumping obstacles whilst out in the country - objectively all impact horses' legs more.
The slaps: you can forget trying to train many horses at all if that level of impact/force isn't allowed.
Maybe the jury just objectively thought about the wider implications a guilty verdict would produce in terms of case law and whether a non-harmful level of kicking/slapping warranted a conviction. As a juror I wouldn't have taken much notice of the defense arguments because well, defense arguments are often laughable. However I'd have thought very hard about the implications of the case and whether the prosectution arguments were valid. It's the prosectution case that wasn't convincing to me.
But I’m not blind to the fact there are elements in the scene that bend the rules to suit their aims.
Its not just some elements. Its every hunting pack and all the folk who ride with them. Its a huge criminal conspiracy driven by blood lust
Not forgetting of course that hunting of any mammals with hounds has been illegal for nearly 20 years now and the various hunts across the country hardly even bother pretending that they are not doing it. Those that could do something about turn a blind eye, for likely similar reasons to the outcome of this case.
The slaps: you can forget trying to train many horses at all if that level of impact/force isn’t allowed.
Withdrawal of horse pudding and 10 mins in the naughty stable no good?
Not sure how many times this can be said but the only possible justification for this sort of behaviour, which clearly freaked the horse out, is an immediate response to bad behaviour. Same principle behind an electric fence - the response is immediate and the abnormal can associate touching the fence with pain.
Kicking and slapping the horse as it calmly stands there teaches it nothing but to distrust and fear the person doing it.
Sorry predictive text changed animal to abnormal…!
Withdrawal of horse pudding (apples and supplements) would mean not being able to reward behaviour you're trying to achieve. The horse wouldn't understand why pudding was being removed and just get annoyed if other horses were still getting it.We don't reward our horses with food with other horses present unless all the horses are being rewarded by their owners at the same time. When we used to have two horses in a field we put out two lots of hay so the dominant horse couldn't stop the other one getting any. In the current herd in the field the dominant horses get to eat the hay first and then have to be put in a naughty stable/field with no food because they've got too fat.
The naughty stable/field is mainly for horses that are a problem with other horses rather than humans. Some horses are such bullies and do so much damage to other horses that they end up in a naughty stable/field. But then there's the horse police/vilgilantes who gang up on horses with bad behaviour and kick shit out of them so they end up on their own even if they're in the same field. Horses have mates, it's a bit like an MTB club ride, not everyone gets on but the group as a whole functions. Or this forum even.
An unarmed human versus a horse is an unequal fight so if there's an untrained horse in a confined space where it can't use its flight instinct take great care. In fact if there's a horse in a confined space take care.
The horse in that vid looked well-trained, human friendly and pretty submissive as horses go. There was absolutely no problem getting it in the horse box and it remained submissive when being unfairly reprimanded. A level of cooperation that suggests it has been generally been well-treated and trained even if on this occasion the human did nothing to improve the horse/human relationship. I'd happily saddle it up and gallop off on it.
Kicking and slapping the horse as it calmly stands there teaches it nothing but to distrust and fear the person doing it.
I'm with the horse in that respect. Not sure I'd trust her behind the wheel of a Range Rover, for example.
It was however not proven that this was a criminal act.
Yes, clearly - hence the verdict. However, due to the ability to actually see what happened I don't I need it to be a proven criminal act for me to be happy that some justice was done to the horrible person.