Not that i am aware ofHave we in the UK been able to access the Helgstrand documentary yet?
I read somewhere that the whistleblower of CDJ did so due to the Danish case, hence the timing.Golly wasnt aware of this thread I wonder if this is linked to CDJ incident in some way?!
but look at the impact it's had. Horse welfare in sport has been catapulted into the minds of layfolk.If the whistleblower was that bothered about the Helgstrand case then she/he had ample opportunity to raise the CDJ video anytime after Helgstrand issue first surfaced in summer 2023 (threads on Helgstrand on here date from then and again Feb. 2024).
Lots of discussion of Helgstrand on the forum and the Danish documentary (which has still not been released outside Denmark) since 2023. Whilst the CDJ video shows completely wrong actions, the timing of the release 2 days before the Olympics was so obviously deliberate.
If the whistleblower was that bothered about the Helgstrand case then she/he had ample opportunity to raise the CDJ video anytime after Helgstrand issue first surfaced in summer 2023 (threads on Helgstrand on here date from then and again Feb. 2024).
Lots of discussion of Helgstrand on the forum and the Danish documentary (which has still not been released outside Denmark) since 2023. Whilst the CDJ video shows completely wrong actions, the timing of the release 2 days before the Olympics was so obviously deliberate.
If the whistleblower was that bothered about the Helgstrand case then she/he had ample opportunity to raise the CDJ video anytime after Helgstrand issue first surfaced in summer 2023 (threads on Helgstrand on here date from then and again Feb. 2024).
Lots of discussion of Helgstrand on the forum and the Danish documentary (which has still not been released outside Denmark) since 2023. Whilst the CDJ video shows completely wrong actions, the timing of the release 2 days before the Olympics was so obviously deliberate.
Lots of discussion on a horse forum. None of my horse friends have any idea what Helgstrand even is. Everyone knows about the CDJ video because everyone knows CDJ, and now everyone is talking about horse welfare. The public and press included.Lots of discussion of Helgstrand on the forum and the Danish documentary (which has still not been released outside Denmark) since 2023.
Another way of looking at the timing is that the whistleblower has had that video for 4 years.
CDJ claims it was a one-off. Whistleblower says he/she saw other instances but didn't have any film. If the latter is the case then it means that the whistleblower was quite content to leave other horses trained/ridden by CDJ at risk of abuse for all of that 4 years (or at least for the year after the breaking news of Helgstrand).
The sooner an issue is raised then the sooner corrective actions can be initiated. That goes for all animal related sports, including those involving dogs.
Similarly with the Helgstrand documentary. Court action was taken to try to prevent it being broadcast and it wasn't until after broadcast that H&H paid any attention to the issues raised and only after broadcast was Helgstrand suspended. Until then the abuse continued....
This is why I think it was unwise for BD to include the comment on the reasons for the report being disingenuous in their official statement. If there is clear evidence of abusive behaviour, that should be the focus, not picking apart the person making the report and/or their motivations for reporting. It does not help foster a culture of speaking up.One one of the other threads (probably the one about CDJ withdrawing from the Olympics) there is a link to a video made by a lady who took a well-known dressage stable to court (in NL) for the physical damage done to her horse. It took her 9 years, and a small fortune, to get anywhere, and she suffered years of abuse from others within the dressage community as a result of blowing the whistle.
It's often the case, that people are afraid to speak up, especially if they fear they would not be taken seriously.
Another way of looking at the timing is that the whistleblower has had that video for 4 years.
CDJ claims it was a one-off. Whistleblower says he/she saw other instances but didn't have any film. If the latter is the case then it means that the whistleblower was quite content to leave other horses trained/ridden by CDJ at risk of abuse for all of that 4 years (or at least for the year after the breaking news of Helgstrand).
The sooner an issue is raised then the sooner corrective actions can be initiated. That goes for all animal related sports, including those involving dogs.
Similarly with the Helgstrand documentary. Court action was taken to try to prevent it being broadcast and it wasn't until after broadcast that H&H paid any attention to the issues raised and only after broadcast was Helgstrand suspended. Until then the abuse continued....
Another way of looking at the timing is that the whistleblower has had that video for 4 years.
CDJ claims it was a one-off. Whistleblower says he/she saw other instances but didn't have any film. If the latter is the case then it means that the whistleblower was quite content to leave other horses trained/ridden by CDJ at risk of abuse for all of that 4 years (or at least for the year after the breaking news of Helgstrand).
The sooner an issue is raised then the sooner corrective actions can be initiated. That goes for all animal related sports, including those involving dogs.
Similarly with the Helgstrand documentary. Court action was taken to try to prevent it being broadcast and it wasn't until after broadcast that H&H paid any attention to the issues raised and only after broadcast was Helgstrand suspended. Until then the abuse continued....
No. To me that looked like a move done many times already.Did the way she went about using the whip, and her comments about what a rubbish whip it was for "hitting hard" indicate to you it's a one off?
Hi All,