CDJ withdrawn from paris

Last month a teacher was banned from teaching indefinitely. He was accused of kicking the leg of a chair (on which a pupil was sitting) and also hitting a pupil on the hand with a ruler.
The report states that 'The panel carefully observed the CCTV footage and towards the end of the footage noted that [Mr X] flicked a ruler, which appeared to make contact with Pupil B’s arm.'
Apparently it wasn't totally clear that contact was made, (and the teacher insists that he didn't make contact), but on balance the panel ruled that the allegation was proven.
The panel stated that 'A prohibition order would therefore prevent such a risk from being present in the future' - basically, they couldn't be sure it wouldn't happen again.
The teacher received a caution from the police for 'assault by beating'. So no prosecution, but a caution and an indefinite ban meaning that he will now have to find another way of making a living.

I'm not commenting on how appropriate or otherwise this ban was, but if we compare it to what happened to CDJ - and others - we can see how much more tolerant people are of abuse towards animals. Obviously, the safety of children is paramount and some would say that it's wrong to even compare the situations. But one of the main points, to me, is that the teacher was banned because there was too high a risk that he'd do it again.

it seems that lots of people are perfectly happy for that risk to be present when it comes to trainers/riders.
tristars said:
However I have to put the horses welfare above all else and it's got to the point of huge changes being needed

I'm with nancykitt on this one its about the horse in that video
Click to expand...
The horse in the video didn't get any choice. It just had to be put up with being beaten. Will it be the last for CDJ? Who can say that there isn't a risk?
You can argue that my cob won't get a choice about going on a hack today. I'll bring him in from the field, tack him up and take him out. Hopefully he'll be fine with that.
But if there's ever an indication that he's not OK, I'll stop and find out more rather than resort to causing him pain.
 
It does make me question a lot of equestrian’s and their love of horses when they are belittling people for feeling uncomfortable about her return to the sport. I’ve seen it a lot this week, the odd person raising concerns on a social media post and a bunch of horse people jumping in excusing it. Unfortunately I’ve seen the “I’ve seen worse at my livery yard” card thrown about at least once.
This does not make it ok.

To those who see no issue with her return to competition, can I ask you a question? If you saw a video of a dog being beaten over and over by a person with a whip, whilst stating/joking that this whip was no good for the job, would you want that person anywhere near a dog again?
I think I know what the answer is.

So why do we excuse it because it’s a horse. Is it because they are big? Because they don’t cry out in pain? Because we need to ‘dominate them’ for safety?
The simple answer is we want them to do things that aren’t natural to them, whether that be for our pleasure or livelihood. So we feel we have the right to force them to do things, and some people will hurt them if they don’t do it how we want. We hurt and frighten another creature because of something WE want.

Read that last paragraph a few times.
It makes me feel sick, quite frankly.
 
They do it because its the only way they know how to get what they want

Which is a shame cause the proper route gives better results

If horses were farm animals would the min of ag tolerate such treatment

If horses where classified as livestock under the min of ag would they be covered by welfare legislation which could be enforced
 
Nancykitt said:
Last month a teacher was banned from teaching indefinitely. He was accused of kicking the leg of a chair (on which a pupil was sitting) and also hitting a pupil on the hand with a ruler.
The report states that 'The panel carefully observed the CCTV footage and towards the end of the footage noted that [Mr X] flicked a ruler, which appeared to make contact with Pupil B’s arm.'
Apparently it wasn't totally clear that contact was made, (and the teacher insists that he didn't make contact), but on balance the panel ruled that the allegation was proven.
The panel stated that 'A prohibition order would therefore prevent such a risk from being present in the future' - basically, they couldn't be sure it wouldn't happen again.
The teacher received a caution from the police for 'assault by beating'. So no prosecution, but a caution and an indefinite ban meaning that he will now have to find another way of making a living.

I'm not commenting on how appropriate or otherwise this ban was, but if we compare it to what happened to CDJ - and others - we can see how much more tolerant people are of abuse towards animals. Obviously, the safety of children is paramount and some would say that it's wrong to even compare the situations. But one of the main points, to me, is that the teacher was banned because there was too high a risk that he'd do it again.

it seems that lots of people are perfectly happy for that risk to be present when it comes to trainers/riders.

The horse in the video didn't get any choice. It just had to be put up with being beaten. Will it be the last for CDJ? Who can say that there isn't a risk?
You can argue that my cob won't get a choice about going on a hack today. I'll bring him in from the field, tack him up and take him out. Hopefully he'll be fine with that.
But if there's ever an indication that he's not OK, I'll stop and find out more rather than resort to causing him pain.
Click to expand...
I can see why people don't want to do teaching anymore.
 
tristars said:
To be honest I feel awful, torn expressing what I see and feel and have been torn to shreds on this forum before now.

However I have to put the horses welfare above all else and it's got to the point of huge changes being needed

I'm with nancykitt on this one its about the horse in that video

Everytime a horse dies racing, usually young, or competitive abuse is exposed its for us to show to governing bodies that we find it unacceptable if that's how we feel

Yes it's ugly very ugly, the feelings around all this are painful and difficult, but horses are such special creatures and we want the best for them, something better for the future

Charlotte has probably shown conclusively, spectacularly that the system is at fault as it stands today
Click to expand...
It should not be a case of tearing people to shreds it is just that people have different opinions.
 
equinerebel said:
Bc they’re not allowed to hit a student? Whether they actually made contact or not is irrelevant to the point bc they should never be acting in such an aggressive way towards a child in the first place.
Click to expand...
The way Nancy has relayed that story there is wiggle room in it to think "assault for flicking a ruler?? Worlds gone mad!"

I suppose the equivalent is a rider being sanctioned for "use of the stick". Was it a tap on the shoulder? Was it a whack in the face? What people assume depends how you tell the story.
 
smolmaus said:
I suppose the equivalent is a rider being sanctioned for "use of the stick". Was it a tap on the shoulder? Was it a whack in the face? What people assume depends how you tell the story.
Click to expand...
And on peoples perspective on what is acceptable. I’m starting to wonder if it’s ever okay for us to use whips on horses for our own gain in the first place.
 
equinerebel said:
And on peoples perspective on what is acceptable. I’m starting to wonder if it’s ever okay for us to use whips on horses for our own gain in the first place.
Click to expand...
Don't think anybody should touch a whip without wondering that, really. Or any piece of equipment I suppose. Is this ethical, reasonable, necessary.
 
I do find it weird when groundworky people say I just use a whip to point when they have arms and fingers that in the whole history of evolution are uniquely good at pointing. Horses are exceptionally good at body language. If you need a whip to point because your arm isn't enough I'm not sure what that says really. But it is definitely the case that if you did happen to want to hit a horse, you can do it at little danger to yourself and without hurting your hand if you have some kind of long, thin implement to do it with.
 
Burnttoast said:
I do find it weird when groundworky people say I just use a whip to point when they have arms and fingers that in the whole history of evolution are uniquely good at pointing. Horses are exceptionally good at body language. If you need a whip to point because your arm isn't enough I'm not sure what that says really. But it is definitely the case that if you did happen to want to hit a horse, you can do it at little danger to yourself and without hurting your hand if you have some kind of long, thin implement to do it with.
Click to expand...
Even if you go into it genuinely believing that, most horses will have experience of what a whip was originally designed to do anyway so there is an implied threat there whether you intend it or not. I have used a lunge whip to poke my horses shoulder to get her to move out away from me as I literally don't have long enough arms, so that is maybe one case where it is genuine???? Doesn't work tho, I do actually need to teach instead of just pushing, incredible hey 🙃
 
smolmaus said:
The way Nancy has relayed that story there is wiggle room in it to think "assault for flicking a ruler?? Worlds gone mad!"

I suppose the equivalent is a rider being sanctioned for "use of the stick". Was it a tap on the shoulder? Was it a whack in the face? What people assume depends how you tell the story.
Click to expand...

I read the official report on the 'hit with a ruler' case. From the CCTV it was apparently impossible to tell for sure whether or not the teacher did make contact with the pupil's hand.
However, from the footage it was clear that his general behaviour was quite hostile/aggressive. And he did kick the chair. That's not acceptable conduct from any teacher.
I can see that the police caution for 'assault by beating' seems very far-fetched; it looks like the teacher lost his temper and may/may not have tapped a pupil's hand. It wasn't a premeditated act where a child got repeatedly beaten. But the fact that it was done out of temper doesn't lessen the risk of a repeat in the future.

And that's the main point: the indefinite ban, in itself, isn't a 'punishment' as such. It was issued because the panel decided there was a significant risk that the behaviour would be repeated.
The most effective way to prevent a repeat offence is to make sure he isn't in the classroom again.
Suppose they'd let him continue in his job and he'd done something similar, but this time caused actual physical harm? The panel won't take the risk.

In contrast, the suspension in the CDJ case, in itself, was considered to be a punishment. You've done something wrong, you lose some income for a period of time. But you can come back and do the same job. The risk of a repeat offence doesn't seem to be considered.

pistolpete said:
For me it’s not about the whip per se. It’s the intention. CJD made her intention super clear. Commenting the whip wasn’t hard enough!
Click to expand...
Acting aggressively because of temper loss isn't acceptable. In this case, the actions appear to have been (to at least some extent) part of the training - as mentioned here, there was a clear intention to cause pain. I think that's actually worse.

To continue with the analogy, punishing children by hitting them was perfectly legal until the 1980s. I remember the day that staff were told that the law had changed and they mustn't do it any more. One teacher - possibly through force of habit - hit a child about a month after the law changed and was immediately dismissed.

Perceptions on what is and isn't acceptable changed.
Personally, I'd like to see that happen in the equestrian world.
 
Going back to the CDJ issue, what I find most depressing is the attitude of people posting things like, ‘hurray, you are back, you go girl’. As if it was completely unfair that she got the ban and what she did was Ok.

I understand that she’s entitled to be back as the ban was lifted, and sadly there’s nothing we can do about that.

But the attitude in many of the comments makes me want to weep, and is this a world I want to be associated with? Even though I know my own are treated with kindness, I represent an industry that I’m started to really detest.

And also, what a waste, she could have made this into a learning opportunity for her to change and actually do some good. But no.

Just so depressing.
 
Jellymoon said:
Going back to the CDJ issue, what I find most depressing is the attitude of people posting things like, ‘hurray, you are back, you go girl’. As if it was completely unfair that she got the ban and what she did was Ok.
Click to expand...

I'm getting to the stage where I can't understand this attitude.

CDJ had years of incredible success. She was at the top of the game for so, so long - nothing and no-one can change that. I've already admitted that I was a big fan, but that was partly because of everything she stood for. I remember seeing a video of Valegro and another horse being hacked out from Carl Hester's yard and thinking it was all just wonderful.

i can understand why she would want to re-write history and pretend that the nasty stuff never happened. But a lot of us will never be able to see past the shadow that has been cast.
I felt absolutely sick at some of the excuses that people were making for her at the time of the ban. I've tried to empathise, but I just can't understand why anyone who loves horses would try to justify abuse. And now we have people acting as if she was unfairly treated and isn't it wonderful that she's back!
Only recently someone I know was trying to point out to me that horses are really nasty and violent towards each other at times, therefore this makes it OK for humans to hit them and cause pain.
To me, there are literally no excuses. I just don't get it.
 
ester said:
I think it maybe hasn’t helped that there doesn’t seem to have been much talk of her changing/improving her methods/learning going forwards, I guess perhaps because she will say it was only that one time
Click to expand...
Totally agree. If she said something along the lines of, I'm appalled at what I did, I'm committed to do better, I've donated x amount to a welfare charity, I invite anyone to video me at any time, I'm donating 20% of all my future teaching earnings to Brooke by way of apologising to them, I'm working with x trainer who works his horses only with empathy etc etc, then she would stand a chance of winning back over the supporters she's lost.
But no, she comes back out, silently, looking exactly the same, with a very tense horse and absolutely no remorse or regret shown.
Plus, all the people I know on FB who spout bulls%£t like, welcome back queen, are equally appalling to me.
 
PoppyAnderson said:
Totally agree. If she said something along the lines of, I'm appalled at what I did, I'm committed to do better, I've donated x amount to a welfare charity, I invite anyone to video me at any time, I'm donating 20% of all my future teaching earnings to Brooke by way of apologising to them, I'm working with x trainer who works his horses only with empathy etc etc, then she would stand a chance of winning back over the supporters she's lost.
But no, she comes back out, silently, looking exactly the same, with a very tense horse and absolutely no remorse or regret shown.
Plus, all the people I know on FB who spout bulls%£t like, welcome back queen, are equally appalling to me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, for the right propaganda merchant this could have been the campaign of a lifetime. Like, she did express regret at the time but to not follow it up with "and now here is how I do it better" makes you wonder if she can't do better, doesn't think she should have to, or ?????? Its weird.
 
Dave's Mam said:
After walloping the horse in the video, she said "This one's shit for hitting them with".
She obviously has a better whip, done it before, hit harder, got better response (for her). This is not a "mistake". It's planned abuse of the horse. Pre meditated. I can't forgive her.
She told us she was on the horses' side. She wasn't.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel. Incredibly let down by someone who lied about their stance on horses and who took us all in. I regret every penny I have sent her way. I cannot stomach watching her anymore.

She has had a year to do something, anything, to show us that she has changed. That actually the horse does matter to her. She did nothing.

Of course she is going to go back to competing, it's what she knows & can make money from and there are enough owners who see horses as vehicles to that end too. The system has again let horses down.
 
Last edited:
The H&CTV post showing her in action just popped up on my feed, and so many congrats and "don't let them get you down"...we are still poles apart. But I still say, to those who feel what she did is utterly disgusting, there is plenty more of it out there, I have no doubt, and until we have a judging and other systems out there that reward truly horse centric training, and acknowledge the tricky balance with trying to also compete (perhaps a limit to travel, number of competitions a year, I dunno), this is not going to end. Especially when a huge section of their peers and fans STILL cannot see that what she did wasn't just a teeny slip up.
 
smolmaus said:
Yeah, for the right propaganda merchant this could have been the campaign of a lifetime. Like, she did express regret at the time but to not follow it up with "and now here is how I do it better" makes you wonder if she can't do better, doesn't think she should have to, or ?????? Its weird.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s very weird.

I also think perhaps it would be good if other pros, esp someone like Carl Hester for eg, could have actually spoken up a bit more - maybe done a series on how you can train horses to do GP ethically?

It’s like the professionals have closed ranks around her. Why? What are they all hiding?

I just cannot trust any of them now, and
now we have to support them all at the Olympics.
 
Thing is, there seem to be plenty of people who honestly don't see anything wrong with what she did.
That's the bit I can't understand.

So presumably they'd be equally tolerant of other riders/trainers behaving in the same way?

I'm sure that some journalists would have put a bit of pressure on Carl Hester, but he clearly has his reasons (and they *might* be good reasons) for keeping pretty quiet about the whole thing.
 
I do know another dressage rider (casual acquaintance) that doesn't really see anything wrong with what CDJ did. However, in the case of this individual, they are easily starstruck and will implement certain methods or use certain equipment with their own horse if a "big name" or "upper level rider" does it. Big names can't possibly be wrong.

Which reminds me that we shouldn't be too blinded by the success of others. I'm not saying be disrespectful, but I think we should have our eyes open.

It also depends on personal beliefs and where you stand. Do I respect those that ride at a higher level than I do? Not by default due to their level, and a lot of people think I'm wrong for that.

Maybe I am, but I don't care.

There are many a rider/pro that I admire, so I'm not just out to be a hater, but maybe I'm just jaded, I dunno.
 
CanteringCarrot said:
I do know another dressage rider (casual acquaintance) that doesn't really see anything wrong with what CDJ did. However, in the case of this individual, they are easily starstruck and will implement certain methods or use certain equipment with their own horse if a "big name" or "upper level rider" does it. Big names can't possibly be wrong.

Which reminds me that we shouldn't be too blinded by the success of others. I'm not saying be disrespectful, but I think we should have our eyes open.

It also depends on personal beliefs and where you stand. Do I respect those that ride at a higher level than I do? Not by default due to their level, and a lot of people think I'm wrong for that.

Maybe I am, but I don't care.

There are many a rider/pro that I admire, so I'm not just out to be a hater, but maybe I'm just jaded, I dunno.
Click to expand...
Out if interest did they elaborate? On what they thought CDJ was going ro achieve with that 'technique'? Genuinely very curious
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top