Hunting is in a spot of bother

[Fellewell]

Speaking as someone who is 65 in a couple of weeks time, I find this post utterly insulting to the point of being offensive.

Are you seriously suggesting women of my age should sit in an armchair all safe and cosy for the rest of our lives?!

No, just don't throw yourself in front of a moving horse and the internet is full of people just sitting around waiting to be offended IME

 

[Fellewell]

You know, just the other day I killed a 60 year old woman. Went to court and they said I didn't have to go to prison for it because I couldn't have known that her reflexes would be too slow to move away from my knife. It's all her fault really. At 60 years old, she should have known that she was too weak to be picking a fight with me.

You've missed the point completely

 

[ycbm]

No, just don't throw yourself in front of a moving horse and the internet is full of people just sitting around waiting to be offended IME

My point was I don't just sit around anywhere, in spite of being 5 years older than this woman.

What a pathetic excuse to make for a huntsman's act of criminal recklessness - his victim didn't move fast enough.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Fellewell does the antis work for them

You can't be for real.

 

[Millionwords]

That woman was in her 60s!
What on earth was she doing conducting guerrilla warfare in the countryside??
I'm sorry but age is indeed a big factor here. There are countless studies of the aging process showing that reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages.
She was very lucky not to have been seriously injured and should never have put herself in that position.
It's doubtful he would have been able to ascertain how old she was in that clothing let alone conduct a mobility assessment in that brief exchange. Clearly she was unable to move as quickly as she intended and it was a bloody big risk to take.
Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

Talk about victim blaming.

 

[Koweyka]

That woman was in her 60s!
What on earth was she doing conducting guerrilla warfare in the countryside??
I'm sorry but age is indeed a big factor here. There are countless studies of the aging process showing that reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages.
She was very lucky not to have been seriously injured and should never have put herself in that position.
It's doubtful he would have been able to ascertain how old she was in that clothing let alone conduct a mobility assessment in that brief exchange. Clearly she was unable to move as quickly as she intended and it was a bloody big risk to take.
Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

Wow just wow, so many many things wrong with this post.

 

[Miss_Millie]

That woman was in her 60s!
What on earth was she doing conducting guerrilla warfare in the countryside??
I'm sorry but age is indeed a big factor here. There are countless studies of the aging process showing that reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages.
She was very lucky not to have been seriously injured and should never have put herself in that position.
It's doubtful he would have been able to ascertain how old she was in that clothing let alone conduct a mobility assessment in that brief exchange. Clearly she was unable to move as quickly as she intended and it was a bloody big risk to take.
Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

I'm curious as to how old you are now, as in your posts you come across as having extremely outdated views...I always assumed that you were in your 80s or something

 

[SilverLinings]

I think that is the oddest argument I've read on here by anyone. Her age is completely irrelevant, and if you think that agility is at all relevant to the huntsman's decision then how could you know that say a 30 year old would be agile enough to move out of the way in time? At 30 I had just had surgery and was fairly crippled but would have looked perfectly 'normal' and healthy standing next to a gate- a 60 year old (or even a healthy 90 year old) would have been far more agile than me, and certainly could have moved quicker. Aside from the fact that you can't tell someone's exact age just by looking at them, some people look substantially older or younger than they are.

I can't say I've ever heard of a crime or accident where the age of the injured party has made them (or the perpetrator) more or less liable for what happened.

Can you imagine a world in which the older you get the more likely you are to be blamed for harm to yourself caused by others. Anyone over 60 better not attempt to cross a road again

 

[Quigleyandme]

That woman was in her 60s!
What on earth was she doing conducting guerrilla warfare in the countryside??
I'm sorry but age is indeed a big factor here. There are countless studies of the aging process showing that reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages.
She was very lucky not to have been seriously injured and should never have put herself in that position.
It's doubtful he would have been able to ascertain how old she was in that clothing let alone conduct a mobility assessment in that brief exchange. Clearly she was unable to move as quickly as she intended and it was a bloody big risk to take.
Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

I’m 65 in June, lean, hard and fit. Nor am I so feeble minded that I pay no attention to what is going on around me and mooch idly into the path of a horse. I think you need some urgent diversity training and to wake up to your judgmental, dismissive, patronising self.

 

[SilverLinings]

As an aside, I am in my 40s and aspire to be as independent-minded, active, engaged and enthusiastic as the posters on here aged 60+. Aside from life experience I don't ever consider someone's age on here or IRL to have any relevance to anything we talk about or what activities they choose to spend their time doing*. I have close friends aged 28-96yrs old and the 96yr old (and her husband when alive) taught me a lot about the folly of treating older people as somehow 'not like us' and making stereotypic assumptions about them/their lives.

You can't judge a book by it's cover has never been a more apt saying.

*obviously known mobility/disability issues that affect what we are doing/talking about are taken into consideration/catered for, but assumptions are avoided.

 

[stangs]

You've missed the point completely

I’m glad to hear it. After all, if your point was indeed that it was this woman’s fault that a man jumped his horse over her, because she was old/weak/inattentive/etc, that would have been utterly abhorrent.

What is your point then, beyond the causal ageism?

 

[AmyMay]

That woman was in her 60s!
What on earth was she doing conducting guerrilla warfare in the countryside??
I'm sorry but age is indeed a big factor here. There are countless studies of the aging process showing that reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages.
She was very lucky not to have been seriously injured and should never have put herself in that position.
It's doubtful he would have been able to ascertain how old she was in that clothing let alone conduct a mobility assessment in that brief exchange. Clearly she was unable to move as quickly as she intended and it was a bloody big risk to take.
Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

Victim blaming at its finest.

What a ridiculous post.

 

[Nancykitt]

I'm also in my 60s and find this sort of ageism absolutely laughable.

And if "reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages" - well, clearly no-one older than 60 should be riding, let alone engaging in a risky pastime such as hunting! And yet years ago I regularly rode out with men and women in their 70s who were much more capable than me.

I live in the Scottish Highlands and some of my neighbours are in their late 70s/early 80s and yet still walking 25+ miles and climbing the Munros.
I think I'd better tell them that they shouldn't be putting themselves at risk....
(Infact, last year a 85 year old man climbed all 282 Munros!)

Funnily enough, the government considers that I am still young enough to work full time as I'm not eligible for a state pension for 5 years yet! Perhaps I should tell them that I'm utterly wrecked and not even sure where my limbs are, they might let me retire early!

 

[YorksG]

It appears that ageism is the last ism which is not only acceptable, but positively embraced by some people. This type of thinking is often expressed on this forum, with no apparent understanding of how gratuitously insulting it is!

 

[Dave's Mam]

So basically anything to excuse the actions of jumping a gate into a person.
Charged emotions, Lawful (not) business, blatant entitlement, incapable old person not able to react quickly enough.....

 

[meleeka]

Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

He did glance back, yes, but we can’t see if the woman was on her feet or not. For all we know she was still on the floor.

 

[Sandstone1]

If age is going to be a factor you had better tell some members of the hunt.... A lot of them must be over 60 so going on your mindset they should certainly not be out hunting but sitting by the fire waiting to die.....
How rude and insulting. Most 60 year olds I know are far more active than 20 year olds who prefer to sit and look at their phones than do anything else.
What a prejudiced narrow minded and insulting mindset you must have!

 

[Tiddlypom]

He did glance back, yes, but we can’t see if the woman was on her feet or not. For all we know she was still on the floor.

The horse fell back to trot because it had nearly fallen, the huntsman barely glanced back at the sab and certainly not long enough to check how seriously injured she was.

As the hunt is no 1 priority traffic he then carried on taking hounds with him. He will most certainly have been aware that he had downed the sab.

 

[ycbm]

For balance on this thread, I don't believe the charge of "attempted grievous bodily harm" will stick. He clearly attempted to avoid the one on the gate and the other walked into his path. If it goes to court I think it will be ripped to shreds and he will be acquitted. If she was actually caused no injuries, it's also difficult to see what other charge could be laid (reckless riding under some ancient statute?). It's a very odd charge anyway, not one I've ever heard of. You either commit GBH or you don't. An attempt at GBH which "goes wrong" would be charged as Actual Bodily Harm if not enough injury was caused or manslaughter/murder if too much was. I don't think we will see this in court.
.

 

[Abacus]

For balance on this thread, I don't believe the charge of "attempted grievous bodily harm" will stick. He clearly attempted to avoid the one on the gate and the other walked into his path. If it goes to court I think it will be ripped to shreds and he will be acquitted. If she was actually caused no injuries, it's also difficult to see what other charge could be laid (reckless riding under some ancient statute?). It's a very odd charge anyway, not one I've ever heard of. You either commit GBH or you don't. An attempt at GBH which "goes wrong" would be charged as Actual Bodily Harm if not enough injury was caused or manslaughter/murder if too much was. I don't think we will see this in court.
.

I agree that the collision wasn’t deliberate (and hence with the rest of what you say). Wonder if there is any kind of employment law regarding putting people at risk. It’s clutching at straws a bit though.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Police are mulling it over potential charges, he's been released on bail rather than being allowed to walk away after questioning without the threat of charges hanging over his head. If it's anything like the E.Essex Hunt terrier man fox stabber case, it might be a very long while before he finds out whether he is to face court and if so, on what charges.

GBH never sounded right, though, but ABH?

 

[ycbm]

Word so far is that she is uninjured, though it wouldn't be surprising if she has some bruises or a ricked neck by now.
.

 

[littleshetland]

That woman was in her 60s!
What on earth was she doing conducting guerrilla warfare in the countryside??
I'm sorry but age is indeed a big factor here. There are countless studies of the aging process showing that reaction times are slower, coordination is poorer, muscles are weaker, joints/tendons less flexible. Even down to less awareness of where their limbs actually are which of course reduces ability to make rapid adjustments when balance is lost. Hence high risk of falls, breakages.
She was very lucky not to have been seriously injured and should never have put herself in that position.
It's doubtful he would have been able to ascertain how old she was in that clothing let alone conduct a mobility assessment in that brief exchange. Clearly she was unable to move as quickly as she intended and it was a bloody big risk to take.
Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

I stopped commenting on this thread quite a while back, but its good to see post that we can ALL agree on, is as ridiculous as it is insulting.

 

[cauda equina]

For balance on this thread, I don't believe the charge of "attempted grievous bodily harm" will stick. He clearly attempted to avoid the one on the gate and the other walked into his path. If it goes to court I think it will be ripped to shreds and he will be acquitted. If she was actually caused no injuries, it's also difficult to see what other charge could be laid (reckless riding under some ancient statute?). It's a very odd charge anyway, not one I've ever heard of. You either commit GBH or you don't. An attempt at GBH which "goes wrong" would be charged as Actual Bodily Harm if not enough injury was caused or manslaughter/murder if too much was. I don't think we will see this in court.
.

I wonder if wanton and furious riding was ever an offence

What is wanton and furious driving?
Causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving is an offence in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
It was created by section 35 of the Offences Against the Persons Act which dates from 1861.
It reads: "Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years ..."
The law is used to convict persons who cause bodily harm with a vehicle that is not motorised, like a bicycle, horse-drawn carriage or in a car that is not being driven on a public road.

 

[SilverLinings]

For balance on this thread, I don't believe the charge of "attempted grievous bodily harm" will stick. He clearly attempted to avoid the one on the gate and the other walked into his path. If it goes to court I think it will be ripped to shreds and he will be acquitted. If she was actually caused no injuries, it's also difficult to see what other charge could be laid (reckless riding under some ancient statute?). It's a very odd charge anyway, not one I've ever heard of. You either commit GBH or you don't. An attempt at GBH which "goes wrong" would be charged as Actual Bodily Harm if not enough injury was caused or manslaughter/murder if too much was. I don't think we will see this in court.
.

Furious riding is a crime still, there was a woman convicted a few years ago (2014); apologies for the source, I'm sure I read it in H&H at the time but didn't find a link in my quick search:

Woman admits 167-year-old offence of riding a horse FURIOUSLY through Surrey countryside

Elizabeth Millard, 65, was charged under rarely-used legislation from 1847 after the incident on Horsell Common in Woking

www.mirror.co.uk

It looks like the incident discussed on this thread might fall under this law as it relates to riding with disregard to the safety of others.

 

[Red-1]

Attempt GBH won't stick, IMO, although he was reckless as to potentially cause it. I suspect he will plead guilty to a lesser offence to stop it going to court.

When quoting offences upthread to show reckless would still be guilty, I only quoted common assault and AOABH, not thinking GBH was on the cards at all.

As to the whole age thing, I am nearer 60 than 50, ride out with a friend in her 70s who has just backed her latest horse and is quite capable and potentially will hunt again. I don't like what the sab was doing, with the trespassing, but actually applaud her in a way, for standing up for what she believes in. She didn't look overtly aggressive.

Like many, I suspect, I initially presumed the black clad person was, in fact, a man. I was aghast when I found it was a lady in her 60s. That is, I admit, a bit "ism-ish," but because a 60 year old woman is likely more vulnerable to injury than a young male I think it is relevant. I think it is real on a practical basis, as, with menopause, we older female people are more prone to breaking bones. Not that I think she should stop doing whatever she wants, (trespassing aside LOL).

As an aside, I do think gender and age could have an impact legally in an abstract way. When using force on someone, for instance, you have to consider impact factors. One of these is weather you believe the person you wish to use force on is likely stronger than you or not, as this is, in law, seen to impact your feeling of vulnerability. It is only abstract as, in this case, he could simply have walked away.

If the rider believed the foot people knew what he was about to do, as he spoke to them, I think it fair to assume he also knew one of them was a woman in her 60s and more likely to sustain injury if struck. This, IMO, increases his recklessness.

 

[cauda equina]

Well, I don't know; sabs make a point of appearing anonymous and unidentifiable, with the 'uniform' of black clothing and sometimes masks too

 

[Red-1]

Well, I don't know; sabs make a point of appearing anonymous and unidentifiable, with the 'uniform' of black clothing and sometimes masks too

I agree, but if he is going to try to use the defence of having spoken to them to inform them of his intentions as some form of mitigation, I think he would be hard pressed if he didn't even know it was a woman in her 60s. it is just further evidence of recklessness that he didn't truly engage with the sabs standing so close to where he planned to jump.

 

[sakura]

Also, in the footage I saw he had slowed to a trot and did indeed look back to check she was on her feet.

So if I hit someone with my car, it's okay if I don't stop or report is as long as 1. they're over 60 and 2. I slow down and look back?

Just trying to keep up with your logic

 

[Gallop_Away]

Attempt GBH won't stick, IMO, although he was reckless as to potentially cause it. I suspect he will plead guilty to a lesser offence to stop it going to court.

This! I don't think it will go very far but I think what this comes down to is the message that you can not show such blatant disregard for the safety of others and not face some sort of repercussion.