Sarah Moulds

[Burnttoast]

I don't comment much in this section, but it has struck me that in attaining a successful outcome for this one individual in this one case, the defence team has thrown sports and leisure equestrianism under the bus.
Super job

The comments (and indeed the up-/down-votes) under the DM article are certainly instructive in this regard. The following "I don't understand. Just because the horse is well cared for doesn't mean the 15 second act of kicking and punching wasn't cruel. What if someone did this to a human and the human survived? Would the perpetrator be found not guilty?" received 419 up-votes and 22 down votes. The general public thinks punching horses is cruel, who'd'v thunk it.

 

[CorvusCorax]

To be fair to the defence team, their job and responsibility was to their client and only to her. Any "incidental" influence is really not their concern

Yeah, I know, I've spent a lot of time in courts, I mean that strand of the defence where they basically said 'sure everyone is doing it'.
It will probably come back to bite a lot of people who have never raised their voice to a horse.

 

[fetlock]

Had this one not plead guilty I wonder what the jury would have done in this instance.

Man, 25, caught having sex with a COW after farmers installed alarms

Liam Brown, 25, (pictured) sneaked onto a farm in Burton, near Christchurch, Dorset, in the dead of night to commit the vile act.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[shanti]

There’s a difference in law between “livestock” and “pets”. Leisure horses fall somewhere in between but usually end up on the pet side of the law as a “possession”.

The RSPCA should have taken her to court because it was a blatant act of animal cruelty and that is literally their job. They have set funds earmarked specifically for legal cases.

My point is that as a society people are somewhat desensitized to animal cruelty due to the way we use animals for gain, rarely considering the impact on the individual animal, be that a cow a horse or a rabbit. From that perspective, unless the jury completely consisted of Vegans/activists the verdict was never going to be unanimously guilty. If the case was as simple as ''did this person hit and kick an animal'' the verdict would obviously have been yes, she is guilty of hitting and kicking a horse, there is a video of her doing it. However, the decision was ultimately left up to a group of people who based their verdict on their own 'line in the sand' and what THEY feel constitutes abuse to an animal. All it needed is for just one of those people to be an avid race punter who knows nothing about horses or an animal hater (they do exist) for them to lose the case.

I agree that they should have taken her to court, and it is what they are there for and in a perfect system they should have won, however, they were never going to win in the current system.

 

[Red-1]

I don't comment much in this section, but it has struck me that in attaining a successful outcome for this one individual in this one case, the defence team has thrown sports and leisure equestrianism under the bus.
Super job

And I would say that the prosecution has thrown equine sports under the bus by not proving that this behaviour is not training, is not commonplace, and each blow was not reasonable, proportionate and necessary as per my previous reply.

I think it would be very easy. The Police have right to punch, kick, hit with a big stick, gas or shoot a man/woman/dog. But, for that to be legal, every single strike, kick etc has to be reasonable, proportionate and necessary. It is to gain compliance to keep everyone safe. It is never legal to meter out punishment.

Years ago a 'double strike' technique was taught. That was deemed in court to be illegal as a tactic, as the body was programmed in to do 2 strikes, without a pause to see if the second was reasonable, proportionate and necessary to gain compliance and ensure safety. That technique was banned.

It is already in courts, already being judged.

I believe already, in sport such as BE/BS, a strike cannot be used as punishment. It can be to urge on, to keep straight... so as a back up for an aid. Racehorses are not hit as punishment either. It is to keep straight or urge forwards.

I believe the RSPCA chose the wrong expert witness, or at least that witness didn't do a proportionality test for each individual blow.

I gave evidence by form of statement to someone who had kicked and punched a horse. I used this line of approach. The perpetrator said she was training the horse (including all but kicking the hind leg of a horse clean from under it). Non horse people were blinded by the issue that they are large and potentially dangerous animals, who need training. When it was broken down to looking at each blow to see if it was reasonable, proportionate and necessary, the argument broke down and it was clearly temper and cruelty.

When blows are rained down on a horse, how can he stop the next blow from occurring, even if compliant (as the pony seemed to be)? If his behaviour modifying cannot prevent more blows, that is abuse straight up.

I believe the RSPCA should have taken this tack.

I have been accepted (and used) as an expert witness for court. I am sometimes stunned by the ineptitude of expert witnesses for the prosecution. Often, they may be expert at ponies etc, but not as law enforcers.

The framework is already there. It simply needed applying.

If new legislation were to be made, I believe it should follow that line.

 

[ycbm]

Had this one not plead guilty I wonder what the jury would have done in this instance.

Man, 25, caught having sex with a COW after farmers installed alarms

Liam Brown, 25, (pictured) sneaked onto a farm in Burton, near Christchurch, Dorset, in the dead of night to commit the vile act.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I don't understand why you are in any doubt. Its not relevant, because the charge is not abusing the animal, it's having sex with the animal. Guilty.
.

 

[palo1]

Yeah, I know, I've spent a lot of time in courts, I mean that strand of the defence where they basically said 'sure everyone is doing it'.
It will probably come back to bite a lot of people who have never raised their voice to a horse.

I think you may be right. But the reality is that for a great many people, animal abuse in the form of hitting/slapping/whipping/spurring inappropriately/rubbing dogs noses into urine/kicking/taunting/providing appalling/inappropriate living conditions;including keeping dogs in crates for hours upon hours and keeping grazing and foraging animals horribly confined in stables, sheds/sow housing, rabbit hutches, travelling animals for many hours, competing them beyond their abilities and putting them into totally alien environments without appropriate habituation, working animals when they are sick, lame etc etc is absolutely commonplace and totally accepted in our society; and is often justified as a form of 'training' or 'discipline' or for our own reasons of safety. We perhaps need to consider our cultural conventions around all those ideas... Sarah Moulds actions were deeply unpleasant but in the scheme of things, as they are in our culture, they are within, unfortunately, 'normal' parameters of abuse/animal management. I have called out similar behaviour at competitions and have been told that whilst stewards would address the matter, the likelihood was that the competitor in question, would continue to behave in exactly the same way regardless. Whilst many people on HHO feel able to make a judgement and able to stand up for the pony in the original video, I suspect in reality that it is very difficult to take any moral high ground when you consider our everyday tolerance of animal abuse. Chuntering away on a forum probably won't change much. As an aside but as part of the wider discussion, I am really, really surprised by the toleration of individual turnout for horses; in some countries that is outlawed but lots of other countries do things differently to us in a number of ways.

 

[ycbm]

The prosecution was certainly inept. They tried to claim that the pony was physically harmed, which was a) not provable b) almost certainly not true and c) could be countered by the defence showing pictures of horses routinely being whipped at public events.

Red has it, they should have argued proportionality. And, imo, effective animal training.

And CC is right, the whole failed prosecution has made all of us who go anywhere near horses out to be routine animal abusers.
.

 

[AmyMay]

Had this one not plead guilty I wonder what the jury would have done in this instance.

Man, 25, caught having sex with a COW after farmers installed alarms

Liam Brown, 25, (pictured) sneaked onto a farm in Burton, near Christchurch, Dorset, in the dead of night to commit the vile act.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Beastiality is illegal. He’d have been found guilty.

 

[Red-1]

The prosecution was certainly inept. They tried to claim that the pony was physically harmed, which was a) not provable b) almost certainly not true and c) could be countered by the defence showing pictures of horses routinely being whipped at public events.

Red has it, they should have argued proportionality. And, imo, effective animal training.

And CC is right, the whole failed prosecution has made all of us who go anywhere near horses out to be routine animal abusers.
.

And the fact that hitting as punishment is already banned by all of the organisations. It is already not part of mainstream equestrianism. Hitting is to keep a horse straight at times of danger or to reinforce an aid. I don't know of any organisation who allows hitting or kicking as retribution.

This would allow a punch if a horse trod on your toe and would not move as, once the horse moved, the request reinforcement would not need to be repeated.

If each and every blow were examined, she may get away with the first, as a means to control, but not subsequent blows, which were given without time to see if the horse had responded to the first and modified its behaviour. Those blows were abuse, because there was nothing the horse could have done to prevent them.

It is not the blows/kick itself that was the abuse, it was the way it was applied and the reasoning behind it. No way could they have won with the repeated punches with no time for the pony to respond. For, how was the pony supposed to prevent the second/third blow? It could not, so it was abuse.

FWIW, I think no punishment was due anyway, as the pony was dropped by the handler (who should have been supervised IMO) and went straight to other horses, allowing itself to be caught and was not rebelling in any way when caught. However, the first blow would be harder to be proved as unjustified as were not in Moulds' shoes at the time. The subsequent, repeated, ones would have been sufficient, IMO.

I can't understand why the rules regarding correction to horses in all affiliated sports, including racing, were not submitted in evidence to show that raining blows down without a chance for modification is not acceptable or normal practice. The prosecution seems to have accepted that at face value. Although, I have not read the full transcript.

I believe a chance to improve horse welfare has been missed by barking up the wrong tree and presuming the impact of the video will sway a jury. I wonder who advised the RSPCA? You would have thought they would get good advice for such a high profile, important case.

 

[conniegirl]

I feel that anyone who chooses to keep a herd animal in an enclosure, on its own, chooses to compromise the animals welfare. If a zoo, or a circus were to keep a herd animal alone people would be up in arms, quite rightly. If people can't meet the five "freedoms " should they be keeping the animal?

Ah wonderful, are you going to provide the sacrificial horses for mine to kill?
He’s already managed to almost kill one and badly injure many more.

 

[DabDab]

I think you may be right. But the reality is that for a great many people, animal abuse in the form of hitting/slapping/whipping/spurring inappropriately/rubbing dogs noses into urine/kicking/taunting/providing appalling/inappropriate living conditions;including keeping dogs in crates for hours upon hours and keeping grazing and foraging animals horribly confined in stables, sheds/sow housing, rabbit hutches, travelling animals for many hours, competing them beyond their abilities and putting them into totally alien environments without appropriate habituation, working animals when they are sick, lame etc etc is absolutely commonplace and totally accepted in our society; and is often justified as a form of 'training' or 'discipline' or for our own reasons of safety. We perhaps need to consider our cultural conventions around all those ideas... Sarah Moulds actions were deeply unpleasant but in the scheme of things, as they are in our culture, they are within, unfortunately, 'normal' parameters of abuse/animal management. I have called out similar behaviour at competitions and have been told that whilst stewards would address the matter, the likelihood was that the competitor in question, would continue to behave in exactly the same way regardless. Whilst many people on HHO feel able to make a judgement and able to stand up for the pony in the original video, I suspect in reality that it is very difficult to take any moral high ground when you consider our everyday tolerance of animal abuse. Chuntering away on a forum probably won't change much. As an aside but as part of the wider discussion, I am really, really surprised by the toleration of individual turnout for horses; in some countries that is outlawed but lots of other countries do things differently to us in a number of ways.

Yep 100%.
I would love to believe that SM did what she did purely in the heat of the moment as a one off moment of madness that she instantly knew was too far. Or alternatively that she is a mad animal-abusing psychopath who acted in a way that is vanishingly rare and unusual. But truthfully I don't believe either of those things. I think she is a poor horsewoman, who lost her temper, and acted in a way that is rarely called out and not so long ago was somewhat normal within patches of the equestrian community. I doubt, even now, SM has really processed and understood what she did wrong

 

[Clodagh]

@DabDab I’d put money on her thinking her response was completely justified and is outraged at anyone thinking it wasn’t.

And not DabDab can we please not revert to individual turnout, even me who is not a fan cannot really see its relevance to punching a horse.

 

[ycbm]

Yep 100%.
I would love to believe that SM did what she did purely in the heat of the moment as a one off moment of madness that she instantly knew was too far. Or alternatively that she is a mad animal-abusing psychopath who acted in a way that is vanishingly rare and unusual. But truthfully I don't believe either of those things. I think she is a poor horsewoman, who lost her temper, and acted in a way that is rarely called out and not so long ago was somewhat normal within patches of the equestrian community. I doubt, even now, SM has really processed and understood what she did wrong

Following her self pitying video, I think this is true. That behaviour was entirely normal in the circles where I was taught and first liveried in the 70s and 80s. I'm sure it's still normal in some hunting, and other, circles now, and indeed when this was first written about a forum member who hunts said "well the pony loaded, didn't it? ", as if the treatment had caused it to load.

I've changed my own methods hugely over the years and it's galling to see her defence of "we all do it" succeed.
.

 

[DabDab]

Following her self pitying video, I think this is true. That behaviour was entirely normal in the circles where I was taught and first liveried in the 70s and 80s. I'm sure it's still normal in some hunting, and other, circles now, and indeed when this was first written about a forum member who hunts said "well the pony loaded, didn't it? ", as if the treatment had caused it to load.

I've changed my own methods hugely over the years and it's galling to see her defence of "we all do it" succeed.
.

Me too, not that I've ever punched a horse, and certainly not on the head, but the yard environments I remember from 20 years ago it wouldn't be considered outlandish behaviour.

And even though yes, I take the point that physical contact with a horse for the purposes of 'punishment' is against the rules of all competitive sports AFAIK, people still don't often get significantly punished for it, let alone prosecuted. Earlier this year I was in xc control at an event and a fence judge came on the radio to say they thought one rider was a bit too ready with the whip. Other fence judges were asked to watch out but no other unfavourable reports came back. The rider was in fact a pro who was running a few horses that day and in a later class on a different horse (his last run of the day) and a fence judge came with some urgency over the radio saying he had used his whip inappropriately. The H&S steward on the course then came over the radio, incandescent with rage, saying she had seen it too and he needed pulling off the course immediately, which he duly was. H&S lady then came into the control box and described the rider's actions, and they were blatant and as bad in my book as SM in this video. The event Steward went to have a word with the rider but AFAIK that was as far as it went, because the road to stronger actions against that kind of behaviour is not easy or well understood. And I do think that this is an area where the equestrian community can improve to ensure there really is a culture of calling out and properly reprimanding the odd individual that still thinks it is acceptable to behave like this.

 

[Red-1]

.... H&S lady then came into the control box and described the rider's actions, and they were blatant and as bad in my book as SM in this video. The event Steward went to have a word with the rider but AFAIK that was as far as it went, because the road to stronger actions against that kind of behaviour is not easy or well understood. And I do think that this is an area where the equestrian community can improve to ensure there really is a culture of calling out and properly reprimanding the odd individual that still thinks it is acceptable to behave like this.

And this is why it was such a wasted opportunity. There was clear video evidence and witnesses. A precedent could have been set by courts if robustly prosecuted.

I think the BHS should take this by the horns now and issue clear guidance about use of force on a horse. It would not be enforceable per se, but would be a nudge towards future prosecutions. I believe the BHS's own Alan Hiscox would be the ideal person to drive this forward as he is well aware of the law regarding use of force on humans and could translate it over in a meaningful way.

Some damage limitation needs to be done for the equestrian community as the law was made to be an a$$, in this particular prosecution, I believe.

 

[fetlock]

I don't understand why you are in any doubt. Its not relevant, because the charge is not abusing the animal, it's having sex with the animal. Guilty.
.

That was one charge, yes.

The other charge was causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal - which actually carries the higher maximum sentence. He pled guilty to both.

 

[fetlock]

And the fact that hitting as punishment is already banned by all of the organisations. It is already not part of mainstream equestrianism. Hitting is to keep a horse straight at times of danger or to reinforce an aid. I don't know of any organisation who allows hitting or kicking as retribution.

This would allow a punch if a horse trod on your toe and would not move as, once the horse moved, the request reinforcement would not need to be repeated.

If each and every blow were examined, she may get away with the first, as a means to control, but not subsequent blows, which were given without time to see if the horse had responded to the first and modified its behaviour. Those blows were abuse, because there was nothing the horse could have done to prevent them.

It is not the blows/kick itself that was the abuse, it was the way it was applied and the reasoning behind it. No way could they have won with the repeated punches with no time for the pony to respond. For, how was the pony supposed to prevent the second/third blow? It could not, so it was abuse.

FWIW, I think no punishment was due anyway, as the pony was dropped by the handler (who should have been supervised IMO) and went straight to other horses, allowing itself to be caught and was not rebelling in any way when caught. However, the first blow would be harder to be proved as unjustified as were not in Moulds' shoes at the time. The subsequent, repeated, ones would have been sufficient, IMO.

I can't understand why the rules regarding correction to horses in all affiliated sports, including racing, were not submitted in evidence to show that raining blows down without a chance for modification is not acceptable or normal practice. The prosecution seems to have accepted that at face value. Although, I have not read the full transcript.

I believe a chance to improve horse welfare has been missed by barking up the wrong tree and presuming the impact of the video will sway a jury. I wonder who advised the RSPCA? You would have thought they would get good advice for such a high profile, important case.

Re the last sentence, I doubt they expected a not guilty plea, (especially with the ‘slam dunk footage) as most would just accept their lot and plead guilty to it (which a quick Google appears to support). So it wasn’t the low hanging fruit they probably expected it to be.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

Re the last sentence, I doubt they expected a not guilty plea, (especially with the ‘slam dunk footage) as most would just accept their lot and plead guilty to it (which a quick Google appears to support). So it wasn’t the low hanging fruit they probably expected it to be.

Didn't SM choose a jury trial? The RSPCA must have instructed a barrister knowing that she would plead NG.

 

[fetlock]

Didn't SM choose a jury trial? The RSPCA must have instructed a barrister knowing that she would plead NG.

She did but only when appearing first at magistrates court, where she then pled not guilty and elected for jury trial, so the case was referred to Crown court.

Had she gone guilty at magistrates court there it would have ended, with no barristers needed.

 

[TPO]

I'd say the behaviour displayed by SM has sadly been engrained in certain horse owning fraternities. I mean, on the original SM thread a poster wrote about hitting their horse on the head multiple times (their own words) as if they was OK and justifiable.

We see it regularly on here how people believe their own lies and attempt to deny what's still on the forum in black and white. Perfectly believable that SM is cut from the same cloth and happy to believe her own lies and attempt to gaslight anyone who disagrees.

There are a lot of poor, poor animals caught up in it. As I've said before there should be some sort of testing before anyone can own any animal. Part of that should be providing it with species specific care and enviroment; not alone in postage stamps. Another part could maybe be not punching, kicking, slapping and beating animals

 

[Birker2020]

I'd say the behaviour displayed by SM has sadly been engrained in certain horse owning fraternities. I mean, on the original SM thread a poster wrote about hitting their horse on the head multiple times (their own words) as if they was OK and justifiable.

No they did not, this is not correct as you will see from the posts below. I tapped him on the nose, not hit him over the head 100's of times so please stop misquoting me like PAS did because that is disingenuous and deceitful. I said I was going to walk away from this post and I still intend to but I will not have me lied about in this way to make me look like a bad and cruel person because that is not who I am. Thank goodness the majority of people on the forum are clever enough and decent enough to realise that I am being baited and aren't stupid enough to believe what has been said about me. You are just trying to get a reaction. Sad.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

She did but only when appearing first at magistrates court, where she then pled not guilty and elected for jury trial, so the case was referred to Crown court.

Had she gone guilty at magistrates court there it would have ended, with no barristers needed.

But there was plenty of time for RSPCA to get all their ducks in a row, with a barrister instructed with an effective argument. They didn't take the opportunity.

 

[fetlock]

But there was plenty of time for RSPCA to get all their ducks in a row, with a barrister instructed with an effective argument. They didn't take the opportunity.

Not sure what you mean.

 

[Arzada]

Until you posted #352 Birker2020 I had no idea who TPO was talking about and for all I know it may not be you that TPO is talking about. If you think this is bait then don't take it.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

Not sure what you mean.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. RSPCA may have been expecting SM to plead guilty in Mags' court but as soon as she pled NG and opted for a jury trial, they could have instructed a barrister with a more effective argument than the one they did offer. Did they just shrug their shoulders and say 'well we didn't expect that?'

 

[Birker2020]

Until you posted Birker2020 I had no idea who TPO was talking about and for all I know it may not be you that TPO is talking about. If you think this is bait then don't take it.

Are you serious?? Of course it was me!!
I have just looked at the post and its quite clear to see hence why I screen shot the replies.

 

[Burnttoast]

Are you serious?? Of course it was me!!
I have just looked at the post and its quite clear to see hence why I screen shot the replies.

I didn't know either, not having followed these threads with much attention, but now I do and in what world is an animal's nose not part of its head?

 

[Arzada]

Are you serious?? Of course it was me!!
I have just looked at the post and its quite clear to see hence why I screen shot the replies.

Yes I'm serious. How else would I know if you hadn't responded to TPO and included screenshots from 2022 which is way too far back for me to recall.

 

[TPO]

No they did not, this is not correct as you will see from the posts below. I tapped him on the nose, not hit him over the head 100's of times so please stop misquoting me like PAS did because that is disingenuous and deceitful. I said I was going to walk away from this post and I still intend to but I will not have me lied about in this way to make me look like a bad and cruel person because that is not who I am. Thank goodness the majority of people on the forum are clever enough and decent enough to realise that I am being baited and aren't stupid enough to believe what has been said about me. You are just trying to get a reaction. Sad.







View attachment 121797



View attachment 121799







You're a liar. It's there in black and white.

The sacked horse hitting ex teacher is going to court

I think the title sums it up... The RSPCA are taking her to court. https://www.stamfordmercury.co.uk/news/woman-to-appear-in-court-after-kicking-and-hitting-horse-9236757/

forums.horseandhound.co.uk

We can all do screenshots, except mine prove what I say and aren't trying to gaslight anyone.















It was also you who posted on the photo thread about your partner hitting his old dog because it had damaged carpet after being DISTRESSED because it had been shut/trapped in a room. You think you can be here spouting about animal welfare and they come first?! Jog on.