Sarah Moulds

Birker2020

Birker2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 October 2008
Messages
23,595
Visit site
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/ex-teacher-accused-kicking-horse-7668036
The primary school teacher who was alleged to have kicked/punched her horse has had her trial delayed so a report could be prepared by a second prosecution expert.

I don't condone her hitting the horse in the way she did especially given her job title, but it must feel like its going on for ever for her and it must be upsetting having to hang around until next August for a decision.
 
I presume it’s indicative of all court/trial delays in general if they have to find a new date (and her defence didn’t object)
 
Soap On A Rope said:
Its her own fault for pleading not guilty....
it would have been over by now
Click to expand...
But she already had a delay due to that. This delay is for a second prosecution report, nothing to do with her defence. How can that take a year, and why was it nor ready for this time, now, that was set aside for her trial?
 
Soap On A Rope said:
Its her own fault for pleading not guilty....
it would have been over by now
Click to expand...
She clearly was guilty. I really hate to see animals treated like that. If she can not control her temper she needs to learn how to. If she has no respect for animals I really doubt she has any for the children in her care.
 
Sandstone1 said:
She clearly was guilty. I really hate to see animals treated like that. If she can not control her temper she needs to learn how to. If she has no respect for animals I really doubt she has any for the children in her care.
Click to expand...
deleted
 
Last edited:
I believe that it is fair to comment on the delay to the trial, but just a heads up to those who appear to have forgotten that admin closed or deleted (can't remember which) the lengthy thread that ran on this incident when it was first aired. Admin warned that anyone who tries to revive the debate on HHO risks a ban.
 
Tiddlypom said:
I believe that it is fair to comment on the delay to the trial, but just a heads up to those who appear to have forgotten that admin closed or deleted (can't remember which) the lengthy thread that ran on this incident when it was first aired. Admin warned that anyone who tries to revive the debate on HHO risks a ban.
Click to expand...
Did they? Ok fair enough then.
 
Tiddlypom said:
I agree that it is inhumane, but her defence didn't even put in any objections to the delay? So it was waved through.
Click to expand...

I don't think they get an option to object, if that's the first available date, it's the first available date. ETA it also says that they "might" get their own expert report. I would have thought that was a given!

We shut the courts for the Covid lockdowns, delay like this is the result.
 
From the newspaper report linked to above:-

However Gordon Holt, prosecuting for the RSPCA, today asked for the trial date to be vacated so a report could be prepared by a second prosecution expert. Stephen Welford, defending Ms Moulds, said there was no objection to the application and told the court they would be considering instructing their own defence expert.

So both the prosecution and the defence are being very leisurely about getting their tame experts together.
 
I still find it annoying that a law on the statute books is not being prosecuted by the CPS but instead by a charity.

Most people donating to the RSPCA do so in response to their animal cruelty based adverts on TV and in the press and do so to help animals. They don't expect their money to be used to make lawyers richer and pay the doubtless large fees required by 'independent experts'. Nor do they expect their donations to be used in a political manner.

Whilst I agree that the delay is not nice for the defendant, it is a symptom of the state of the court system, not helped at all by the recent long running strike by barristers.

Justice should be swift and sure for all cases before the courts and I wonder at many trials that take place a long time after the event, how good the memories are of witnesses. I make no comment on the rights and wrongs of this case, which has already been extensively 'prosecuted' in social media as is too often the case these days.
 
I think what she did was awful, but doubt the horse was bruised. Other than lifting his head, I didn't see the horse desperately trying to get away either.

"Giving evidence, Dr Suzanne Green, an equine veterinary surgeon who analysed the footage frame-by-frame in court, said Bruce "was desperately trying to get away" from Ms Moulds' blows and would have been left bruised."

I think she should be prosecuted for the treatment of the pony, it was unacceptable, but feel the vet's report was sensationalised.
 
She needs the judge that gave that despicable van driver (that left scene of accident, burnt his van, lied to police, caused the death of the horse and serious injury to the rider) a suspended sentence with no points on license and no fine. The judge made the statement that 'we're all entitled to one mistake'.

If we're all entitled to one mistake she shouldn't be sentenced to jail time - if cases are to be judged consistently - which of course they never seem to be.

If she is given a worse sentence than that van driver I would hope she wins an appeal. I do believe though that it was her choice to go to crown court trial and not magistrates court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top