eahotson
Well-Known Member
Wish there was a love button.I don't condone what this woman did and how she acted, but as far as "abuse" goes, I would think there are bigger fish to fry.
Wish there was a love button.I don't condone what this woman did and how she acted, but as far as "abuse" goes, I would think there are bigger fish to fry.
Problem is, i just don't think people WILL feel empowered. Depressing as it is, i don't think one person can make much difference in most situations. It's hard to work out how to say what i mean without coming across like a person with a massive superiority complex, which i am not, i teeter on the "we shouldn't have horses" rabbit hole edge pretty often. but there are a lot of people out there riding and handling horses with pretty minimal horsemanship/skill, who would give you a gobful if you commented on it. In fairness it's also easy to make a wrong judgement of something you happen upon the wrong moment and it is not always helpful to go wading in telling people they are Doing It All Wrong (what makes the onlooker *right* anyway?)To me I don't know if "it was only..." excuses the behaviour or if this, possibly OTT, action is required to try and stamp out the "low level" violence towards horses.
Perhaps this womans case will make others who are a bit handsy think twice or learn to control their tempers? Perhaps the sacking and court case will empower others to speak up when they see similar instead of being worn down to accept that this is what happens sometimes.
We could start ,of course,with the violence routinely dealt out in competition rings up and down the country.Mostly it's ignored.The worst thing otherwise is a fine and suspension.No criminal charge,no loss of job or vilification on social media.What I find to be the saddest part of this is that all/nearly all of us can say that we have witnessed the same types of behaviours, if not worse.
Isn't it upsetting that this type of behaviour towards horses is verging on the "norm" and that there are people so willing to dismiss it because "people lose their tempers"?
I don't know where I stand exactly in regards to this person's behaviour. If she hadn't have done something "wrong" she wouldn't be in any bother. So whether what she did was a big wrong or a small wrong it's still a wrong?
She's probably also had that type of behaviour normalised. She has lost her job, is going to court and no doubt has had a very hard time of it since she took the action that she did.
To me I don't know if "it was only..." excuses the behaviour or if this, possibly OTT, action is required to try and stamp out the "low level" violence towards horses.
Perhaps this womans case will make others who are a bit handsy think twice or learn to control their tempers? Perhaps the sacking and court case will empower others to speak up when they see similar instead of being worn down to accept that this is what happens sometimes.
Honestly some of the replies in the various threads about this woman have been more distressing than what she did but that's the joy of the Internet I guess.
Dear God.
I've very much said my piece on this on the previous thread.
I just hope that the woman has good support.
But surely "it" has already been punished way beyond what is reasonable?I don't know.
I'm a teacher.
I'm not a bunny hugger, and have given the odd wallop on the chest for downright rudeness in the past.
I have no time for the RSPCA.
I can't stand Packham.
I detest the way social media seems to have a bigger influence than the law these days.
I suspect she shouldn't really have lost her job over it.
I believe there are many worse cases of abuse and cruelty that should be dealt with.
And yet, I still can't muster any sympathy for her. The way she went at that horse, who wasn't being rude or dangerous, and kicked and smacked him in the face. That's pure temper. You just don't hit horses in the face. That is clear abuse and there is an element of an example needing to be made.
The fact that it's not the worst case of abuse doesn't mean it should go unpunished.
The RSPCA are beyond a joke! At the very least they should have their charitable status removed.
They have zero interest in animal welfare, I'm quite sure the vast majority of those who donate to them would not be happy to see their money spent in this way.
The fact that it's not the worst case of abuse doesn't mean it should go unpunished
It's not beyond what is reasonable though. It is perfectly reasonable given the role the woman did as a teacher.But surely "it" has already been punished way beyond what is reasonable?
Reasonable would have been banned from the hunt and a warning from the police. The whole country baying for blood was not reasonable imo.It's not beyond what is reasonable though. It is perfectly reasonable given the role the woman did as a teacher.
Well your view of reasonable and just, is very different from mine. I prefer due process, rather than social media witch hunt.It's not beyond what is reasonable though. It is perfectly reasonable given the role the woman did as a teacher.
It's not beyond what is reasonable though. It is perfectly reasonable given the role the woman did as a teacher.
Do you work with children in your role as office secretary? No. Therefore there is nothing to safeguard.So if I did what the woman did to the horse, but I'm an office secretary (for example), my consequences should be different? Interesting to consider when it comes to animal abuse, that different professions are held to different standards.
I think you are wrong there. I expect most people who donate to RSPCA know nothing about horses and are anti hunting l. Many of their supporters may have seen that video and been horrified and the RSPCA could easily have been lobbied by their supporters to prosecute. They may even have high net worth supporters who have been willing to donate to fund the case.
The RSPCA has some very wealthy supporters including Deborah Meaden who has horses https://www.looktothestars.org/charity/rspca
I agree there are certainly situations which are much worse including dodgy dealers and professional riders but because they are not seen by the right person they probably get away with it.
This is probably strategic they have to been seen to be doing something if they didn't they may lose supporters and they may even gain supporters from this case such is the vitriol against hunting from the average person. Think of it as a fundraising investment. Yes the case will cost a lot of money but it will raise the profile of RSPCA, may attract new supporters and stop supporters from leaving they could actually end up being financially better off by taking this to court than by letting it go.
I doubt they will win. If they do win it will be a wake up call for the equestrian community as anyone who is able to film similar sort of behaviour would be able to send it to the RSPCA and expect them to investigate.
What we don't know is if this was a one off incident where the stress of the situation lead to unacceptable behaviour or if this woman regularly treats horses like this. If this is normal behaviour for this lady then it is a very different situation than if it is a one off.
That link does not match your summary, nomention of suspensionfromher job or that she was sacked. It simply says that she was 'let go' which can cover a multitude.
Not the issue here.Just a thought, what do people think about electric cattle prods, or electric collars for dogs, and how do they compare?