The sacked horse hitting ex teacher is going to court

Status
Not open for further replies.

mariew

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 February 2009
Messages
512
Just a thought, what do people think about electric cattle prods, or electric collars for dogs, and how do they compare?
Cattle prods, not sure as cows are big and can be pretty dangerous and possibly a necessity for emergencies. Not too far off electric fencing?

I didn't even know electric collars were legal, they shouldn't be. Together with those that have spikes towards the neck.

But as birker said, not really that relevant to the original issue
 

stangs

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 September 2021
Messages
1,480
Just a thought, what do people think about electric cattle prods, or electric collars for dogs, and how do they compare?
Don't know much about cattle management so can't comment, but an electric prod doesn't sound like a tool I'd want to use if anything better was available.

Despise electric collars and think there's no place for them in 99.9% of cases where they're used. I'd say they're about the same as what this woman did (depending on the voltage), but you can't really compare them given different animals, different parts of the body, and different contexts.
 

TPO

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 November 2008
Messages
8,290
Location
A ray of sunshine 🌞
I think the difference is that this person set about her horse for her own reasons/temper and cattle prods/e-collars etc are totally different things.

Re cattle prods and e-collars; each has their place in EXPERIENCED hands. Neither do anything of their own accord ots the human element that makes them dangerous.

It's the good old "blue pipe" I've experienced being used when working cattle as its more about getting into their space/bubble safely to get them to move away from "pressure". I've used a prod on beasts who plant in the race and are causing difficult situations so need to be moved when shouting/jumping/blue pipe isn't doing the job or when a beast has locked onto a person who won't make it out the way in time.

I've never used an e-collar but in the right hands I'd imagine that they could be a useful, if extreme/last chance, training aid in certain situations. I don't like that they are available wily nily to any Joe Bloggs.

Of course as with all things they have the potential to cause serious harm but as this ex teacher has shown you don't need anything if you want to set about an animal yo cause it harm or distress.

I do think it's a separate discussion from this one though.
 

Birker2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 January 2021
Messages
4,367
Reasonable would have been banned from the hunt and a warning from the police. The whole country baying for blood was not reasonable imo.
But the decision wasn't made by the whole country.. And what the media have written about would have been disregarded. The decision would have been made up with a panel of professionals who would have thoroughly investigated the allegations, decided if it met the threshold for further input, taken into account the history of the POI, address the scope of the investigation including other children possibly at risk and consider the allegation in the context of any previous allegations or concerns and then made a decision based on parameters set by a safeguarding committee.
 
Last edited:

meleeka

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2001
Messages
7,652
Location
Hants, England
But the decision wasn't made by the whole country.. And what the media have written about would have been disregarded. The decision would have been made up with a panel of professionals who would have thoroughly investigated the allegations, decided if it met the threshold for further input, taken into account the history of the POI, any previous employment issues, any previous police warnings/criminal record (if applicable), made a decision based on whether they posed a risk of harm to children in their role as teacher and made a decision based on parameters set by a safeguarding committee.
Would that have happened if the video hadn’t been posted everywhere and the name of the school and LEA also widely named?
 

Birker2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 January 2021
Messages
4,367
Would that have happened if the video hadn’t been posted everywhere and the name of the school and LEA also widely named?
Then it would have been reliant on someone making a referral based on what they had seen.
But this may never have happened if they didn't know she was a teacher. Such is the power of media, that what took place has been brought to the forefront. And that can only be a good thing.
 

Pearlsasinger

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 February 2009
Messages
39,352
Location
W. Yorks
But the decision wasn't made by the whole country.. And what the media have written about would have been disregarded. The decision would have been made up with a panel of professionals who would have thoroughly investigated the allegations, decided if it met the threshold for further input, taken into account the history of the POI, any previous employment issues, any police record and made a decision based on parameters set by a safeguarding committee.

You write as if you were privy to the minutes of any meetings. You were not. Neither, when you have taken minutes at a LA level safeguarding meeting, have you been present to hear the outcome of any meeting with the employee, their union rep and their employer. You also seem to forget that in schools The Governing Body, who acts as the employer, has the last word, the LA will advise but the Govs don't have to act on that advice and in many 'grey area' situations, where no harm has come to an actual child, will give a warning. Dismissal for an incident in which no child was harmed would be an extreme measure and could well see the employer in an ET.
HR advice usually is to avoid ET situations.
 

conniegirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 November 2004
Messages
7,477
You write as if you were privy to the minutes of any meetings. You were not. Neither, when you have taken minutes at a LA level safeguarding meeting, have you been present to hear the outcome of any meeting with the employee, their union rep and their employer. You also seem to forget that in schools The Governing Body, who acts as the employer, has the last word, the LA will advise but the Govs don't have to act on that advice and in many 'grey area' situations, where no harm has come to an actual child, will give a warning. Dismissal for an incident in which no child was harmed would be an extreme measure and could well see the employer in an ET.
This, but i will also add the Birker seems to have decided that the woman was fired due to safeguarding issues after safeguarding meetings etc.
It may never have got that far, she may have resigned or been fired for bringing the school into disrepute rather than safeguarding
 

Birker2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 January 2021
Messages
4,367
This, but i will also add the Birker seems to have decided that the woman was fired due to safeguarding issues after safeguarding meetings etc.
It may never have got that far, she may have resigned or been fired for bringing the school into disrepute rather than safeguarding
I haven't 'decided' anything. She may have been fired for bringing the school into disrepute I agree.
The news reports clearly say she was suspended and then fired.

I wonder what her being asked to leave her voluntary role with the pony club has to do with it though?
 

Winters100

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 April 2015
Messages
2,171
But the role that the person in question did meant she was surrounded by children all day long. THerefore the transference of risk is greater.
To me this is just a totally theoretical risk. Would any of us, based upon what we have seen, be seriously afraid for the safety of our children if she was their teacher? I just cannot see any way that I would be worried about it. Really if she was dismissed because of this then I would view it as a hysterical overreaction.
 

Birker2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 January 2021
Messages
4,367
Quite, and yet you are so sure that you know the rest of it and you implied that she was asked to step down, as a result of safeguarding concerns.
Look you please yourself what you want to believe, I couldn't care less. I am only telling you what usually happens if there are any potential safeguarding issues because she is in a position of trust with her role.

If an allegation arises about a member of staff outside work and this could present as a risk of harm/risk to children for whom the member of staff is responsible for through their role then it is the norm for a position of trust meeting to be held and the level of risk of harm assessed.

She could have been sacked for bringing the school into disrepute. She could have been sacked for other reasons and she could have been asked to leave her voluntary position with the pony club in case she brought them into direpute. I've never disagreed with any of that.
 

meleeka

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2001
Messages
7,652
Location
Hants, England
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals had no choice but to take action. What message would it have sent to animal abusers if they had done nothing?

The fact that you may have seen worse abuse doesn't make what she did any better.
I just wish they’d act on things that didn’t make the evening news too. Harry Evans was ‘investigated’ but he’s still abusing horses and posting it online. The travellers round here are still racing with lame and injured horses in full view of the RSPCA who turn up to monitor proceedings. It’s very sad that donations are more important than animal welfare :(
 

Birker2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 January 2021
Messages
4,367
I just wish they’d act on things that didn’t make the evening news too. Harry Evans was ‘investigated’ but he’s still abusing horses and posting it online. The travellers round here are still racing with lame and injured horses in full view of the RSPCA who turn up to monitor proceedings. It’s very sad that donations are more important than animal welfare :(
I suppose they have guidelines and thresholds to meet and if they don't think they have enough evidence to bring forth a criminal conviction based on the evidence that they have then they won't bother. It doesn't make it right but they can only work with what they have.
 

eahotson

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 June 2003
Messages
3,431
Location
merseyside
Like everyone else I do not like what this woman did and of course I think she should be punished but her punishment is disproportionate to what she did.Her actions, especially in front of what was probably her own child was very unpleasant BUT the pony looked to me to be healthy and generally well cared for.I wish I could say that about all horses.
I was at a fairly high profile show and saw a quite well know show jumper in the ring up end his stick,lean over and deal his horse a vicious blow across the ribs for stopping at a jump.He did that in full view of the audience including no doubt children and young teenagers who may well have thought that if he did it it was perfectly acceptable.He wasn't even called to the judges tent.I wrote to the BSJA and complained and pointed out that it was all on camera.They did say they would investigate but I heard no more.Probably he received the lightest of wrist taps.He certainly wasn't suspended,investigated by the RSPCA or anything else.
I hope in future that if behaviour like that can be caught on camera that the RSPCA will investigate.If nothing else to show fairness.
 

meleeka

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2001
Messages
7,652
Location
Hants, England
I suppose they have guidelines and thresholds to meet and if they don't think they have enough evidence to bring forth a criminal conviction based on the evidence that they have then they won't bother. It doesn't make it right but they can only work with what they have.
This is what they’d like us to believe. My personal experience is that they generally do as little as possible, while making it look like they care. That would be ok if they weren’t expected to do the job of the local authorities and the police too. The fact that a charity is masquerading as the police force for animals and that those who are responsible for upholding the law are happy with that is just wrong.
 

conniegirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 November 2004
Messages
7,477
I suppose they have guidelines and thresholds to meet and if they don't think they have enough evidence to bring forth a criminal conviction based on the evidence that they have then they won't bother. It doesn't make it right but they can only work with what they have.
No they just want soft targets.

I reported 2 starved horses to them, they were skeletal and there was a pony who had died of starvation in the same field.
My Vet said it was one of the worst cases he had seen (i called him because they were loose on the road so i herded them into my stables)

The horses and my vet were both in my stables when the RSPCA inspector turned up. Inspector decided they knew more that the vet and there was no evidence of starvation.
Refused to do anything about it.
 

meleeka

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2001
Messages
7,652
Location
Hants, England
No they just want soft targets.

I reported 2 starved horses to them, they were skeletal and there was a pony who had died of starvation in the same field.
My Vet said it was one of the worst cases he had seen (i called him because they were loose on the road so i herded them into my stables)

The horses and my vet were both in my stables when the RSPCA inspector turned up. Inspector decided they knew more that the vet and there was no evidence of starvation.
Refused to do anything about it.
That’s been similar to my experiences too. None of the severe welfare cases we hear about happen overnight and I’ll bet the RSPCA we’re aware of all of them.
 

eahotson

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 June 2003
Messages
3,431
Location
merseyside
No they just want soft targets.

I reported 2 starved horses to them, they were skeletal and there was a pony who had died of starvation in the same field.
My Vet said it was one of the worst cases he had seen (i called him because they were loose on the road so i herded them into my stables)

The horses and my vet were both in my stables when the RSPCA inspector turned up. Inspector decided they knew more that the vet and there was no evidence of starvation.
Refused to do anything about it.
Disgraceful.
 

Gallop_Away

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 May 2015
Messages
528
Let's be honest if this hadn't generated such a social media poo storm, I doubt things would have gone so far. Now thanks to the trial by social media gang the woman has lost her job and had her life turned upside down.
I'm still not quite sure what the sabs were filming for in the first place. I'm not sure what evidence of "illegal hunting" they had hoped to film while people were loading their horses to go home for the day, but anyway that's not the point.
A proportional response would have been that she was banned from the hunt and I can understand the local PC wanting to take action to.
I do not think the woman deserved to loose her job or face prosecution over this. What she did was wrong but people make mistakes.
The RSPCA have simply selected her as an easy target and run with it. I feel very sorry for her.
 

Errin Paddywack

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 June 2019
Messages
3,702
My old, very down to earth, vet told me about being rung by the local RSPCA inspector in the middle of the night. Apparently the Inspector had been rung by an elderly lady as her dog had died and she was in distress and wanted it taken away. He wanted my vet to go and collect it. His reply was 'why don't you go?' to which the Inspector replied that he would have to get up out of his warm bed and go. I think you can imagine what the reply to that was. Not sure what did happen in the end. I do know my vet had no time for the RSPCA at all as he had witnessed too many of these sort of things.
 

honetpot

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 July 2010
Messages
8,094
Location
Cambridgeshire
Don't know much about cattle management so can't comment, but an electric prod doesn't sound like a tool I'd want to use if anything better was available.

Despise electric collars and think there's no place for them in 99.9% of cases where they're used. I'd say they're about the same as what this woman did (depending on the voltage), but you can't really compare them given different animals, different parts of the body, and different contexts.
I agree, but you are still inflicting pain, as a discipline, deterrent. So is the cruelty bit, that inflicted pain, or the degree of pain, and was the use justifiable, how long was the distress caused. If there was no injury, and it's so long after the event even if there was, was it caused by the blow.
Where does the ball of string end? Do you end up banning every form of control or restraint?.
 

tristar

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 August 2010
Messages
5,707
how fascinating that what she did has generated lots of posts, while mule`s thread about bloodying of 4 years olds mouths in competing and training, which i find utterly shocking has so few responses

funny old place the horse world

and i don`t like what she did, the worst part is the fact the pony did nothing wrong, from what i saw of the video

whilst realizing this thread is about does the punishment fit the crime
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top