brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
Hey JM, just kidding!
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...........
How are the boys doing?
How are the boys doing?
Trying to explain myself a little
- Thread starter myjack
- Start date
JM07
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Hey JM, just kidding!
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...........
How are the boys doing?
[/ QUOTE ]
changed it...TBH, the blue is the only colour that doesnt do my eyes in!!!
the boys???
newbies are free of worms coming out, ATM...will see when they have another dose tomorrow!!!
the rest of the gang are happy as larry now they're out 24/7!!
Hey JM, just kidding!
How are the boys doing?
[/ QUOTE ]
changed it...TBH, the blue is the only colour that doesnt do my eyes in!!!
the boys???
newbies are free of worms coming out, ATM...will see when they have another dose tomorrow!!!
the rest of the gang are happy as larry now they're out 24/7!!
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
Now <font color="green"> that's </font> a very gentle colour! Love it!
I once saw bots in a horse's poo (not one of mine). Ewwww.
I once saw bots in a horse's poo (not one of mine). Ewwww.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
its just very easy to say you know the facts...so do i
[/ QUOTE ]
True - it is very easy indeed. However, I have shown no one any physical facts to have them believe anything. <font color="blue"> indeed you haven't </font>
I don't expect people to just sit back and believe me when I say that I have facts. - they don't know me so to expect them just sit back and believe me, I believe, would be very dumb of me for one thing, and for 2, would also be insulting their intelligence. The people here are full grown adults not children who believe anything people tell them.
I have asked them to simply THINK.
[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">and boy, have they!!!! you just have to <font color="blue"> r</font> ead the responses to your posts over the last 14 days, as opposed to the totally negative responses in the first week when this story blew </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
I can't understand some people. To me, it looks as though I am being blamed for people having THINKING minds.
I believe the only thing I have done is advised people to THINK. If people choose to take this advice on board they come to their own conclusions. Yet, it appears I am being blamed for the open minds of thinking ADULTS.
Yes, I know facts but I have never, neither do I expect people to believe this. You people don't know me - for all you know I could be speaking utter BS. This is why I believe people should attend the court hearings and sit in the public gallery - that way they can hear facts for themselves - The very facts in which I don't feel at liberty to share on a public forum.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
its just very easy to say you know the facts...so do i
[/ QUOTE ]
True - it is very easy indeed. However, I have shown no one any physical facts to have them believe anything. <font color="blue"> indeed you haven't </font>
I don't expect people to just sit back and believe me when I say that I have facts. - they don't know me so to expect them just sit back and believe me, I believe, would be very dumb of me for one thing, and for 2, would also be insulting their intelligence. The people here are full grown adults not children who believe anything people tell them.
I have asked them to simply THINK.
[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">and boy, have they!!!! you just have to <font color="blue"> r</font> ead the responses to your posts over the last 14 days, as opposed to the totally negative responses in the first week when this story blew </font>
[/ QUOTE ]
I can't understand some people. To me, it looks as though I am being blamed for people having THINKING minds.
I believe the only thing I have done is advised people to THINK. If people choose to take this advice on board they come to their own conclusions. Yet, it appears I am being blamed for the open minds of thinking ADULTS.
Yes, I know facts but I have never, neither do I expect people to believe this. You people don't know me - for all you know I could be speaking utter BS. This is why I believe people should attend the court hearings and sit in the public gallery - that way they can hear facts for themselves - The very facts in which I don't feel at liberty to share on a public forum.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
I can't get away - I work in a primary school and I can't ask for time off (contract of employment) for anything unless it is life or death (of me)
However, I am sure there will be a balanced bunch of individuals from here and we expect the same in the way of a report afterwards.
You know, I think most of the hostility to JG was a knee-jerk reaction to quite a one-sided set of facts. Now the dust has settled a bit, we can (and should) stand back and look at things carefully. I hope that whoever is prosecuting and defending are equipped with hard evidence and sound facts. Then it is up to the court to weigh it up and decide.
Really, there isn't much else to say.
However, I am sure there will be a balanced bunch of individuals from here and we expect the same in the way of a report afterwards.
You know, I think most of the hostility to JG was a knee-jerk reaction to quite a one-sided set of facts. Now the dust has settled a bit, we can (and should) stand back and look at things carefully. I hope that whoever is prosecuting and defending are equipped with hard evidence and sound facts. Then it is up to the court to weigh it up and decide.
Really, there isn't much else to say.
blueberry
Well-Known Member
Just want to say that even though this thread has had a lot of opposing opinions posted and by clearly strong minded inviduals, on the whole this thread has been enjoyable to be part of.
Discussion at its best
Discussion at its best
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I can't get away - I work in a primary school and I can't ask for time off (contract of employment) for anything unless it is life or death (of me)
[/ QUOTE ]
well I don't think they would have much choice if you died.
But thats a pain in the neck - would have been good for you to hear some facts.
[ QUOTE ]
However, I am sure there will be a balanced bunch of individuals from here and we expect the same in the way of a report afterwards.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't be holding my breath were honest reports are concerned.
[ QUOTE ]
You know, I think most of the hostility to JG was a knee-jerk reaction to quite a one-sided set of facts.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it was a knee jerk reaction too. I would say it was a one sided story rather than facts.
[ QUOTE ]
Now the dust has settled a bit, we can (and should) stand back and look at things carefully. I hope that whoever is prosecuting and defending are equipped with hard evidence and sound facts. Then it is up to the court to weigh it up and decide. Really, there isn't much else to say.
[/ QUOTE ]
The defence team produced hard evidence when the judge ruled in JG favour - however, after much manipulation tactics ect, (no more evidence what so ever from either side) the judge put a 'stay' on the animals.
I hope the next judge will stand firm and do the right thing.
I can't get away - I work in a primary school and I can't ask for time off (contract of employment) for anything unless it is life or death (of me)
[/ QUOTE ]
well I don't think they would have much choice if you died.
But thats a pain in the neck - would have been good for you to hear some facts.
[ QUOTE ]
However, I am sure there will be a balanced bunch of individuals from here and we expect the same in the way of a report afterwards.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't be holding my breath were honest reports are concerned.
[ QUOTE ]
You know, I think most of the hostility to JG was a knee-jerk reaction to quite a one-sided set of facts.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it was a knee jerk reaction too. I would say it was a one sided story rather than facts.
[ QUOTE ]
Now the dust has settled a bit, we can (and should) stand back and look at things carefully. I hope that whoever is prosecuting and defending are equipped with hard evidence and sound facts. Then it is up to the court to weigh it up and decide. Really, there isn't much else to say.
[/ QUOTE ]
The defence team produced hard evidence when the judge ruled in JG favour - however, after much manipulation tactics ect, (no more evidence what so ever from either side) the judge put a 'stay' on the animals.
I hope the next judge will stand firm and do the right thing.
Tia
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
Flint; I don't know whether Myjack will stay here afterwards; I'm not sure it really matters where this forum is concerned; as is always said, this place is bigger than any one of us. I have enjoyed bantering back and forth with Myjack and, from my perspective, I would be happy for Myjack to continue using this forum afterwards, but if she doesn't, then that is her prerogative.
Flint; I don't know whether Myjack will stay here afterwards; I'm not sure it really matters where this forum is concerned; as is always said, this place is bigger than any one of us. I have enjoyed bantering back and forth with Myjack and, from my perspective, I would be happy for Myjack to continue using this forum afterwards, but if she doesn't, then that is her prerogative.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[ QUOTE ]
Flint; I don't know whether Myjack will stay here afterwards; I'm not sure it really matters where this forum is concerned; as is always said, this place is bigger than any one of us. I have enjoyed bantering back and forth with Myjack and, from my perspective, I would be happy for Myjack to continue using this forum afterwards, but if she doesn't, then that is her prerogative.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you - I will be staying around.
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[ QUOTE ]
Flint; I don't know whether Myjack will stay here afterwards; I'm not sure it really matters where this forum is concerned; as is always said, this place is bigger than any one of us. I have enjoyed bantering back and forth with Myjack and, from my perspective, I would be happy for Myjack to continue using this forum afterwards, but if she doesn't, then that is her prerogative.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you - I will be staying around.
Tia
Well-Known Member
Yes those were my thoughts also.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Yes those were my thoughts also.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes those were my thoughts also.
[/ QUOTE ]
BankEndRescue
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
QR
I think that if JG is found guilty it won't make the slightest bit of difference. I don't think that many members will hold up their hands and say "well, I got that wrong" or whatever....
It'll be all about a terrible "miscarriage of justice" and questioning the legal system.
As for the family, even if they're found guilty they're reputations, and possibly their lives, have been ruined. And for what? Speculation and narrow mindedness (if that isn't a word, it is now)...people deciding they 'know the truth'...
It amazes me how many have posted saying that they know/live near Spindles Farm...they've seen the horses, seen them being abused or whatever....
If that was the case then why weren't they doing anything about it BEFORE?
I know no facts at all, I've read odd bits in the newspapers, and I've read on here bits and bobs. I have no reason to trust any of the posters on here any more than I have the Sun newspaper....I've refrained from commenting on these threads as I felt I wasn't 'clued up' on the case enough....however the majority of posts are pure speculation.
Have any of you read some of the truly distressing cases in which the RSPCA have removed beloved family pets etc for no reason? The cat they ordered to be PTS as it was 'severe;y ill and suffering' which turned out to have fleas? The old veteran horse who was under the care of the vet, owned practically all of her life by the same couple who doted on her? Months it took them to get their beloved mare back.....
The RSPCA can be wrong, where are the pictures of the so-called emaciated horses retrieved from the farm? If there were horses in such a state then those pictures would have been either released or 'accidentally leaked'.....
The RSPCA love a good sob story....any distressing pictures/coverage ensure the public are roped into donating even more money.
Maybe they should actually try spending a little of their money on actually helping a genuinely needy animal rather than victimising the weak, blowing God knows how much on court cases that don't stick and didn't have a hope in Hells chance to begin with (previous cases, not this one, check up online) and making poxy adverts when they could achieve a lot more impact and really hit home by simply taking a camera around a rescue kennels and filming the heartbreaking sights there. The old dogs noone wants. The ones who have been there so long that they don't even bother getting up when someone approaches....the look of desperation, the sadness, rejection and the constant whines, barks and cries of the residents.
Just my views.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely perfectly said! I have never had any time for the RSPCA and as far as I can see they only show up when the TV cameras do!
QR
I think that if JG is found guilty it won't make the slightest bit of difference. I don't think that many members will hold up their hands and say "well, I got that wrong" or whatever....
It'll be all about a terrible "miscarriage of justice" and questioning the legal system.
As for the family, even if they're found guilty they're reputations, and possibly their lives, have been ruined. And for what? Speculation and narrow mindedness (if that isn't a word, it is now)...people deciding they 'know the truth'...
It amazes me how many have posted saying that they know/live near Spindles Farm...they've seen the horses, seen them being abused or whatever....
If that was the case then why weren't they doing anything about it BEFORE?
I know no facts at all, I've read odd bits in the newspapers, and I've read on here bits and bobs. I have no reason to trust any of the posters on here any more than I have the Sun newspaper....I've refrained from commenting on these threads as I felt I wasn't 'clued up' on the case enough....however the majority of posts are pure speculation.
Have any of you read some of the truly distressing cases in which the RSPCA have removed beloved family pets etc for no reason? The cat they ordered to be PTS as it was 'severe;y ill and suffering' which turned out to have fleas? The old veteran horse who was under the care of the vet, owned practically all of her life by the same couple who doted on her? Months it took them to get their beloved mare back.....
The RSPCA can be wrong, where are the pictures of the so-called emaciated horses retrieved from the farm? If there were horses in such a state then those pictures would have been either released or 'accidentally leaked'.....
The RSPCA love a good sob story....any distressing pictures/coverage ensure the public are roped into donating even more money.
Maybe they should actually try spending a little of their money on actually helping a genuinely needy animal rather than victimising the weak, blowing God knows how much on court cases that don't stick and didn't have a hope in Hells chance to begin with (previous cases, not this one, check up online) and making poxy adverts when they could achieve a lot more impact and really hit home by simply taking a camera around a rescue kennels and filming the heartbreaking sights there. The old dogs noone wants. The ones who have been there so long that they don't even bother getting up when someone approaches....the look of desperation, the sadness, rejection and the constant whines, barks and cries of the residents.
Just my views.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely perfectly said! I have never had any time for the RSPCA and as far as I can see they only show up when the TV cameras do!
BankEndRescue
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey I was there last time and I'm not aggressive!!
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey I was there last time and I'm not aggressive!!
myjack
Well-Known Member
Like BER said.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey I was there last time and I'm not aggressive!!
[/ QUOTE ]
Oop's - you are an exception.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey I was there last time and I'm not aggressive!!
[/ QUOTE ]
Oop's - you are an exception.
the watcher
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is an interesting perception. My view of is was that the prosecution case was caught on the back foot and didn't prepare properly for that application. By the time it was revisited they had done so. there is nothing to link the decision on the merits of returning the animals to the future outcome of a case yet to be heard. To imply that it is would simply be casting more doubt and misinformation without any basis. Something MJ has mastered quite nicely
[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is an interesting perception. My view of is was that the prosecution case was caught on the back foot and didn't prepare properly for that application. By the time it was revisited they had done so. there is nothing to link the decision on the merits of returning the animals to the future outcome of a case yet to be heard. To imply that it is would simply be casting more doubt and misinformation without any basis. Something MJ has mastered quite nicely
brummel
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[/ QUOTE ]
If the judge believed JG was innocent of all the things he'd been accused of, surely he would have ordered ALL the animals to be returned to SF?
Whether JG is guilty or innocent can only be decided when all the facts have been put forward by both the prosecution and defence lawyers. So far, this couldn't have taken place because as far as I'm aware, the pre trial hearing isn't until 28th. Maybe the case will be thrown out through lack of evidence on Monday and if that happens, the RSPCA will have hell of a lot of questions to answer.
I've steered clear of getting involved is the Amersham debate, because as far as I'm concerned, it's ALL based on here say and speculation from both sides. Facts can only be proven by providing evidence and until that evidence is produced in court...I will remain open minded.
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[/ QUOTE ]
If the judge believed JG was innocent of all the things he'd been accused of, surely he would have ordered ALL the animals to be returned to SF?
Whether JG is guilty or innocent can only be decided when all the facts have been put forward by both the prosecution and defence lawyers. So far, this couldn't have taken place because as far as I'm aware, the pre trial hearing isn't until 28th. Maybe the case will be thrown out through lack of evidence on Monday and if that happens, the RSPCA will have hell of a lot of questions to answer.
I've steered clear of getting involved is the Amersham debate, because as far as I'm concerned, it's ALL based on here say and speculation from both sides. Facts can only be proven by providing evidence and until that evidence is produced in court...I will remain open minded.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is an interesting perception. My view of is was that the prosecution case was caught on the back foot and didn't prepare properly for that application. By the time it was revisited they had done so. there is nothing to link the decision on the merits of returning the animals to the future outcome of a case yet to be heard. To imply that it is would simply be casting more doubt and misinformation without any basis. Something MJ has mastered quite nicely
[/ QUOTE ]
MH, I am not implying anything of the kind. What I said (above) is exactly what I mean - if I thought anything more of it then I would simply just come out and say so.
Those are my thought and I stand by them.
Please tell me how I have misinformed anyone?
If people doubt then thats up to the individual person. I CANNOT control how people think.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I do think that the stay was correct procedure. I think the judge was a bit premature in changing the situation as it stands, before any verdict had been given.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you say here but I do think that the judges first ruling has proved that the judge, based upon the evidence put before him from both sides, believes that JG is innocent of the things he is being accused of.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is an interesting perception. My view of is was that the prosecution case was caught on the back foot and didn't prepare properly for that application. By the time it was revisited they had done so. there is nothing to link the decision on the merits of returning the animals to the future outcome of a case yet to be heard. To imply that it is would simply be casting more doubt and misinformation without any basis. Something MJ has mastered quite nicely
[/ QUOTE ]
MH, I am not implying anything of the kind. What I said (above) is exactly what I mean - if I thought anything more of it then I would simply just come out and say so.
Those are my thought and I stand by them.
Please tell me how I have misinformed anyone?
If people doubt then thats up to the individual person. I CANNOT control how people think.
dun_in
Well-Known Member
Maybe MJ thought that the judges reasons was a fact.
Couldn't resist
Couldn't resist
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
If the judge believed JG was innocent of all the things he'd been accused of, surely he would have ordered ALL the animals to be returned to SF?
[/ QUOTE ]
It was at JG request that the remaining animals be sold. However, for arguments sake lets assume the judge ordered they be sold - surely he wouldn't have returned any of the animals if he felt JG was guilty of such crimes he is being accused of??
If the judge believed JG was innocent of all the things he'd been accused of, surely he would have ordered ALL the animals to be returned to SF?
[/ QUOTE ]
It was at JG request that the remaining animals be sold. However, for arguments sake lets assume the judge ordered they be sold - surely he wouldn't have returned any of the animals if he felt JG was guilty of such crimes he is being accused of??
BankEndRescue
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey I was there last time and I'm not aggressive!!
[/ QUOTE ]
Oop's - you are an exception.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm Many people have said I'm an exception...not always thought it was a compliment lol
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
now mj has irritated the pants off me
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you thinking of going to the trial? I hope to be going but I won't be wearing that sandwichboard.
I'm gonna get me full body armour...lol
I hear the protesters outside are an agresive bunch.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hey I was there last time and I'm not aggressive!!
[/ QUOTE ]
Oop's - you are an exception.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm Many people have said I'm an exception...not always thought it was a compliment lol
brighteyes
Pooh-Bah
<font color="blue">now mj has irritated the pants off me
</font>
Why does this keep getting quoted out of context? They are my words not mj's!
BTW She doesn't any more because I have taken a course in anger management.
</font>
Why does this keep getting quoted out of context? They are my words not mj's!
BTW She doesn't any more because I have taken a course in anger management.
myjack
Well-Known Member
Well please do accept it as a compliment.
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">now mj has irritated the pants off me
</font>
Why does this keep getting quoted out of context? They are my words not mj's!
BTW She doesn't any more because I have taken a course in anger management.
[/ QUOTE ]
That was my fault - I quoted you and it looks like my trait is catching.
....and boy 0 boy am I happy to learn you have taken a course in anger management. I don't own a 'tin hat'
<font color="blue">now mj has irritated the pants off me
</font>
Why does this keep getting quoted out of context? They are my words not mj's!
BTW She doesn't any more because I have taken a course in anger management.
[/ QUOTE ]
That was my fault - I quoted you and it looks like my trait is catching.
....and boy 0 boy am I happy to learn you have taken a course in anger management. I don't own a 'tin hat'
brummel
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
It was at JG request that the remaining animals be sold.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's one version of why the remaining horses where to be sold at auction, the other was because JG's application to have ALL the animals returned was rejected by the judge.
[ QUOTE ]
However, for arguments sake lets assume the judge ordered they be sold - surely he wouldn't have returned any of the animals if he felt JG was guilty of such crimes he is being accused of??
[/ QUOTE ]
That's how some interpret the judge's decission, others believe, that because he ordered the Shetlands and donkeys to be returned as there was no evidence to show they where in any danger, indicated there WAS enough evidence to show the remaining animals would be at risk if they where returned to SF.
The problem is...who to believe????
Only by listening to the actual defence and prosecution evidence, could I make a rational decission as to whether I believe JG is guilty or innocent.
IMO, anything else is just speculation and heresay.
It was at JG request that the remaining animals be sold.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's one version of why the remaining horses where to be sold at auction, the other was because JG's application to have ALL the animals returned was rejected by the judge.
[ QUOTE ]
However, for arguments sake lets assume the judge ordered they be sold - surely he wouldn't have returned any of the animals if he felt JG was guilty of such crimes he is being accused of??
[/ QUOTE ]
That's how some interpret the judge's decission, others believe, that because he ordered the Shetlands and donkeys to be returned as there was no evidence to show they where in any danger, indicated there WAS enough evidence to show the remaining animals would be at risk if they where returned to SF.
The problem is...who to believe????
Only by listening to the actual defence and prosecution evidence, could I make a rational decission as to whether I believe JG is guilty or innocent.
IMO, anything else is just speculation and heresay.
BankEndRescue
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Well please do accept it as a compliment.
[/ QUOTE ]
why thank you!
Well please do accept it as a compliment.
[/ QUOTE ]
why thank you!
myjack
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
That's how some interpret the judge's decission, others believe, that because he ordered the Shetlands and donkeys to be returned as there was no evidence to show they where in any danger, indicated there WAS enough evidence to show the remaining animals would be at risk if they where returned to SF.
[/ QUOTE ]
And yet the RSPCA accepted that all of the donkeys and ponies which have been ordered back were in "good condition and claimed that they were seized, not because of their condition, but because of concerns about Mr Gray and his family.
As to the remainder, there was, the judge rightly ruled, no evidence to show they were in any danger" and that a sale at auction was a respectable, and traditional, way for horses to change ownership.
link to above statement
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is...who to believe????
[/ QUOTE ]
I would believe what is said in the link I have posted above.
[ QUOTE ]
Only by listening to the actual defence and prosecution evidence, could I make a rational decission as to whether I believe JG is guilty or innocent.
IMO, anything else is just speculation and heresay.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you can make it to court then do so. That way you will hear the facts for yourself.
That's how some interpret the judge's decission, others believe, that because he ordered the Shetlands and donkeys to be returned as there was no evidence to show they where in any danger, indicated there WAS enough evidence to show the remaining animals would be at risk if they where returned to SF.
[/ QUOTE ]
And yet the RSPCA accepted that all of the donkeys and ponies which have been ordered back were in "good condition and claimed that they were seized, not because of their condition, but because of concerns about Mr Gray and his family.
As to the remainder, there was, the judge rightly ruled, no evidence to show they were in any danger" and that a sale at auction was a respectable, and traditional, way for horses to change ownership.
link to above statement
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is...who to believe????
[/ QUOTE ]
I would believe what is said in the link I have posted above.
[ QUOTE ]
Only by listening to the actual defence and prosecution evidence, could I make a rational decission as to whether I believe JG is guilty or innocent.
IMO, anything else is just speculation and heresay.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you can make it to court then do so. That way you will hear the facts for yourself.
myjack
Well-Known Member
Your'e welcome.
brummel
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
"As to the remainder, there was, the judge rightly ruled, no evidence to show they were in any danger" and that a sale at auction was a respectable, and traditional, way for horses to change ownership.
link to above statement
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is...who to believe????
[/ QUOTE ]
I would believe what is said in the link I have posted above.
[/ QUOTE ]
"Deputy District Judge Sandeep Kainth agreed to return the pets to the family but rejected their application to have the remaining 82 animals returned. These animals will instead be sold at auction in May. [/b]
.....But Judge Kainth said the donkeys and Shetland ponies had to be returned to the Grays, "as there is no evidence to show they are in any danger".
Link to above statements:
http://www.buckinghamshireadvertiser.co.uk/archives/2008/04/court_orders_an.html
Now the one report is from the SHG website, while the other from a news article. They give different interpretations of what the judge stated but as both where written by people not actually connected with the defence or prosecution team...who's to say which statement includes the true facts?
[ QUOTE ]
If you can make it to court then do so. That way you will hear the facts for yourself.
[/ QUOTE ]
If the case goes to trial, I have every intentions of attending.
"As to the remainder, there was, the judge rightly ruled, no evidence to show they were in any danger" and that a sale at auction was a respectable, and traditional, way for horses to change ownership.
link to above statement
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is...who to believe????
[/ QUOTE ]
I would believe what is said in the link I have posted above.
[/ QUOTE ]
"Deputy District Judge Sandeep Kainth agreed to return the pets to the family but rejected their application to have the remaining 82 animals returned. These animals will instead be sold at auction in May. [/b]
.....But Judge Kainth said the donkeys and Shetland ponies had to be returned to the Grays, "as there is no evidence to show they are in any danger".
Link to above statements:
http://www.buckinghamshireadvertiser.co.uk/archives/2008/04/court_orders_an.html
Now the one report is from the SHG website, while the other from a news article. They give different interpretations of what the judge stated but as both where written by people not actually connected with the defence or prosecution team...who's to say which statement includes the true facts?
[ QUOTE ]
If you can make it to court then do so. That way you will hear the facts for yourself.
[/ QUOTE ]
If the case goes to trial, I have every intentions of attending.