PDA

View Full Version : The "NO REINSTATEMENT" thread.



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13

Dancing Lawn
Feb. 15, 2006, 02:51 PM
AS long as the bracelets bring attention to the issue, they're doing their job, regardless of colour, race, sex, or creed.

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:04 PM
Has anyone who goes to horse shows noticed how many people are NOT wearing any of this stupid crap?

In all seriousness, don't you think that someone who supports the heart association but doesnt support your cause might have a problem with the lookalike bracelets?

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:05 PM
What do you want Sheila??

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:07 PM
As long as there's sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.

Duffy
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:07 PM
Why would anyone who supports the heart association have a problem seeing other red bracelets out there? Mine only has the indentation for the "no reinstatement". It's not like anyone can read it unless it's under their nose. And, when it is, and they ask, I inform and discuss.

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:10 PM
Well they might feel uncomfortable wearing a red bracelet if they think it sends the message that they oppose reinstatement when they actually support it or dont care.

If the Klu Klux Klan decided that red bracelets were their thing, would you be happy about that?

Dancing Lawn
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:10 PM
Sheila, I think by now you have made your point.
You don't LIKE the red bracelets. In fact, you don't like the BRACELETS.
great, fine, good. don't buy one. we GET it already.

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:12 PM
Duffy (who is smart and reasonable) just finished explaining how she doesnt get it.

I'm not too sure you do either.

Duffy
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:31 PM
Well, since evidently most people think that red bracelets mean that one supports the heart association, then that's what people think they're for. Unless one is aware of the non reinstatement issue, they wouldn't have a clue that you're not wearing it for the heart association. I support the heart association, so I don't have a problem wearing a bracelet which might infer to someone else that I do support the heart association.

If I see red bracelets on people now, I might try to take a closer look. (I haven't seen the heart association ones, so I don't know how different they look from the non-reinstatement ones.)

If the KKK was able to market their supposed red bracelets to the masses and was able to convey to the public that if one wore a red bracelet that they were supporting the KKK, then I would have a problem wearing one. However, somehow I just don't see that happening.

As far as people wearing red bracelets supporting the heart association who are pro reinstatement, I guess that would be a predicament for said people. Course, I sure haven't met anyone who was ANTI heart association. So, maybe people don't feel they need to wear the bracelets to announce their support? Everyone already knows what the heart association is.

I wish to make more people aware of what "non reinstatement" means.

Erin
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:34 PM
Sheila, if you can't participate in this discussion in a reasoned way, you're not welcome to participate. Your choice... you either elevate the level of your discourse, or you leave.

Erin
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:40 PM
Try it again, Sheila. Surely you DO have the ability for reasoned discourse?

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 03:43 PM
I think the coast is clear.

Let the wild rumpus begin!

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by In the Air:
After you find out who the person is, you should also post his or her name on this thread so we can all know who it is.

Any update on this initiative? I think its unfortinate that certain people are under a cloud of suspicion with regards to the bogus names on the petition.

Snowbird
Feb. 15, 2006, 06:22 PM
There are no bogus names and the ones falsely submitted in the behalf of others are traced and have been eliminated.

I did get a new order today for the bracelets...keep them coming.

BUY YOUR BRACELETS TODAY MAKE GREAT GIFTS (http://www.usAHSA.org/Bracelets_for_Sale.htm)

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 06:24 PM
funniest post ever

Snowbird
Feb. 15, 2006, 06:29 PM
I heard a party from the USEF went to the Westminster Dog Show to learn about how to run horse shows.

I think they discovered you can fill the Garden with flat classes. And the Sponsors like spectators.

With convicted felons free and easy it just dosen't attract "Sponsors".

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 06:31 PM
No convicted felons at that doggie show??

Snowbird
Feb. 15, 2006, 06:36 PM
I didn't get your order today for the bracelets...keep them coming.

BUY YOUR BRACELETS TODAY MAKE GREAT GIFTS (http://www.usASA.org/Bracelets_for_Sale.htm)

Sheila H
Feb. 15, 2006, 06:44 PM
It's too easy if Snowy is the only one who will play. I'm retiring.

Snowbird
Feb. 16, 2006, 10:06 AM
Thank you I just received your order. They will be in the mail tomorrow. Enjoy! We are invincible.

SGray
Feb. 16, 2006, 10:24 AM
my order must have gotten caught in a snowdrift http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/cry.gif - none have made it here yet

TL
Feb. 16, 2006, 10:42 AM
I'm waiting to get paid, too, Paypal balance stunningly less than I thought it was!! Keep the bracelets available, please!

Self-employment keeps on proving itself so much less glamorous than I thought it would be http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 16, 2006, 12:19 PM
Snowbird..I went to Westminster..We sure could learn alot from the dog show folks!! On a sold out day we were allowed to "sit anywhere you'd like!". ANYONE can wander through the benching [our stable] area, at The Garden. The owners and handlers, nervous and prepping for the biggest class of their lives, are WONDERFUL..and happy to discuss their breeds, grooming tips and bloodlines with great enthusiasm. I met our Bloodhound handler from 35 years ago, and my Briard's relatives..each and every one of them treated me like a part of their family. The top wire haired daschund handler came and crouched down by a trash can to share a cigarette with me http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif That lovely Scottish Deerhound in Best of Group was allowed to fling herself on my shoulders while her handler discussed the history of the breed in great detail with me...this just minutes before entering the ring. Can you see one of US doing THAT??? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif You may pet champions, photograph and camcord away...you'd be shot for less if this was the horse show! Pedigree, the ASPCA etc. handed out BAGS of free gifts..and ASPCA wristbands..you shoulda been there with yours! Waiters with trays of good champagne served ALL the seating levels throughout the day. I really was lost in admiration for these folks...I may have to change sports!!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 16, 2006, 12:59 PM
It used to be better Race. You know people could wander thru out the stabling area, talk to trainers find out where barns were located. Talk about lessons, etc. Now its closed door. Certainly hasn't helped in the PR dept one bit.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:13 PM
Yeah..I realize I'd be the first one tearing everyone's head off that wandered my way during a horse show..but a LITTLE of the "Dog Show Hospitality" could serve as a lesson to us bitchy old horse folks...especially the champagne servers!!!! Yahoo!

Andrew
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:25 PM
Oh RACE....they ARE a different breed of people however, I really found the Dog shows throughout the country to be WAY MORE political than horse shows. I learned very QUICKLY how to play the game. 1) Good Handler 2) win 3) send the judge a thank you note with pix 4) place ad's like crazy in breed and national mags... exposure exposure exposure 5) sweep any health abnormalities under the carpent and when Auto Immune or whatever ailment shows up, it's the FIRT time that's ever been in MY LINES ! that's how you win. It's not ALWAYS and very raely the dog that wins deserves the BIS (Rufus is an exception) I found "most" NOT ALL... dog show folks are like used car sales people.. dont' get me started http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Andrew
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:26 PM
SORRY ERIN.... THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A PM PLEASE FORGIVE ME http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:31 PM
Race, horse shows have changed since you have graced the grounds. We DO have champagne now.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:42 PM
Oh, I know Andrew....The dog show politics, etc. run rampant, and they make the horse world appear quite tame ...but it's more the sponsors' treatment of spectators that seems a good example to follow...and Harry, I don't see the waiters proffering bubbly to the cheap seats @ today's shows...Unless you mean that motley crew lined up at your motorhome http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:47 PM
Race, in my world, all that matters is who is holding their glass ready for me to pour! The reason I go to the shows is for the party, and if I have anything to do with it, the party is a grand one.

Equit8tor
Feb. 16, 2006, 01:49 PM
AMEN, Harry! My sentiments exactly.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:03 PM
Oh yeah...count me in with that motley crew lined up outside your wine cellar!

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:04 PM
Race, next weekend, Mount Holyoke Hunter show rescheduled, it is your golden opportunity. And please, stop with the blizzards.

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:16 PM
I went to the National Horse Show in 2004 and, not knowing any better, roamed around the stabling area patting and hand-feeding horses and sizing abandoned boots. I believe I got away with it because not only were there no waiters with trays of champagne in the stands, there were no spectators, either. The west side pier was a dismal setting. I had an entire section to myself for the whole evening.

Race, please go with Harry to Mt. Holyoke, if only to confirm that the Pine Rest bar still exists, still has a warped pool table and a good jukebox, and still serves freezing cold Ballantine Ale in 16 oz. bottles. Harry, I frequented the Pine Rest in Hadley while a student at Hampshire College in Amherst, and my MOTHER frequented the Pine Rest when she was a Mt. Holyoke student in the 1940's. She told me that a typical girls' night out at Mt. Holyoke was to pass a hat to get $4 for a case of Pabst. Mt. Holyoke knows how to party.
* * * * * *

Equit8tor
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:21 PM
Sounds like a great place! Reminds me of a similar "institution" in Toronto- The Brunswick House! Any U of T student knows it, as do their ancestors!!

Aunt Esther
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:29 PM
Aunt Esther, national and international Purse Champion, would like to steer the topic back to the original subject.

She wonders if you have forwarded the information about No Reinstatement to all of your friends, and asked them to sign and forward it to their friends. And so on, and so on, just like the Breck commercial.

Aunt Esther, of course, does not use Breck products.

Equit8tor
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:31 PM
I can still remember going to look at a horse that was stabled with Beth Underhill. We were more than welcome to visit and pet her beloved Monopoly while there. (My daughters were in awe!). We did end up buying that wonderful mare, too! It is truly a breath of fresh air to come across the "big names" and their "big horses" an to be treated like equals. Horse people. Plain and simple.

SGray
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by xegeba:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Ohhhhh please. Every public action he's taken in the last 10 years has been in aid of reinstatement. All those egregiously self-serving ads???
Maybe the guy is trying to atone. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

did a lot of volunteer work for Horses in the Hood did he?

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:40 PM
Those are the things which sold people on horses, taking lessons and being involved. We have let it slip by the wayside. Now more than ever, we need to get back to that.

Its easier at Devon to walk about, look at the horses. See the big names. Stabling isn't blocked so you don't enter or a guard standing there demanding who are you? I understand security, but like all things our pendualum has swung the opposite way.

Oh and the answer to your question Aunt Esther is yes, I did.

Dancing Lawn
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:43 PM
Harry., I want to be one of the motley crew!!

Oh wait! I AM one of the motley crew!!!

Ahh, Brunswick House. Equit8tor, do you remember the ELMO as well?

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:46 PM
Single digits by the weekend , Harry. All the Pabst Blue Ribbon in the world won't get me there!......

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:47 PM
mxyplyzyx, I am sorry to inform you that the Pine Rest is not longer in existence. I do have an amusing anecdote in the same regard however. On the main road back to Hartford, a couple from our stable saw a crowded parking lot, and stopped in at Beers and Story, figuring it was a restaurant or bar, turned out they arrived at a wake, and had to quench their thirst elsewhere. And race, the show is NEXT weekend. This weekend is jumpers.

Janet
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge:


Harry, I frequented the Pine Rest in Hadley while a student at Hampshire College in Amherst,
* * * * * *
WHEN were you at Hampshire? I was 71F (second entering class). I drove over the Notch on a regular basis.

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 16, 2006, 02:53 PM
Thank you Harry, I should have known you'd be familiar with the Pine Rest. It's the end of several eras. I have some very fond, albeit foggy, memories of that fine establishment. I'll break the news to my mother gently.

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:00 PM
WHEN were you at Hampshire? I was 71F (second entering class). I drove over the Notch on a regular basis.

Janet, you were a Hampshire founder! I admire that; it took guts to enroll in the brand new experiment. I was F78, a transfer from Syracuse University. Was your Hampshire experience as chemically enhanced as my Hampshire experience? You may plead the Fifth if counsel advises.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:08 PM
Been quietly observing for a few weeks, actually looked away from the computer to RIDE..

A few questions I just need clarification on...

1)Exactly which horse show did Paul judge ( rated, or non)and when? I am aware that he was ASKED to judge, to which he politely declined after meeting such public attack and opposition.

2) Why is he not allowed to conduct any business he chooses on private property? My understanding is that Grand Prix Village, which does abut horse show property, is all privately owned...

3) It is a fact that Paul did and does continue to operate as a trainer of horses and riders. Given the circumstances, I would imagine that the incident would have resulted in substantial legal bills. Having had a considerable operation, as well as a family to support, how were the bills to be paid?
4) As far as any advertising goes...Was any advertising that may have been done false? Were donations that were reportedly made, not actually made? If the conditions to be met for any future reinstatement included rehabilitation as well as valid attempts to repay the community, why are such attempts discredited? Perhaps rather than 'self-serving' they are more in hopes to bring such attempts to the notice of the community? Perhaps they are exactly what the committee was asking for, an attempt to give back.

Last of all, I do have one question...

Have any of you actually spoken WITH Paul, and given him at least an opportunity to apologize?

Janet
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:15 PM
When I went to interview, as a high school junior, they hadn't even finished construction.

So I really was "buying into" a concept rather than reality. But it all worked out.

While I won't deny a certain amount of "chemical enhancement", it wasn't the dominant feature of my Hampshire experience. But it certainly was entertaining to watch everyone else at the Halloween party.

I thnk that by 78, most of the students I knew had left, but I am sure we shared some professors. What was your Div II? Mine was the completely atypical "traditional mathematics concentration".

The first semester I kept my horse at the Mt Holyoke stable (when it was on the far northern edge of campus), but I discovered I only had enough time for 2 of
school
riding
working to pay the board.
So Rocket went home- (the deal was that my parents would support a horse at home, but if we wanted to baord somewhere else we had to pay the board ourselves.)

I had a couple of close friends who were at Mt Holyoke, so I spent a fair amount of time there, as well as taking one class (Russian) there.

eqnjumperrider
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:17 PM
Anthem-That was perfectly put. THANK YOU http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:38 PM
I am sure we shared some professors. What was your Div II? Mine was the completely atypical "traditional mathematics concentration".

Good lord, I didn't know Hampshire even offered math. My Div II was in performance, video and writing. I worked with Jerry Leibling, Tom Joslin and Elaine Mayes. I left before completing Div III and am currently, at a ripe old age, a college junior again. This time I can't avoid the math.

Sorry you couldn't keep Rocket at Mt. Holyoke but you made the smart decision. He was no doubt happy to see you when you were home and well cared for by your family when you were not.

Aunt Esther
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:43 PM
Aunt Esther would like to suggest that, given that so many No Reinstatement threads have been closed due to wandering subjects and cat fights, that the non-No Reinstatement line of discussion go to a different thread, before this is closed down as well.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:50 PM
Anthem, seeing as you ride and train with PV, I am sure you have the answers, or at least the ones you want, to all of your questions. As far as I am concerned, he can judge any show he wants to, I would hope never a USEF rated one, but that is not my decision to make. He can conduct business anywhere he wishes, again, hopefully not at a USEF event, but again, that is not my decision. I personally do not care where he gets the money to pay his bills, as long as it is not my money, which it never will be. As far as the advertising goes, many of us do good things, but we do not take out advertisements to brag about it, and would be embarassed to market our good works. Again, if he needs public record he helped an old woman across the street, someone will sell him advertising space to showcase this, that is his business and theirs. As far as speaking to the man goes, I knew him before this happened, I do not care to know him now, I will say hello, that is it. In this equation, that is my right, just as he has his right to advertise, run a stable, judge a show. Sorry, but some privileges are still available to those of us who are not big name trainers/customers.

lyrical
Feb. 16, 2006, 03:56 PM
Thanks, Harry, for putting my thoughts to words much better than I could have.

VirginiaBred
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:09 PM
Well said Harry! There are so many of us who agree with you. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Duffy
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:10 PM
Ditto.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
Anthem, seeing as you ride and train with PV, I am sure you have the answers, or at least the ones you want, to all of your questions. As far as I am concerned, he can judge any show he wants to, I would hope never a USEF rated one, but that is not my decision to make. He can conduct business anywhere he wishes, again, hopefully not at a USEF event, but again, that is not my decision. I personally do not care where he gets the money to pay his bills, as long as it is not my money, which it never will be. As far as the advertising goes, many of us do good things, but we do not take out advertisements to brag about it, and would be embarassed to market our good works. Again, if he needs public record he helped an old woman across the street, someone will sell him advertising space to showcase this, that is his business and theirs. As far as speaking to the man goes, I knew him before this happened, I do not care to know him now, I will say hello, that is it. In this equation, that is my right, just as he has his right to advertise, run a stable, judge a show. Sorry, but some privileges are still available to those of us who are not big name trainers/customers.

Harry, as always, I appreciate both your civility and your opinion.
My reason for asking the questions was merely to further understand the petition.
It makes a few points which I feel are inaccurate, as well as irrelevant.
But as you agree, Paul does have the privelege to run a business.

But the rights and priveleges do not end there.

We are all also give the right to make mistakes.

Thankfully for us all, we are also give a chance to make our apologies, and a chance to make amends.

But how can you decide if someone is sorry if YOU personally havent given that person a chance to be?

You admit you knew Paul at one point in your life...Would it be so wrong to just LISTEN to his VOICE, and not what you HEAR?

A chance, thats it...If you can take the time to listen, then decide for yourself, I will respect your opinion.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:16 PM
Oh, for God's sake...When it's a little friendly info being traded by people involved in the subject at hand, I don't think veering off the topic for a minute is a big deal. Beats the sniping off topic crap that seems to go on for chapters at times.

2hsmommy
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:19 PM
Agree with Harry. Better stated than I could have done.

True about the amends and apologies anthem. Also true about listening to someone to see if they are genuine.
But also, when all said and done, anyone has the right not to forget past wrong doings, which is, in my eyes this petition is all about.

VirginiaBred
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:21 PM
But also, when all said and done, anyone has the right not to forget past wrong doings, which is, in my eyes this petition is all about.


Can I get an Amen?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:22 PM
Actually, Fairview, yes they are.

Having spent many a year on Wall Street, I watched bankers and traders cuffed and collared on the desk, and lead off to punishment.

Fines are paid, time is served, and then, yes, they are allowed back into the system.

Free to resume the life they may have taken a wrong turn in...as so many other have.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by VirginiaBred:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But also, when all said and done, anyone has the right not to forget past wrong doings, which is, in my eyes this petition is all about.


Can I get an Amen? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Are you seriously going to get religious here?

I think The Man Upstairs wrote The Book on Forgiveness....

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:26 PM
Sorry Anthem, I, like others feel this was not a mistake. It was a calculated action. As far as apologies go, sure, he can make all of them he wants, none of us have ever seen them, even in recent interviews. Again, we also have the right not to accept them, or even acknowledge them if we feel they are not sincere. To be honest, I was not suprised when I heard of his part in events. Just as it is your right to train with him and be his customer, others feel it is not right for him to enjoy the privileges enjoyed by those who believe and follow the Sportsman's Charter, which supposedly is one of the founding ideals of the USEF. I personally feel that if it can be proven that horses or riders on show grounds are being trained by him, they also should be set down, but again, that is not my decision to make.

Snowbird
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:28 PM
What PV said clearly was he was guilty. It is not a mistake to hire someone to kill your horse so that it looks like a natural death. That is calculating and it is premeditated murder of a horse for profit in dollars.

He cooperated after he was caught later to mediate his own sentence. That is clear and unchallenged fact.

I have no doubt he regrets that he was caught. But, he is free to be in the horse business as it is and he may continue to do so, he can make a living at horses or anything of his choice and I wish him well. BUT, there is no question the US Equestrian Federation should never again allow him to be a member in good standing so he ever becomes a role model for the young trainers and students yet to come along.

He should never pursue whatever are his interests with horses at our Federation Events and Competitions. Perhaps he is talented enough to find make green horses and then sell them to trainers who are in good standing. That might be a genuine servece to this sport.

I don't think that anyone who has committed a fraud using our horses as the means should be a Member in Good Standing if that Membership is to be valued by anyone. PV is not the only one and there is a lot company for him amongst those we should not honor with the option of Judging, Stewarding, Managing or Tarining and coaching at what is supposed to be the highest level of this sport.

I think that list should also include Joe Plemmons and Joshua Cardine, Kenneth Berlin and Wally Holly. And any other yet to be prosecuted and convicted.

Kap
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:33 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
Actually, Fairview, yes they are.

Having spent many a year on Wall Street, I watched bankers and traders cuffed and collared on the desk, and lead off to punishment.

Fines are paid, time is served, and then, yes, they are allowed back into the system.

Free to resume the life they may have taken a wrong turn in...as so many other have.

Erm, stocks are public property. It's like getting caught shoplifting a watch... it doesn't bar you from buying watches anymore, or buying from the same company. (I think?)

CBoylen
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:37 PM
Its easier at Devon to walk about, look at the horses. See the big names. Stabling isn't blocked so you don't enter or a guard standing there demanding who are you? I understand security, but like all things our pendualum has swung the opposite way.
The FEI requires secure stabling for those competing in sanctioned classes, so as we get more FEI classes we get more cases of secured stabling. It's not there to block spectators because horsepeople are unfriendly.
In non-FEI stabling, I've always found spectators welcome in most barns, and there's certainly no security to speak of.
At Devon and Roanoke especially we always get tons of spectators through our barn, and people tend to wander through occasionally at most of the other shows.
Except of course WEF, no spectator in their right mind would walk all the way out to where we are stabled http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Snowbird
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:43 PM
Amen! Virginiabred

I believe you can buy and own stocks but you can't be a broker or an agent for stocks. As to the banker, I doubt once one is convicted of embezzelment he gets many job offers in the industry. I doubt he could open his own bank either or be bonded so he could work in the industry.

We don't say he can't own a horse, ride a horse or sell a horse just he cannot be a Federation Member in Good Standings with the opportunities that offers.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:47 PM
Yes, Harry, you're right...it was a calculated act...of stupidity.
Please, though, allow me this...

The written word is often left to misinterpretation as well as distort. The media has long suffered a reputation of sensationalism as well as slander.

Can you say with sincerity that you personally have given Paul a chance to apologize to you???

Does a forum exist that can allow this man an opportunity to apologize sufficiently?

PSD
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:48 PM
Amen, anthem35.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Amen! Virginiabred

I believe you can buy and own stocks but you can't be a broker or an agent for stocks. As to the banker, I doubt once one is convicted of embezzelment he gets many job offers in the industry. I doubt he could open his own bank either or be bonded so he could work in the industry.

We don't say he can't own a horse, ride a horse or sell a horse just he cannot be a Federation Member in Good Standings with the opportunities that offers.

But the option does exist to return to the industry and engage in banking activities, as well as be licensed by the NYSE and the SEC.

2hsmommy
Feb. 16, 2006, 04:59 PM
[/QUOTE]

But the option does exist to return to the industry and engage in banking activities, as well as be licensed by the NYSE and the SEC.[/QUOTE]
And has anyone made an attempt to stop whomevers reinstatment of their licenses? Has anyone tried to say "No, they should not be allowed?" Would you want to trade or buy stock from a known theif? I'm not that carefree about my money.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
As far as I am concerned, he can judge any show he wants to, I would hope never a USEF rated one, but that is not my decision to make. He can conduct business anywhere he wishes, again, hopefully not at a USEF event, but again, that is not my decision.

If it is not your decision to make, why then are you petitioning to the masses to picket the governing body?

Why not let it be THEIR decision, based on the penalties they delivered, and the criteria for reinstatement that they defined?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yes, Harry, you're right...it was a calculated act...of stupidity.

Nope - it was of greed

Still not taking on the Doctors or Cops? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not really sure how cops and doctors relate to this argument, and I am witholding comment on the activities and behavior of law enforcement officers both on and off duty.

2hsmommy
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:05 PM
Because picketing the governing body is how to let the governing body know how their members feel about a cause/decision/ruling etc.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yes, Harry, you're right...it was a calculated act...of stupidity.

Nope - it was of greed

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes! Fairview! GREED.

Not sickness, or depravity.

So you can see how the relation to child molesters is irrelevant! Finally!!!!

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:07 PM
Chanda, I know all about FEI and the secured stabling they require. Also, signing in & out of riders, grooms and owners. Listed times for exercising, specific rings in which schooling can be done, and the many personnel this requires by a show. This is not at every USEF show. The shows that are permitted to have these classes are specified and ratings are listed in the FEI's roster.

What I was speaking about, was the ease which non owners, young riders and people who are interested in horses used to have in the stabling area. This was a place for many, they got to meet a big name. This was good PR for the horse industry.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
BTW Chanda, nice job in the hack...your horse is a cute mover. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Erin
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:17 PM
anthem, obviously you are comfortable working with Paul... more power to ya.

But there is a reason that people treasure and protect their good reputations -- because they know that one screw-up is all it takes for a goodly portion of the population to write you off. No matter how stellar the rest of your life has been, if you foul up good enough, that's what people are going to remember you for. And they'll steer clear of you for it.

Is this fair? Maybe not, in some cases. But it's any individual's choice as to whether or not they want to hear an apology, whether they want to give a second chance, etc.

And you know what? They are totally within their rights to say that they don't want to hear it, that they don't care if PV is now a saint, that killing a horse for insurance money is just not something they are at all interested in forgiving. And that's tough toenails for Paul, but hey... mistakes have consequences. Just because you admit to a mistake doesn't mean you don't have to suffer those consequences.

The USEF is a member organization. Its members are certainly within their rights to say, "Hey, we don't think that someone who admitted killing a horse for insurance money should be allowed back into our organization." Likewise, people who think PV is wonderful are within their rights to tell the USEF how wonderful he is and that he would be an asset as a member.

The point of the petition, it seems to me, is to make sure USEF knows how many of its members are of the opinion that PV should not be reinstated. It's not to convince those who DO support and forgive PV that they should not support or forgive him.

Perhaps this discussion could stop going around in circles if both sides realized they're not going to be able to change the other's mind, and focused on swaying those who might not have an opinion yet and the USEF. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

CBoylen
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:21 PM
Chanda, I know all about FEI and the secured stabling they require. Also, signing in & out of riders, grooms and owners. Listed times for exercising, specific rings in which schooling can be done, and the many personnel this requires by a show. This is not at every USEF show. The shows that are permitted to have these classes are specified and ratings are listed in the FEI's roster.
What I was speaking about, was the ease which non owners, young riders and people who are interested in horses used to have in the stabling area. This was a place for many, they got to meet a big name. This was good PR for the horse industry.
I understand that YOU understand. But many people aren't familiar with that and it was sounding like spectators were locked out of all the barn areas, and I wanted to make it clear that for the most part that is not the case.

BTW Chanda, nice job in the hack...your horse is a cute mover.
Oh, thanks http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. He's just coming five in May, and this is his second time at the 3', so the jumping was a bit rough http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:23 PM
Erin, I get it...I do.

But as you state, we are all entitled to our own opinions...and I do try to give mine with diplomacy.

But for every ten people that PM me to accuse me of lackling moral compass, there is 1 who does forgive.

My only hope and cause is that people take the TIME to LISTEN, and uncover the FACTS.

I will continue to respectful and polite despite the personal attacks on me, and my friends.

Beezer
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:23 PM
I haven't posted on this thread because, well, I know what my position is and so do those who matter to me. And, frankly, as with so many polarizing issues, neither side in this one will sway the other. It is just not going to happen.

I'm not sure PV owes me, personally, an apology. But he owes the industry one, and he hasn't given it. He and the others involved gave all of us a nasty black eye and as far as I can tell, they really don't see that as being a problem. If they did, they'd take out an ad that, instead of touting their recent good works, would say something along the lines of, "I was stupid. I was wrong. I apologize."

For cripes sake, Pete Rose is still banned from baseball nearly two decades after he was found to have gambled on sports. When he finally made a huge mea culpa in 2004, it went a long way toward re-establishing the momentum to get the ban lifted and make him eligible for the Hall of Fame. The ban is still in place and he's still not in the Hall of Fame because of the illegality of his actions and, yes, the shame he brought on his sport.

For gambling. It's not like he had any players killed.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by Beezer:

I'm not sure PV owes me, personally, an apology. But he owes the industry one, and he hasn't given it. He and the others involved gave all of us a nasty black eye and as far as I can tell, they really don't see that as being a problem. If they did, they'd take out an ad that, instead of touting their recent good works, would say something along the lines of, "I was stupid. I was wrong. I apologize."


Very good point. And I agree.

But unfortunately there really isnt any public forum that would allow him to stand before the members ask for forgiveness.

Perhaps something he will consider....

I do know that anyone that has had the b@lls to speak to him personally has been satisfied with his humility.

2hsmommy
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:37 PM
Hmmm, isn't this a public forum? Not being snarky mind you. He could come here and post away.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:40 PM
You know, 2hs, maybe he will...

But as I wrote in an earlier post, we all know that the written word is too easily misinterpreted.

If your career/life-as-you-know-it depended on it, you would made make damned sure that your every contact with the opposition was properly represented, and thereby, understood.

But altogether a good idea!

eqnjumperrider
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
Yes, Harry, you're right...it was a calculated act...of stupidity.
Please, though, allow me this...

The written word is often left to misinterpretation as well as distort. The media has long suffered a reputation of sensationalism as well as slander.

Can you say with sincerity that you personally have given Paul a chance to apologize to you???

Does a forum exist that can allow this man an opportunity to apologize sufficiently?
Once again you are right on the money. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As an aside.. Aunt Esther, it's anoying that you refer to yourself in the third person, how about trying the first person. Also, I am so the national/international purse champion http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 05:49 PM
Anthem, the only answer I can give to your question is this. While I do not make the final decision on this matter, I feel an obligation to the poor animals who were done away with. I am an animal lover. One should not be summarily forgiven for this act. No, it is not up to me, but if my support to this issue somehow makes a difference, it is important to me that I at least try.

On another note anthem, I think someone may have hacked your friend oxer's account. The other night an incoherent post was made under her name that was filled with spelling errors and bad grammar. You might want to alert her to this.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:03 PM
Anthem, I must apologize to you, but I have seen the man as a child, as an adolescent, as a young man, as a thirty year old, and I have to admit, nothing in his character changed from the very first day I saw him. This is a world where you are free to conduct business with him, for me there is nothing that can change my mind.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
Thanks, Harry..I'll look into the hacker...as long as he hasnt made off with her sweet pony!!!

Back on topic, I too am an animal lover. Nd I completely understand your obligation to them.

But, I am also a believer in PEOPLE. In the word of the famous poet, Jimmy Buffett, "Human beings are flawed individuals".

I know the entire world is mad at Paul. Im mad at Paul. Paul is mad at Paul.

I am not asking you to ever forgive, or even forget.

What I would ask is this...ALlow this man a moment of your time to apologize to YOU.

I am not asking you to accept, I am just asking you to listen. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:04 PM
Anthem, this is not meant to be inflamatory. When this went down we all waited. No one could believe he was involved. Kept thinking not Paul, he wouldn't do this, never. Believed what we were being told was wrong, media hype kinda thing. But the facts, proved us all wrong. Which was devasting. He never formally made any type of apology to his friends or peers. That may have been the hardest thing for all of us.

2hsmommy
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:04 PM
Why are you asking? Why not him?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA:
Anthem, this is not meant to be inflamatory. When this went down we all waited. No one could believe he was involved. Kept thinking not Paul, he wouldn't do this, never. Believed what we were being told was wrong, media hype kinda thing. But the facts, proved us all wrong. Which was devasting. He never formally made any type of apology to his friends or peers. That may have been the hardest thing for all of us.

I can absolutely appreciate this.

I know Paul NOW, and I wonder 'how'?

While I am not asking for any compassion, please consider this...

Moving beyond the atrocities of the incident,

How must he have felt, letting down friends, family, clients, kids...???

I am sure this was NOT his finest hour.

The ovewhelming urge to crawl up and die until hell froze over would have been my first thought.
To face my peers would have been an impossible task.

In addition, I am certain that his counsel advised him to refrain from discussing this incident as is often the case.

If he were to offer a formal apology, would you accept it? Or would people continue to beat him down, and attack his effort.

Would YOU like an apology? If he offered YOU one, would you at least hear him out?

Snowbird
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:44 PM
I would like to hear how he justifies such a heinous act? As someone who struggles to support my poor string of lowly horses that no one wanted and the care for them until it's their time and not when it's convenient for me. I came close to bankruptcy and never considered killing my horses. I could have insured them and arranged for accidents, heck we have a lot of ice to slip on in the winter, I wouldn't need a "sandman".

I would like him to tell me why it's different for him. Why is it different for expensive horses and rich clients than it is for me? Why wouldn't he have given the kids in my barn a horse like the one killed for free? Tell me why I should respect him and want him back judging the Maclay? or managing horse shows?

Erin
Feb. 16, 2006, 06:49 PM
I dunno, anthem, there are tearful apologies from public figures who have "done wrong" all the time. It's sort of de rigeur, in fact.

Kobe Bryant apologized before he suited back up for the Lakers. Duke Cunningham, that California congressman who got indicted, was sobbing on TV apologizing to his friends, family and constituents.

It's certainly not a pleasant task and I doubt anyone WANTS to do it, but many public figures do.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:06 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
I would like to hear how he justifies such a heinous act? As someone who struggles to support my poor string of lowly horses that no one wanted and the care for them until it's their time and not when it's convenient for me. I came close to bankruptcy and never considered killing my horses. I could have insured them and arranged for accidents, heck we have a lot of ice to slip on in the winter, I wouldn;t need a "sandman".

I would like him to tell me why it's different for him. Why is it different for expensive horses and rich clients than it is for me? Why wouldn't he have given the kids in my barn at a horse like the one killed for free? Tell me why I should respect him and want him back judging the Maclay?


I think this deserves a response for sure...

But in all honesty, it will be very hard for one man to personally respond to all the inquiries posed here...But Snowbird, what can I do to help YOU?

I can offer you this--

I have been to your farm, showed at your show.
Had a great time while suffering the risk of making a tremendous fool of myself.

I am not anything other than a little person myself. I am certainly not a rich client.
I do not have a string of warmbloods. I have a plain ole' QH.

While you may feel that he sees it differently, I can assure you that he does not. Expensive horse, cheap horse. He does not care. Just wants it to be the Right Horse.

I have said this before, and I will say it again.
There will be corruption at the top end of any game.
Politics, Religion, Sports.
I am happy that you enjoy your life and your wonderful farm, and have not felt the need to sacrifice yourself to produce only winners. Its a tough game to win.

But what does that have to do with respecting his opinion as a trainer?

I am not asking you to sponsor a class in business ethics with Paul as the guest speaker.

But even you agree, his expertise in the training arena is without compromise.

You do NOT have to respect his history, you should respect his opinion judging the Maclay.

amandaw
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:

Having spent many a year on Wall Street, I watched bankers and traders cuffed and collared on the desk, and lead off to punishment.

Fines are paid, time is served, and then, yes, they are allowed back into the system.

Free to resume the life they may have taken a wrong turn in...as so many other have.

Henry Blodgett comes to mind. His experience, which may be an isolated event, is contrary to what you have seen.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">How must he have felt, letting down friends, family, clients, kids...???

Someone that had that kind of feelings for others would have never entertained the thought of killing a horse for money. A tiger does not change his stripes - he just gets more cunning. He was willing to do this because of greed & status. He is still protecting his "status" & showing his greed by staying involved with horses. A remorseful person would have gone to work in a different occupation to not have to keep hurting "his" victims again and again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, a tiger does not change its stripes.
But we are not talking about animals, we are taling about HUMANS.
Humans have the ability to FEEL remorse.

Kap
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:13 PM
Anthem, it's been said so many times I feel foolish saying it again.

He can feel remorse. That is good. That doesn't mean he should be forgiven, and it doesn't mean people will WANT to forgive him. Murderers in jail often feel remorse-- does that mean they should get out on parol?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by Kap: Aefvue Young'un:
Anthem, it's been said so many times I feel foolish saying it again.

He can feel remorse. That is good. That doesn't mean he should be forgiven, and it doesn't mean people will WANT to forgive him. Murderers in jail often feel remorse-- does that mean they should get out on parol?

KAP-but they DO.

If theyprove to a parole board that they have satisfied the requirements for re-entry to society, they are granted so.
I am not saying you have to forgive, that is a personal decision.

I AM saying the qualifications for consideration for reeinstatement have been met. The man deserves a fair chance.

Snowbird
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:18 PM
anthem35 if you've been here then you should understand the difference between what a horse can do for you and what we need to do for the horses.

The next generation of youngsters coming up; and those not even born neeed the opportunity to have icons of this sport they can respect. An accident is what GM had in Florida when his horse was impaled on a pipe rail. It is not an accident to hire a professional to make a horse's death look like an accident.

Murder Inc. did that with people, they had just as good reasons as PV had unless he can tell me why it was different. I agree with you; being sorry speaking an apology is not good enough. If he was out of his mind...if his kids were starving and he was going to be homeless maybe I could find a soft spot. Even if he was drugged out of his mind maybe I could forgive him if he hadn't taken the drugs himself.

I'm very glad for you that he can forgive you because a Quarter Horse is what you need. I am happy for you that he is willing to get the best he can out of you and your horse. And, if I could believe that he had learned his lesson I would be really happy for him.

BUT...as an icon of this sport like any Olympian they have to be above reproach. Character, honor and integrity are not just words they are part of an ideal. When that ideal has feet of clay it undermines everything. Please understand I hate to see wasted talent and I do believe that Paul Valiere has talent but right now his mission is to prove that bending the rules and tap dancing around them is evil.

Yours Truly
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:25 PM
It is futile to discuss how we wish someone would feel. Remorse, regret, sorrow, guilt--these are feelings that come from within. Asking for an apology is similarly futile. The only genuine apology is one given of free will.

Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
It is futile to discuss how we wish someone would feel. Remorse, regret, sorrow, guilt--these are feelings that come from within. Asking for an apology is similarly futile. The only genuine apology is one given of free will.

So well said!

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:28 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snowbird:
anthem35 if you've been here then you should understand the difference between what a horse can do for you and what we need to do for the horses.

The next generation of youngsters coming up; and those not even born neeed the opportunity to have icons of this sport they can respect. An accident is what GM had in Florida when his horse was impaled on a pipe rail. An accident is not hiring a professional to make a horse's death look like an accident.

Murder Inc. did that with people, they had just as good reasons as PV had unless he can tell me why it was different. I agree with you; being sorry speaking an apology is not good enough. If he was out of his mind...if his kids were starving and he was going to be homeless maybe I could find a soft spot. Even if he was drugged out of his mind maybe I could forgive him if he hadn't taken the drugs himself.

I'm very glad for you that he can forgive you because a Quarter Horse is what you need. I am happy for you that he is willing to get the best he can out of you and your horse. And, if I could believe that he had learned his lesson I would be really happy for him.

BUT...as an icon of this sport like any Olympian they have to be above reproach. Character, honor and integrity are not just words they are part of an ideal. When that ideal has feet of clay it undermines everything. Please understand I hate to see wasted talent and I do believe that Paul Valiere has talent but right now his mission is to prove that bending the rules and tap dancing around them is evil.[/QUOTE

But Snowbird, there is so much you are missing.

What rules is he bending?
The rules does not say he can't train, only that he cannot train on showgrounds.
AND he does NOT.

And as far as the next generation goes?

I am happy and proud to say that my plain old QH is now in the hands of an extremely talented 10 yr old.
And, as any kid would, he worships his trainer.
Unfortunately his trainer can't watch him as he wins his first ribbon in Palm Beach.
But this kid knows the story, and kids are smarter than we give them credit for.

This kid has learned firsthand how much mistakes will cost you, and he is mad at Paul for that.
But I will tell you, that this sweet kid has been able to look at this without the hystrionics usually attributed to us older more judgenmental citizens, and was one of the first to offer his support.

So, yes, there is a lesson to be taught to our young ones in this sport..just not the one you expected.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
It is futile to discuss how we wish someone would feel. Remorse, regret, sorrow, guilt--these are feelings that come from within. Asking for an apology is similarly futile. The only genuine apology is one given of free will.

Your Truly-

I appreciate this, and welcome your ideas...

In what way would you offer an apology considering your audience?

Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:32 PM
I have an eleven year old and I don't think he would be very forgiving if I told him the story. He is quite intellegent and very sensitive. He knows right from wrong and most of all what a mistake is vs a non mistake. I really can't believe a ten year old child would be that forgiving and want to be around someone that had an animal killed. Was it fully explained how the horse was killed? Or was it explained in a not so graphic way?

Duffy
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:37 PM
The kids I've told have been beyond horrified.

Andrew
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:37 PM
I'll give Harry a HALLELJUIA!!!!!! PAISE IT BE!!
HARRY ROCKS http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif.. Proud memeber of the Motley Crew http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:38 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division:
I have an eleven year old and I don't think he would be very forgiving if I told him the story. He is quite intellegent and very sensitive. He knows right from wrong and most of all what a mistake is vs a non mistake. I really can't believe a ten year old child would be that forgiving and want to be around someone that had an animal killed. Was it fully explained how the horse was killed? Or was it explained in a not so graphic way?[/QUOTE}

It was explained by his Mother quite candidly.

As I said, kids are a lot more astute than we give them credit for.

She took the time, gave him the story...he took it like a man. He gets the right from wrong, and misses his Idol at the ring.

Same kid got to meet McLain I hear..So much they have in common.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:38 PM
While it is sad that the child cannot have his trainer share in winning a ribbon at WEF, it would have been possible for him to have a trainer who was welcome on the show grounds. I say shame on parents who teach their child that winning a piece of satin ribbon or a trophy is more important than integrity. You can believe, and argue that you are with the best trainer, best is a matter of opinion, and best at what, yet another opinion. There are hundreds of wonderful trainers at WEF, dozens in New England. Yes, you have the right to select who you want, my direction would be towards someone without the kind of history that haunts Mr. Valliere. For the record, I am just as much against Barney Ward, George Lindeman, Marion Hulick, Donna Brown or any of the others being reinstated. And in the beginning I was ambivalent.

Yours Truly
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:39 PM
anthem--you said:

I am not saying you have to forgive, that is a personal decision.

I agree.

You also said:

I AM saying the qualifications for consideration for reeinstatement have been met. The man deserves a fair chance.

But isn't the giving of the "fair chance" also a personal decision?

It is important to point out the importance of the word consideration for reinstatement. Part of that consideration is happening here. Albeit, unofficially.

Andrew
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:39 PM
and my I PLEASE have another Cab i net to get through these pages http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by Duffy, CFO, Aefvue Farm LLC:
The kids I've told have been beyond horrified.

Well, I actually think Goldilocks was no childrens tale, myself...

Yours Truly
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:43 PM
anthem, please clarify your question:


In what way would you offer an apology considering your audience?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
anthem--you said:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I am not saying you have to forgive, that is a personal decision.

I agree.

You also said:

I AM saying the qualifications for consideration for reeinstatement have been met. The man deserves a fair chance.

But isn't the giving of the "fair chance" also a personal decision?

It is important to point out the importance of the word consideration for reinstatement. Part of that consideration is happening here. Albeit, unofficially. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well, depends how you look at it.

The ultimate decision is up to the governing body.
In all fairness, they have to consider everything.
your opinion, my opinion. and the facts.
So yes, I can understand your actions, but fair is fair, and he had made every attempt to play by the rules.

Erin
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:

KAP-but they DO.

If theyprove to a parole board that they have satisfied the requirements for re-entry to society, they are granted so.

Some of them. But many of them come up for parole and are denied, denied, denied, denied...

It's not automatic.

Yours Truly
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:45 PM
Be right back. Must go watch figure skating.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
anthem, please clarify your question:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> In what way would you offer an apology considering your audience? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
How would you, In his position, make a public apology that would reach everyone?
A letter to the Chron?
A public forum?
Its just not possible to personally reach every horseperson.
Please, I ask in sincerity...as someone who has been offended, what would it take to offer an apology?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by Erin:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by anthem35:

KAP-but they DO.

If theyprove to a parole board that they have satisfied the requirements for re-entry to society, they are granted so.
No, Erin, thank god its not
But, it IS based on behavior and action.

Every case is individual, and requires individual scrutiny.

Erin
Feb. 16, 2006, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
No, Erin, thank god its not
But, it IS based on behavior and action.

Every case is individual, and requires individual scrutiny.

Agreed. And individual scrutiny is definitely what PV is getting, for better or worse! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by Erin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by anthem35:

KAP-but they DO.

If theyprove to a parole board that they have satisfied the requirements for re-entry to society, they are granted so.

Some of them. But many of them come up for parole and are denied, denied, denied, denied...

It's not automatic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Erin-a few years back I posted a topic about a girl at my past barn who was also a co-worker, who had stolen from our employers to pay to train and show her horse. In the end, the amount stole came to 160 thousand dollars.
She then, after having been fired, came to work at barn.
Confused as how to approach this, my topic drew many responses.
Obviously upset by this negative publicity, at her husbands request, you withdrew the thread.
Its now 2 years later.
The company she embezzled from struggles to survive.
She, on the other hand, is flourishing with a new LandRover and a baby.
She will show again in the AA hunters on the horse she stole from her employers to support.
Why, does this woman get a second chance?
Why was her thread erased, while this continues.
Why?
Because she was NO ONE.
We all understood how hard it is to compete without a lot of cash.
We get how hard it is when ur a little person trying to get by.
Felony is a felony, right?

I guess not.

There is a small company in New England with an older couple who may not be able to retire, with an ex-employee who is getting ready to hit the showgrounds with their future.

Why is this ok?

asher
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:09 PM
Okay, confession time. Longtime lurker who has been to maybe three tiny shows max in her lifetime and is not a member of the USEF, so please take the following words as the view of a not very informed outsider.



Moving beyond the atrocities of the incident,

How must he have felt, letting down friends, family, clients, kids...???


Why oh why did I have to get caught? *ducks for cover* http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

Sorry, sorry!

But seriously...

I'm reasonably sure that the killing was a well-thought out plan of action, designed to minimize any and all possible "problems" associated with such an endeavor-using a middleman and electrocution, etc. Those actions did just *not* seem the work of a man broken with indecision and guilt over a difficult choice, but a business decision to minimize loss. Or possibly embarrassment. I really don’t know, and I’ve never met him or actually even heard of Mr. Valliere before the No Reinstatement threads. This is just how it’s appearing to me.

I’m sure he’s a perfectly nice person when under parole, but it takes a bit of cool, calculating temperament to even think about doing anything close to what he did, which leads me to wonder if, indeed, he feels remorse for killing a horse under his care or if the remorse is for getting caught. The regret itself seems genuine, but his quotes personally come across as “I’ve done charity, I’ve expressed remorse, ergo I am entitled to join the USEF http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif"

[QUOTE] "I've helped a lot of different animal charities," Valliere said. "I donated all of my lesson money to the animals left behind after 9/11. I've donated a lot to the ASPCA and to rescuing horses in distress. A lot of people just don't know what I've done. Mason was kind enough to ask me to judge. There were only a handful of people [dissenting] — enough to stir up a problem. Some people just won't let go." [/QUOTE ]

Again, he probably didn’t just wake up one day an Evil Horse Killer ™ after a life of good deeds, but had a long and disreputable spiral downward to reach that point. Yes, this is nothing but speculation on my part based on admittedly limited experience. However, nothing has really convinced me that if a similar situation comes up again, he won’t make another wrong decision. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Ok, long rant over. This is my view of the subject, and when I discussed it with non-horsey folks, they had similar opinions on the situation. Am I missing something? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Kap
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:10 PM
It's not, anthem. Just because she got away with it doesn't mean it is unjust that PV hasn't been able to get away with it. They BOTH did wrong. She just escaped the fair punishment, I guess.

Erin
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:12 PM
anthem, the rules on this forum are clear, and I don't care WHO is being talked about, it has to follow the rules.

PV pleaded guilty. The facts here are not in dispute. They're well documented and therefore fair game for discussion. I don't recall the thread you're talking about (which is not surprising, if it was several years ago), but I kind of doubt the facts were as well documented in that instance.

Don't make this about me and this forum because you're not winning the argument on your own merit. This is certainly a legitimate issue that deserves discussion.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:13 PM
You're not missing anything...but details and the truth.

Another example of how the media can distort the truth and separate the reality.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by Erin:
anthem, the rules on this forum are clear, and I don't care WHO is being talked about, it has to follow the rules.

PV pleaded guilty. The facts here are not in dispute. They're well documented and therefore fair game for discussion. I don't recall the thread you're talking about (which is not surprising, if it was several years ago), but I kind of doubt the facts were as well documented in that instance.

Don't make this about me and this forum because you're not winning the argument on your own merit. This is certainly a legitimate issue that deserves discussion.

Erin, with all due respect, I have done nothing but play by the rules.
I have never been less than respectful or diplomatic, despite to personla attacks I have suffered.
Although I may be in the vast minority, I am entitled to speak my mind.

And as far as the embezzlement incident went, you personally e-mailed me to let me know you were withdrawing the thread at his request, despite the fact that you as well as the board had found it to be a rather intersting topic.

Erin
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
Erin, with all due respect, I have done nothing but play by the rules.
I have never been less than respectful or diplomatic, despite to personla attacks I have suffered.

And I never suggested otherwise. But I do find it... interesting... that you're trying to make it seem as though there's some sort of COTH BB conspiracy afoot here. I don't appreciate that insinuation.


And as far as the embezzlement incident went, you personally e-mailed me to let me know you were withdrawing the thread at his request, despite the fact that you as well as the board had found it to be a rather intersting topic.

I don't remove threads simply because people request that they be removed. I remove them because they violate the rules. If they break the rules, it doesn't matter if they're interesting.

If the embezzler you refer to was identifiable in your posts and had not actually been charged with a criminal act, the thread was against the rules.

Yours Truly
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:21 PM
How would you, In his position, make a public apology that would reach everyone?
A letter to the Chron?
A public forum?
Its just not possible to personally reach every horseperson.
Please, I ask in sincerity...as someone who has been offended, what would it take to offer an apology?

As I said, I would never ask someone for an apology. But if he wanted to apologize to every horseperson, he could figure out a way to do it. (Starting with your examples.) Would it help? Who knows? That's the thing about apologies. They don't come with expectations.

Kap
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:23 PM
Why doesn't PV just buy the domain name www.iscrewedupandimsorry.com (http://www.iscrewedupandimsorry.com) and post a permanent "I'm sorry" letter to the horse world for anyone to go read?

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Erin:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by anthem35:
Erin, with all due respect, I have done nothing but play by the rules.
I have never been less than respectful or diplomatic, despite to personla attacks I have suffered.

And I never suggested otherwise. But I do find it... interesting... that you're trying to make it seem as though there's some sort of COTH BB conspiracy afoot here. I don't appreciate that insinuation.


And as far as the embezzlement incident went, you personally e-mailed me to let me know you were withdrawing the thread at his request, despite the fact that you as well as the board had found it to be a rather intersting topic.

I don't remove threads simply because people request that they be removed. I remove them because they violate the rules. If they break the rules, it doesn't matter if they're interesting.

If the embezzler you refer to was identifiable in your posts and had not actually been charged with a criminal act, the thread was against the rules.[/QUOTE

Fair enough...The embezzler in question was not charged as the company in question did not want to suffer the negative publicity in a small, seasonal town.

I am going to every effort to actually play BY the rules despite the majority, and will continue to do so.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by Kap: Aefvue Young'un:
Why doesn't PV just buy the domain name www.iscrewedupandimsorry.com (http://www.iscrewedupandimsorry.com) and post a permanent "I'm sorry" letter to the horse world for anyone to go read?

You know, at this point, he may consider it.
I cant speak for him, but at this point, I'm not sure where I'd be begin to apologize to the community.

But I'm sure he wishes he knew.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:32 PM
Well, as much as I feel like a salmon swimming upstream, I have enjoyed our 'discussion'.
See, we CAN all politely disagree.
And as I continually say, everyone is entitled to THEIR opinion based on FACTS,and I will most certainly respect that.
But, its late and I am beat.
I wish you all well, and good night.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:32 PM
And Anthem, you know I applaud the fact that you HAVE been civil throughout all of our discussions, despite the fact that we are completely on opposite sides of the fence. I must say that is refreshing, considering the posts we have seen.

anthem35
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
And Anthem, you know I applaud the fact that you HAVE been civil throughout all of our discussions, despite the fact that we are completely on opposite sides of the fence. I must say that is refreshing, considering the posts we have seen.

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Harry.

Yours Truly
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:41 PM
I cant speak for him, but at this point, I'm not sure where I'd be begin to apologize to the community.

But I'm sure he wishes he knew.

You just begin. And that beginning can be anywhere he likes.

Beezer
Feb. 16, 2006, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
And Anthem, you know I applaud the fact that you HAVE been civil throughout all of our discussions, despite the fact that we are completely on opposite sides of the fence. I must say that is refreshing, considering the posts we have seen.

Ditto. Anthem, you at least, seem able to express yourself in a manner that might help PV, rather than hurt him.

FWIW, I think that if the same effort were put into ads saying he's sorry -- if indeed he is -- that was put into publicizing his recent good works, and they appeared in the same publications, it would be a good start to his mea culpa. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I truly believe in redemption. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I am Pollyanna-ish enough to think that even condemned murderers can be truly remorseful and that most people who have served their time deserve a second chance (I say most, because, frankly, I think child molesters deserve their own small island hell).

But it all has to start with the person truly being sorry, owning up to their mistakes and wanting to make amends. Until that happens, everything else is moot.

Hopeful Hunter
Feb. 16, 2006, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
Last of all, I do have one question...

Have any of you actually spoken WITH Paul, and given him at least an opportunity to apologize?

Anthem, I appreciate your rational input into this discussion, although I don't agree with your position. I wanted to address this though....

I, certainly have not spoken to Mr. Valliere. I don't even know how to do so. I have been asked by members of the media how to contact him, since they tell me his phone is unlisted and they also don't have contact information for them (although Nancy Jaffer did succeed in getting him to speak with her - and I'm not sure he served himself well doing so, from a PR standpoint...but I'm not Mason Phelps, I practice PR quite differently, and I digress...)

So, as one of "the little people" I don't know how to contact him...and I don't particularly want to. See, this ISN'T about whether or not Mr. Valliere is remorseful (which, given the tone of his comments, doesn't come through to the average reader...) nor even about whether or not he has fulfilled the letter - or the spirit - of his suspension.

For me, this is about what is and is not acceptable practices that the governing body of my sport will allow. And I do not believe that the governing body should ever permit the destruction of the horses that are the only reason this sport exists - for fraudulent, illegal purposes - to be condoned. Period.

So, for me, there isn't any way in which Mr. Valliere can "apologize" that would make me say "oh, heck, he's not that bad, it's a long time, let him in." Because, as I've been quoted as saying, some things MAY be forgivable, but that doesn't mean they should be forgotten.

Mr. Valliere made a very, very, very poor choice. He made it freely, and he has admitted making it, and he must live with the consequences. People make bad choices all the time, and they live with the consequences every day. It's not easy, but that's the way it goes.

Whether or not Mr. Valliere is a skilled trainer isn't the issue...I have never and will never believe that the ends justify the means. The journey - whether it be to win a class or through one's life - really IS what it's about.

Mr. Valliere's journey is one I cannot respect. You can -- that's not something I'm able to get my brain around, but that's your choice, not mine. I do give people second chances, but not if what they've done is something I consider to be non-negotiable. And, should I ever screw up to that extent, I'd expect to be treated the same. There are standards for me which one cannot violate without incurring dire penalties.

Some things in life just are not acceptable. This is one of them for me, and for many other people. You feel differently. I can't understand that, I don't "agree" with it, but I can accept it. But because I DO think some things are just non-negotiable in terms of acceptance, an apology - to me, at least - isn't necessary. One to the horses who died, and to the industry, though, might have been nice...but it would need to be in a different tone, I think than what has been seen so far.

(edited to attempt to clarify....)

jetsmom
Feb. 16, 2006, 09:12 PM
Anthem, I too am impressed by your civility. You sound like you would be a good friend to have, and I hope PV appreciates it.

Can I ask though, (and you can PT me if you don't want to risk being flamed), if you were riding with PV before this happened, during or after? If you went there after, did you know his history? If not, did he bring it up to you? If you knew his history, why did you choose him over someone without the baggage? How can you ever be sure that he will put your horse's needs first? I mean, say there was an important show/class, and while warming up your horse seems sore, but not truly lame. I personally would want my trainer to say, "You know, he doesn't look right. I think you should scratch." Or if your trainer gave Bute before bedtime at a show, and he was colicky, would he go ahead and give Banamine and scratch, due to the illegal meds, or would he hold off on the Banamine because he REALLY wants to see this horse show? I'd always have the doubt in my mind that if you can kill a horse, then you view them differently than me, and I wouldn't ever feel that you would put the horse first. Do you know what I mean? How do you get around that?
Does he freely discuss his past with people visiting him that are thinking about training with him. Does he let them know right away that he can't be at shows and why?
And my last question is, that he isn't allowed to be the trainer at shows. So if he sends his students to a show with a stand in trainer, isn't that skirting the rules?

hiddenlake
Feb. 16, 2006, 09:16 PM
Originally posted by Hopeful Hunter:
For me, this is about what is and is not acceptable practices that the governing body of my sport will allow. And I do not believe that the governing body should ever permit the destruction of the horses that are the only reason this sport exists - for nothing more than greed and vanity - to be condoned. Period.


HH is right on. My father always told me to remember the difference between an honor and a privilege. An honor is something you receive for something you've done well, and it's yours to keep. A privilege is something that's lent to you in trust, and if you abuse it, the privilege can be taken away. Winning the Maclay is an honor. Membership in the USEF is a privilege. PV abused the privilege of membership in an organization that (purportedly) puts the welfare of the horse above all else.

Besides, at this point in time an apology seems a little late, and would seem like a means to an end. Had I seen that apology come long ago, and seen it repeatedly, then I might think it was sincere.

lure
Feb. 16, 2006, 09:48 PM
When I 1st found this thread I was reminded about the insurance killings per say, it spurred me onto signing the 'No Re-instatement' petition. More importantly, it got me intense about finding the book 'Hot Blood'. I researched the book, bought it ,am 1/2 way thru, and am horrified and reminded why I signed the petition. I have a story or 2 to tell myself, thru only from being the x wife of a trainer who's still involved and as we speak, has horses in Palm Beach. (He' has never done anything like be involved in the

lure
Feb. 16, 2006, 10:18 PM
I'm having terrible problems responding o I apoligise if this is a 'repeat;. I STRONGLY opose any re-instatement of PV, have signed the petition and am re-reading the book Hot Blood and thru that book am reminded vividly what happened. I am sickened by what happened. I was in the past married to a h/j trainer who still claims success in Palm Beach as recent as today so I think my opinion is 'more than valid;

Seal Harbor
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:48 AM
If victim's families show up at parole hearings they make sure the person is not paroled, no matter their stellar prison behavior.

I do not want anyone who perpetrated this crime against horses and the insurance companies reinstated. It's not just Paul.

He made his decision, he is responsible for his past behavior, not us, but we don't have to have him back either. There are always consequences to choices we make; he does not deserve to be a member of the USEF. He had the very being that made him what he was killed, for insurance money when it could have been sold to someone else. He disrespected the animal on whose back he made his name and reputation. Had he pursued this mistake as an honest horseman he would have sold the horse at a loss, he could have taken a tax deduction since he was in the business of making a living doing this, or donated it to a college riding program or found it another job doing something it enjoyed, because the horses come first. From where I sit, it appears that he could not do this because he believed his own hype that he was infallible, perfect, could never be wrong about a horse. He chose this path; no one forced him to do it. A person with a conscience wouldn't even ask to be reinstated or assume they could come back they would be too embarrassed.

The advertisments touting his good works make me even more suspect. A person does charitable deeds because it's the right thing to do not to make themselves look good nor do they inform the world about it via advertisments. To head you supporters of PV off at the pass, I'm sure it's a client or two that pays for these homages to Paul's charitable works, it still does not take away the stench of self promotion and lack of humility. It cheapens anything he has done, because it just proves it's not from the kindness of his heart they are just a means to an end, his own glorification and the mistaken belief that this buys him redemption. Some things just aren't for sale.



.

pwynnnorman
Feb. 17, 2006, 04:56 AM
I've stayed away from this thread, but reading the last two pages made me want to just throw this out for discussion:

People kill horses all the time. It's not against the law.

How and why it is done can be against the law.

PV did it for money and it was done in a very cruel way.

But he only got charged with the "why," not the "how," right? I don't recall. Was the "how" his decision or the SandMan's (remember that sometimes, electrocution was used).

The penalty for murders that a heinous are different (and more long lasting, yes?) than the penalties for manslaughter and murder in less degrees.

If he only did it for money, and left the "how" up to someone else's decision, shouldn't that be considered differently (don't forget the IF there, OK)?

There are trainers out there medicating horses to the point where they will face ultimately face a painful retirement and possibly death. Some of these trainers have gotten caught doing such things. They are doing them for money, too.

If PV gets treated in "x" way, will there/should there be a trickle down effect on all "crimes against horses" in the USEF that are based on monetary gain and result in cruelty? Shouldn't USEF be consistent? Or is PV's condition just because he also broke a law in the wider criminal system?

I watch Animal Planet's Animal Cops. There's a lot of cruelty toward animals out there, but so far, the wider society doesn't seem to feel it deserves the kind of treatment it is getting in this instance. What makes horses different from chickens, dogs and cows?

I find myself continually coming back to fairness here. What is truly, truly "fair" in this case? Truly?

(I'll admit that I'm not neutral: I believe he's paid his dues on this and will continue to pay (socially). But keeping him off the grounds by ruling him off for life doesn't look like it'll make much of a difference (economically), so what does it all matter (ultimately)?

War Admiral
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:13 AM
It *isn't* going to make any difference economically to any of them - I think that's already been demonstrated... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

To me, it's just the principle of the thing: lawyers who commit malpractice are no longer permitted to practice law; doctors who commit malpractice are no longer permitted to practice medicine. There's a lot of reliance in this industry on the term "professional". If you want to CALL yourself a professional, then you need to be held to professional standards. That means ACCOUNTABILITY. All of these people did what they did of their own free will; they are accountable for their own actions.

To me, ALL the horse killers committed malpractice by killing animals they were being (in most instances) PAID to train and care for.

And yes, further on down the road, I hope this *does* start a trickle-down effect. It's no secret that I think suspensions and penalties for abuse should be increased; I've always maintained that.

I'm hopelessly idealistic but I would really like to see USEF be a clean organization, insofar as it is able to be. I think that they do try, but I'm not sure they try hard enough.

Anything we members can think of to do in order to encourage them on the long road to development of sound policy is something that's going to get a LOT of my time/attention.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:31 AM
Eloquently said, WA.

SGray
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by anthem35:
......
and have not felt the need to sacrifice yourself to produce only winners. Its a tough game to win.

But what does that have to do with respecting his opinion as a trainer?

I am not asking you to sponsor a class in business ethics with Paul as the guest speaker.

But even you agree, his expertise in the training arena is without compromise....

if "his expertise in the training arena is without compromise" then why did he have RP killed?

TL
Feb. 17, 2006, 08:09 AM
Originally posted by hiddenlake:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hopeful Hunter:
For me, this is about what is and is not acceptable practices that the governing body of my sport will allow. And I do not believe that the governing body should ever permit the destruction of the horses that are the only reason this sport exists - for nothing more than greed and vanity - to be condoned. Period.


HH is right on. My father always told me to remember the difference between an honor and a privilege. An honor is something you receive for something you've done well, and it's yours to keep. A privilege is something that's lent to you in trust, and if you abuse it, the privilege can be taken away. Winning the Maclay is an honor. Membership in the USEF is a privilege. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know I'm being repetitive but, uh-gain (sorry!) I'd also consider it a privilege to earn one's living in Sport (capitalized for emphasis).

It's been said a million different ways by a million different people here but... with the money involved it's easy to forget what this is all about and why it's particularly reprehensible. This is sport. This is recreation. This is, at the end of the day, a hobby and if the law needs to be broken and abuses committed with the ultimate end-result of maximizing someone's enjoyment (as measured thrugh ribbons)...

well, that's about the least sportsmanlike thing I can think of. The person who does these things or, the person for whom he does them needs a new hobby.

The examples of doctors and lawyers and stockbrokers? I'd consider this, this insurance fraud scandal a degree worse, a degree less comprehensible. Because this is not the practice of law or medicine or financial services. This is a sport.

The little cheats are bad enough and go against what we are taught as children. The little cheats, however, get second chances and opportunities to "learn from the experience."

Not the big ones, though.

pwynnnorman
Feb. 17, 2006, 09:50 AM
And yes, further on down the road, I hope this *does* start a trickle-down effect. It's no secret that I think suspensions and penalties for abuse should be increased; I've always maintained that.

I'm hopelessly idealistic but I would really like to see USEF be a clean organization, insofar as it is able to be. I think that they do try, but I'm not sure they try hard enough.

Anything we members can think of to do in order to encourage them on the long road to development of sound policy is something that's going to get a LOT of my time/attention.

I sure can't argue with that, WA, and I'd support it if I thought it'd make any difference. Alas, it will in the end come down to money, not principles.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 10:02 AM
What rules is he bending?
Hiring a proxy to take his place is bending the rules. Using cell phones and radios to keep in touch and answer questions for the proxy trainer is tap dancing around the rules.

PV knows full well the intention of the rules is to prevent suspended persons from participating. The above is bending the rules to the edge of them snapping in his face. The new rules threaten to punish anyone who rides to the credit or benefit of a suspended trainer or horse owner. Those juniors who rode horses he owned even for free have been jeopardized and could be penalized themselves. Is that the way of one of the "best" trainers?

For anyone to consider that PV judge an unrecognized Equitation Class on grounds that are USEF approved for a 24 hour day is bending the rules. He is not permitted on those grounds while they are sanctioned by USEF whether or not rated classes are being offered. The sanctioning of USEF says from Midnight to midnight for each day.

That is not a good example for anyone to give to those who are looking up to emulate the "great" and "famous". Whether a young trainer or a young exhibitor.

Again, PV had to be caught before he withdrew as a judge from that Equitation Class. Not good sportsmanship even this year.

I'd like to repeat what Harry said; it is not just PV it is everyone that has been convicted or confessed or both who should not be a Member in Good Standing. I think it is as offensive that a man still sitting in jail for fraud against a horse owner, or many horse owners is a Member in Good Standing of the Federation.

I am equally offended that Joe Plemmons can on national TV admit he shot Helen Brach in the head and disposed of the body for money and be a member in Good Standing. Welcomed at our Premiere Show Circuit to sell horses to more unsuspecting clients.

Paul Valiere has his name on this petition because he is due for "Reinstatement". Since the administration ignored my mail requesting that Joe Plemmons be banned we have every reason to be suspicious.

I sent the Executive Director the link to the TV show where he made his outrageous confessions. I have never even had the courtesy of a reply.

Duffy
Feb. 17, 2006, 10:03 AM
But, why not support it because you agree with it then? If no one supported anything because they didn't think they'd make a difference, where would we be?

anthem35
Feb. 17, 2006, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What rules is he bending?
Hiring a proxy to take his place is bending the rules. Using cell phones and radios to keep in touch and answer questions for the proxy trainer is tap dancing around the rules.

PV knows full well the intention of the rules is to prevent suspended persons from participating. The above is bending the rules to the edge of them snapping in his face. The new rules threaten to punish anyone who rides to the credit or benefit of a suspended trainer or horse owner. Those juniors who rode horses he owned even for free have been jeopardized and could be penalized themselves. Is that the way of one of the "best" trainers?

For anyone to consider that PV judge an unrecognized Equitation Class on grounds that are USEF approved for a 24 hour day is bending the rules. He is not permitted on those grounds while they are sanctioned by USEF whether or not rated classes are being offered. The sanctioning of USEF says from Midnight to midnight for each day.

That is not a good example for anyone to give to those who are looking up to emulate the "great" and "famous". Whether a young trainer or a young exhibitor.

Again, PV had to be caught before he withdrew as a judge from that Equitation Class. Not good sportsmanship even this year.

I'd like to repeat what Harry said; it is not just PV it is everyone that has been convicted or confessed or both who should not be a Member in Good Standing. I think it is as offensive that a man still sitting in jail for fraud against a horse owner, or many horse owners is a Member in Good Standing of the Federation.

I am equally offended that Joe Plemmons can on national TV admit he shot Helen Brach in the head and disposed of the body for money and be a member in Good Standing. Welcomed at our Premiere Show Circuit to sell horses to more unsuspecting clients.

Paul Valiere has his name on this petition because he is due for "Reinstatement". Since the administration ignored my mail requesting that Joe Plemmons be banned we have every reason to be suspicious.

I sent the Executive Director the link to the TV show where he made his outrageous confessions. I have never even had the courtesy of a reply. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, Snowbird, it is NOT bending the rules.

Acres Wild Farm is operating fully within the laws as defined by the USEF.

Paul is NOT participating in any USEF event.

He can and does continue to train students who choose to train with him on private property.

As far as judging the Equitation class, which year are you referring to?

Coreene
Feb. 17, 2006, 11:22 AM
Snowbird, my ten "No Reinstatement" bands arrived today. Love 'em.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 11:31 AM
Anthem, here is where I have to disagree with you, as we both know that the letter of the ruling is being adhered to, but in what I feel is unremorseful fashion, the spirit of the ruling is being ignored. As one of the other PV supporters said ""I like his "stick it to you attitude". "". I can't help but feel the very same disregard I have come to expect after the many years I have seen his actions speaking louder than his words. This again is something we will not agree on, thank goodness we can agree to disagree.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 11:45 AM
Do you all read the cynicism and the growing attitude of Oh! Well! what's the use everything is crooked or politely "political".

That is the resaon for the petition and that is the reason we all need to take a stand finally at a certain place and time.

It is not acceptable to accept "political choices" in sport. The more we ignore the bigger the crimes grow. I have little doubt at that time those involved did not consider thier crime a serious infraction of the law. Afterall with horse dealers it is always buyer beware...we know they all lie.

Just like Dick Nixon didn't think breaking into Democratic Headquarters was all that bad. And, Bill Clinton really believed that what he did with Monica was not sex. All travesties start as what hose people believed was acceptable. Rape...well she really wanted it...girls always have to say no...she liked it rough. Thereby we had the muder in Central Park from "rough sex". I'm certain the killer believed it was a male entitlement.

We The PEOPLE have to take charge by letting the governance at any time so they know where we draw the line. We have become confortable with delegating that authority to any kind of governance.

It is the cynicism and apathy of concession to the ineitable evil deed that was bred by our cynicism and apathy. I've read apologies for being an idealist. That is sad. Idealism and perfection are the goals we should strive for and failure to be perfect should be a reason for defeat.

People who have something to gain from the expertise of PV will make excuses for him and themselves. That is human afterall. But, it is not the level of honor and integrity that I find acceptable. I will not apologize for being an idealist. I will as long as I am am able argue for a level playing field. That means where the best is the best ant just the one who can afford to spend the most.

It doesn't require government subsidy. How much money is collected at $5.00 a horse for every horse? That money could be better spent plain and simple.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 12:43 PM
I think anthem35 this says it all! we do not have the same definitions nor criteria.




Actually, Snowbird, it is NOT bending the rules.

Acres Wild Farm is operating fully within the laws as defined by the USEF.

IS IT? Not when it proprietor offers horses to competitors. It says horses owned by a suspended person cannot be shown. Using a proxy is as deviant from the rules and killing a horse to make it look like an accident. There has been no change in attitude.


Paul is NOT participating in any USEF event. He is participating by proxy; honorable people could not conceive of such an infraction. When the Rules in place were written but they were amended and then he found anothr short cut and now the Rules say that the person riding or exhibitng for the benefit or credit of a suspended person is violating the rules. Please read page GR67 in the current Rule Book and then trace those rules down to the dates they became active. Would an honorable man let someone use his horse knowing they might be set down and their win voided because of the use of that horse?


He can and does continue to train students who choose to train with him on private property. Yep! he does and he hires and pays someone to be his proxy. So that those ribbons and wins are all to his credit and benefit.


As far as judging the Equitation class, which year are you referring to?

Again he withdrew when us "little people" to quote Mason Phelps made a loud howl. He should have been man enough and honorable enough to have reminded them he was suspended and would be a distract to the merit of the class. That, might have been a way to apologize. But, once again and recently he withdrew and he was sorry after he got caught.

Pwynn, you're right money seems to triumph but being the perpetual idealist and dreamer I seek a day when a sport is so governed that the talent comes first. I had thought we outgrew as a society the need for patronage with the Middle Ages.

I will die believing that if the "People" make themselves heard and stop assuming it has to be this way that it can all change. I know I'm right because that's why this governance will not give us a vote for our money. They want to spend our money without our approval and that is against the law in a public non-profit corporation and if there are enough of us we can make it happen.

As Iremember you did already once when you were still a young idealist just as I am an old idealist.

Boston Chicken
Feb. 17, 2006, 12:51 PM
Sticking a toe in here (but not to debate the should he or shouldn't he) as something struck me while I was reading PV's commentary in one of the recent media articles. Would being interviewed for an article like that not have been an opportune time to start an apology if he wanted to open a dialogue? Instead to me he sounded as if he were saying, "geez, isn't it enough already?" That surprised me given everything that's been said here recently about his (potential?) desire to atone publicly.

VirginiaBred
Feb. 17, 2006, 12:52 PM
Yes, or take out a full page ad in the Chronicle.

There ARE ways! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 17, 2006, 12:56 PM
There have always been ways. Not used however.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 12:57 PM
I disagree that an ad in the Chronicle would sway people. If anything his advertisements touting his "good works" have been galling. I do agree with Boston Chicken, wherein if he had said something even slightly remorseful in his interview, it would have been an opportune time to win over at least the people who were ambivalent towards the issue. With that said, I do not feel his objective is to win over the public. His only concern is the USEF committee charged with reinstatement and keeping his customers loyal.

SGray
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:03 PM
I predict that if reinstatement is not granted there will be a lawsuit against USEF

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:05 PM
I agree SGray.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:13 PM
The fact is Harry if he were the slightest bit sorry he would not have risked those children in the clippings I posted where they were riding horses owned by Paul Valiere. Under the rules they both could be penalized.

He has behaved badly since as well. He certainly knows that hiring a proxy is against the rules. Sure it doesn't say exactly that he can't send an employee instead of him but everyone knows what it means. Who can possibly anticipate the actions of someone who is not honorable except someone else who is not honorable?

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:18 PM
Snowy, I have no disagreement as to the level of his honor and respectability. However, those are two qualities seen through the eyes of others, and just as there are many of us who feel this way about him, there are just as many who feel the opposite.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:18 PM
I'm glad they got there, I don't have a lot of confidence in the postal system. I hoped the new envelopes would keep them secure.

I have gotten 3 orders since that batch and will get them ready for Sunday. So anyone who wants to order do me a favor and send it in before Sunday afternoon. Buy your NO-REINSTATEMENT BRACELETS NOW! (http://www.usAHSA.org/Bracelets_for_Sale.htm)

I've been giving them to my trade people like the vet to circulate at other barns as well.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:22 PM
I understand that Harry. And I respond hoping to show them why we disagree as you do much more diplomatically. I hope not as many; I hope there are more of us!

You're right of course and HONOR, RESPECTABILITY and INTEGRITY are all abstractions. I remember as I'm sure you do that originally with the rule book it was understood that if it didn't say you coundn't do something, then you could. On that basis I can understand why those who support PV believe he has not broken the rules at all.

That is the biggest weakness of our system and why the Rule Book is Volumes compared to "Those good old days". I have a 1940 Rule Book which is not a half inch thick and included all the rules, all the past winners, all the officials and sanctioned shows.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:29 PM
Sgray and I predict that if he is Re-Instated there will also be law suits. However, by that time the current law suit and those pending over show dates may have already stripped the treasury.

Yours Truly
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:38 PM
Of course there are ways for him to apologize, if an apology reflects his true feelings: ads in The Chronicle, discussion during interviews, websites, etc.

It seems that he doesn't feel remorse and isn't compelled to do any of the above. No apology is better than an empty apology, in my opinion. At least you know where the guy stands. Makes it easy to pick sides. (As if it was difficult to pick.)

But here's food for thought: if he DID apologize publicly, dollars to doughnuts there would be a massive debate over whether he really means it.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:40 PM
Well said, Yours Truly, and I also agree that no apology is better than an empty one.

Linus
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:50 PM
Is PV bending the rules?

Seems to me there's not much consensus about what one must do to show (s)he's been "rehabilitated." In the Star-Ledger article (http://www.nj.com/columns/ledger/jaffer/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1139722677231210.xml&coll=1), PV and several others indicate that he's made a positive contribution to the horse community since his suspension from active showing -- as though that's evidence that he's abided by the rules, not broken them (in spirit if not by letter). And the USEF hearing committee liaison seems to agree:


Lori Nelson, the USEF's hearing committee liaison, said "there are substantial requirements for reinstatement." Those who apply "must feel remorse and show total rehabilitation and a contribution to the horse community before the hearing." She said the committee also would look at letters from people who want to weigh in on the matter.

I'm confused. Is he supposed to have nothing to do with horses during his suspension, or is he supposed to make a contribution to the horse community? If reinstatement deponds upon some "contribution," his involvement with horses for the past 10 years seems a bit less shady, no?

(I'm against reinstatement, BTW, just a little confused by this issue.)

BaliBandido
Feb. 17, 2006, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by SGray:
I predict that if reinstatement is not granted there will be a lawsuit against USEF
What a disgrace, but I too see that happening.

Seal Harbor
Feb. 17, 2006, 02:02 PM
Snowy - I received my bracelets. The remainder will be sent to my eventer sister.

TL
Feb. 17, 2006, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
Of course there are ways for him to apologize, if an apology reflects his true feelings: ads in The Chronicle, discussion during interviews, websites, etc.
....But here's food for thought: if he DID apologize publicly, dollars to doughnuts there would be a massive debate over whether he really means it.

Perhaps someone with a better memory than mine can answer this... as, at the time this was really blowing up, I gave a friend all my COTHs with the related stories, the infamous SI and so forth so she could write some sort of current affairs/ethics paper about it.

Did anyone involved, back then, issue any sort of statement recognizing the impact that this had? And the people, young riders who may've had respect or a degree of admiration for them up until...? I don't really recall anyone involved speaking publicly and candidly about it at the time.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 02:10 PM
He certainly knows that hiring a proxy is against the rules. Sure it doesn't say exactly that he can't send an employee instead of him but everyone knows what it means
I don't think anyone can state with certainty that Paul is not abiding by the rules. There are very detailed rules as to what someone can and cannot do under these circumstances, and there is no reason to suspect that someone in such circumstances would not follow them when they are very specifically laid out. In any case, they are so specific; there's certainly no way for anyone not privy to the exact details to be able to judge for sure one way or the other.
I will say that, as a competitor, I have no issue with the way Paul currently conducts his business.
I'll add the rest of the passage from the rulebook, as all that seems to have been quoted is the very vague beginning.

GR70 © USEF November 2005
VIOLATIONS and PENALTIES
Any person who assumes the responsibility for the care, custody or control of an unsuspended horse completely or in part owned, leased, trained by or coached by a suspended person, must not:
a. Be paid a salary directly or indirectly by or on behalf of the suspended person; or
b. Receive a bonus or any other form of compensation in cash, property or other remuneration or consideration such as to make up for any such lost salary; or
c. Make any payments of any kind, or give any remuneration or other compensation or consideration, to the suspended person, his/her spouse or companion, any corporation,
partnership or other entity owned or controlled by said suspended person or to any other person for transfer to any of said individuals or entities for the right to ride, exhibit,
coach or train for the suspended person or any of the suspended person’s customers
during Federation Licensed Competitions;
d. Use the farm or individual name of the suspended person.
5. An individual who takes over the horses of a suspended trainer or coach must:
a. Bill customers directly on his/her own bill forms for any services rendered at or in connection with any Federation Licensed Competitions
b. Maintain a personal checking account totally separate from and independent of that of the suspended person for purposes of paying all expenses of and depositing all income from customers;
c. Pay all his/her employees working at Federation competitions, none of whom may be employees, directly or indirectly, of the suspended person;
d. Keep checks, books, employee records and make withholding of taxes and other regular deductions from his/her employees’ paychecks;
e. Pay all feed bills, motel, van bills, travel expenses, etc. from his/her separate and independent checking account and preserve, for six months after the date that said suspension is terminated, invoices for said bills;
f. If such individual makes use of any equipment of a suspended trainer, the use of said equipment must be enumerated in detail in a written lease, the form and substance of which must be satisfactory to counsel for the Federation and shall be at the fair rental value for said equipment and said price must be included in said agreement;
g. File such federal and state tax returns as will reflect as his or her income the income from said training or coaching responsibilities at Federation Licensed Competitions;
h. Not borrow funds from a suspended trainer or coach, his/her spouse or companion, their families, corporations, partnerships or any other entities owned or controlled by said suspended trainer or to any other person for the purpose of going into business for
himself or herself at Federation Licensed Competitions during the period of said suspension, nor will he/she allow any of the above-named parties or entities to sign or guarantee any notes or any type of loans to enable him or her to go into business as
described above.
6. Suspended trainers and coaches, and individuals taking over the horses or customers of a suspended trainer or coach may be requested to make their books, canceled checks, invoices, tax returns and other evidence available to Federation representatives to verify and affirm the details of any relationship between them and suspended trainer or coach.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 17, 2006, 02:27 PM
I really do think these transgressions have had an impact on how my clients have been dealt with by their insurance agencies. Since the indictments, we have had to delay burial at times, while an agent was sent to the farm, and even Fairfield Equine's Dr. Mitchell was put through the ringer [God help THAT agency], when having to euthanize an amateur hunter in the last throes of a twisted intestine colic. Pre Sandman era, a mere phone call to one's insurer seemed to produce a cheque from whomever within the week.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:10 PM
I think the biggest issue is this is a new corporation. It did not take over the obligations of the old AHSA. That still exists as the USAE Trust as does the USET Foundation exist as a separate entity.

They have all over the book "in the best interest of the sport and the Federation". What does that mean if they allow these culprits back silently one by one?

Yes racetb it does and it has an influence with all clients who have a horse that has a real accident. And, yes! we are paying the costs in our premiums for insurance.

C.Boylen Thank you I had forgotten that page in favor of GR67. This book for this new corporation is very clear. Hiring a proxy and paying them is a violation. His interpretation of the rules is putting a lot of people at risk if this Federation stands by it's rule book. But, I agree that just because we're right doesn't mean we can win our point without a lot of people stamping their feet and mailing letters in addition to the Petition.

Every Board Member with an email address is listed on the USEF pages. Every Committee and Working Group is listed with emails or faxes.
Don;t send one letter group email them or group fax them.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:20 PM
C.Boylen Thank you I had forgotten that page in fovor of GR67. This book for this new corporation is very clear. Hiring a proxy and paying them is a violation. His interpretation of the rules is putting a lot of people at risk if this Federation stands by it's rule book.
My point is that, while you may perceive it, from afar, as "hiring a proxy", there is no clear indication that that correctly describes the arrangement in question. Unless you are personally familiar with the books and finances of everyone involved you cannot know who has hired whom or what anyone's official business involvement actually is. All you are doing is speculating with no actual proof of any facts.

Sherry
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Yours Truly:
anthem, please clarify your question:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> In what way would you offer an apology considering your audience? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
How would you, In his position, make a public apology that would reach everyone?
A letter to the Chron?
A public forum?
Its just not possible to personally reach every horseperson.
Please, I ask in sincerity...as someone who has been offended, what would it take to offer an apology? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A full page ad in the Chronicle might be a place to start. I don't know how many full page ads I've seen in the Chronicle that have thanked him for "helping" someone sell their horse, win a big class, buy a horse, train their child, etc.
Of course many of us would question the sincerity of such an ad........

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:31 PM
Under no circumstances may you allege that any specific individual or organization has done anything illegal, unethical or abusive, unless what you're saying has been documented as fact in court or in print somewhere (bulletin boards don't count!) and you can back your statements up.
Just to be clear, does "illegal" apply to the rules of our governing body or solely to criminal acts prosecuted by the legal system?
I believe "unethical" certainly applies to infractions of the rules of our governing body.
You're accusing Paul of violating the rules of GR70, of which he has not been in violation, and your accusation most definitely has not been documented as fact.

pwynnnorman
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:33 PM
Hey, I have an idea. Maybe PV should adopt a certain number of ex-race horses each year for x-number of years. He could take on horses which would otherwise be cast aside, rehabilitate them, and find them comfortable homes. Since he contributed to taking a life, maybe GIVING horses lives would be a good way to atone (is that the right word) for his misdeeds? Would that satisfy some folks?

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:50 PM
You're absolutely correct C.Boylan. Our concern has been that a convicted person found guilty and having confessed to a crime is a cut above an infraction of the rules.

Yes! we cannot prove that his proxy has been paid; it could have been a cash deal and untraceable. Yes! there are always ways that people can bend and twist the rules of well intentioned people to make their infractions seem and error of the composition and detail of the rules.

PV and the others are very clever and have very clever people working to help them. Those of us who are basically hones can never imagine the loopholes that exist. You are correct by these definitions a set of books could show no legal provable trail under USEF Rules but it doe not alter the conviction which was against the law and for which he was suspended. Our margin of proof depends solely on that conviction.

I would not want to see anyone make a life's work out of trying to prove that these rules which can be evaded are not enforced. That's the reason we have stayed with those convicted and sentenced in a court of law. That is covered on page GR67.

We are not concerned with others who may violate the rules in other ways but those suspended by virtue of a US Court Trial of a felony specificaly related to a fraud involving horses.

It is so easy to find reasons not to do something and much harder to find constructive ways. I am not in favor of vigilanteism or witch hunts.

I do believe that as described above in keeping with all the redundant rules that specify "in the best interest of the sport and the Federation" are specifically applicable.

filly3
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:50 PM
It's sort of an interesting phenomenon. Everyone has their own sort of level of "payment satisfaction". For some maybe a very sincere apology, for some maybe a big check to an animal charity for some maybe a couple of alligator clips and a wall socket for him. But I suspect that the lines are drawn much cleaner and more exact than that. I beleive that you are either satisfied that he has paid his debt and should be let back in..end of story.. no apology nesessary. Or you believe that there is absolutely nothing on God's green earth that he could ever do, pay or say that would make what he did forgivable enough to ever welcome his re-instatement.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 17, 2006, 03:51 PM
Well, Chanda since many of the rules of the USEF actually state the term illegal, one would believe that it does. And in case we should forget:
THE SPORTSMAN'S CHARTER

That sport is something done for the fun of doing it and that it ceases to be sport when it becomes a business only, something done for what there is in it;

That amateurism is something of the heart and spirit - not a matter of exact technical qualifications;

That good manners of sport are fundamentally important;

That the code must be strictly upheld;

That the whole structure of sport is not only preserved from the absurdity of undue importance, but is justified by a kind of romance which animates it, and by the positive virtues of courage, patience, good temper, and unselfishness which are demanded by the code;

That the exploitation of sport for profit alone kills the spirit and retains only the husk and semblance of the thing;

That the qualities of frankness, courage, and sincerity which mark the good sportsman in private life shall mark the discussions of his interests at a competition.

These are powerful words. And something, no one should ever forget!

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 17, 2006, 05:32 PM
And now, a brief harmonic interlude, to the tune of "I Wish I Was in Dixieland" with apologies to Daniel Decatur Emmett.

O, they said in Palm Beach something sure smells rotten
Media Group thought they’d all forgotten
Look away! Look away! Please don’t bandy my name.
Offing my own horse got me 10 years probation
And outrage like I’d bombed the nation
Look away! Look away! Did the time for the crime.

I wish I was in USEF! But hey, today,
I’m in the van, and have in hand
A cellphone to my proxy
Away, away, away down south in Welly!

O, I wore a wire, was a federal snitch
Averting fate as Sandman’s cell-bitch
Look away! Look away! Screwed my pals, ass was saved.
O, the little peeps do “Reinstate” campaigning
Meanwhile I’ll just keep on training
Look away! Look away! I’m absolved in the fray!

They forced me out at Equus
Let go! Let go!
When asked if I would re-apply
I said with humble ego
“Someday, someday” I’ll get off USEF’s sh*t list!

Since I’m banned from competitions like KILkenny
How’m I s’posed to earn a penny?
Look away! Look away! Ne’er again go astray.
Shall I chuck it all, live like a has-been spinster?
What’s the pay to judge Westminster?
Look away! I’m okay! Reinstate me today!

* * * * * * * *

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 17, 2006, 05:46 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif A thing of beauty is a joy forever, Letter Man.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:12 PM
You're absolutely correct C.Boylan.

Well, Chanda since many of the rules of the USEF actually state the term illegal, one would believe that it does.
So you all agree with me then that much of this speculation is in direct violation of the rules of this bulletin board?

Duffy
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:13 PM
Incredible, Letter Man! Welcome back! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:16 PM
Thank you, Duffy. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:37 PM
Chanda pray tell what are you drinking, smoking or ingesting to come up with that? You keep taking things out of context, then try and turn them into something they most certainly are not. Thought someone your age would be out on a date. Isn't friday nite date nite?

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:41 PM
Chanda pray tell what are you drinking, smoking or ingesting to come up with that?
I posted the rules of the BB, and you agreed that they applied the terms to USEF rules. There's been multiple accusations of USEF rule violations for which Paul has not been charged. Hence, those accusations are in violation of the BB rules.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:43 PM
Where did you post the BB rules? That according to what you posted was USEF rules.. What are you talking about??

Erin
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by C.Boylen:

So you all agree with me then that much of this speculation is in direct violation of the rules of this bulletin board?

No, it's not, as long as it's sticking to documented facts.

I don't think the fact that PV is continuing to train is at all a point of contention (especially considering that his students are posting here). Discussing whether or not that is in vioaltion of USEF rules is a legitimate topic of discussion.

And radio talk, cut out the personal attacks. This thread has been refreshingly civil the last couple of days, and I'd like it to stay that way.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:45 PM
Thought someone your age would be out on a date. Isn't friday nite date nite?
Nope. Sunday night is date night. Friday night is crash night, but the Olympics are on and I'm keeping my self awake on valentine candy http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:49 PM
Where did you post the BB rules?

Here is where I posted them:


quote:
Under no circumstances may you allege that any specific individual or organization has done anything illegal, unethical or abusive, unless what you're saying has been documented as fact in court or in print somewhere (bulletin boards don't count!) and you can back your statements up.

Just to be clear, does "illegal" apply to the rules of our governing body or solely to criminal acts prosecuted by the legal system?
I believe "unethical" certainly applies to infractions of the rules of our governing body.
You're accusing Paul of violating the rules of GR70, of which he has not been in violation, and your accusation most definitely has not been documented as fact.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:49 PM
Chanda, you have stated before that you are friends with PV and his clients. Enough said on the subject. You can sit on here and quote rules and regulations from now until forever, but the fact of the matter is, killing a horse because it does not live up to your expectaions and promises is just wrong. Disagree with me if you must, but, fraud is a crime.

Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:52 PM
Harry, How well put and concise that is. I just don't understand why some people just don't get it.

VirginiaBred
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:53 PM
Seems perfectly clear to me!

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:53 PM
Thank you Harry.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:54 PM
Disagree with me if you must, but, fraud is a crime.
I don't disagree with you on that point at all.
I just found the direction the thread was taking, making accusations of present alleged rule violations, rather than discussing facts of a past, proven case, unfair.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:57 PM
Chanda, you are an intelligent person. You know that PV is bending the rules to suit his own personal objectives and business. All of us know what he does is within the letter of the ruling, and not the spirit, indeed his own clients allude to that, how can one be trained by said individual and be showing with yet another trainer's name and signature on your entry blank, I realize you are friends with him, but please, what he is doing is just wrong.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 17, 2006, 06:57 PM
Chanda, what we are discussing is the circumvention of the rules. That is whats appalling for many.

jetsmom
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:08 PM
Letter Man- Loved the song!

How can someone be so concerned with the appearance of impropriety regarding violating BB rules, yet they ride with PV and have no problem with his history and "bending" the rules of USEF? Too bad the expectations of a high moral fiber is only being applied to posters on an internet BB, not a convicted criminal and horse abuser.

BaliBandido
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by jetsmom:
How can someone be so concerned with the appearance of impropriety regarding violating BB rules, yet they ride with PV and have no problem with his history and "bending" the rules of USEF? Too bad the expectations of a high moral fiber is only being applied to posters on an internet BB, not a convicted criminal and horse abuser.

Yeah, bit of a double standard. But again it is a matter of looking for the loopholes and the technicalities because the big issue is not one that can be defended- so look for another way out.

CBoylen
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by BaliBandido:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jetsmom:
How can someone be so concerned with the appearance of impropriety regarding violating BB rules, yet they ride with PV and have no problem with his history and "bending" the rules of USEF? Too bad the expectations of a high moral fiber is only being applied to posters on an internet BB, not a convicted criminal and horse abuser.
Yeah, bit of a double standard. But again it is a matter of looking for the loopholes and the technicalities because the big issue is not one that can be defended- so look for another way out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm not defending any big issues. I'm defending the point that no one here can definitively say or prove that any USEF rules are currently being broken. I find speculation about the legality of a named person's current actions not in keeping with the tone usually expected from posters on the BB, but that is my opinion and Erin has said she feels differently in this instance.
Also, I do not ride with Paul and I do not know how you came to be under that impression.

Snowbird
Feb. 17, 2006, 07:48 PM
mxyplyzyx you are a genius. You have a most remarkable talent and your lyrics are pure poetry. Thank you! I am still waiting to hear from Ireland with a modifcation of the music so we don't get sued. She's going through a bad time and is more in the mood for dirges right now.

NO! C.Boylen that is not my conclusion at all. The issue we raise is that all those who have been convicted of a felony involving horses should not be permitted to be Members of USEF.

You have no proved that PV has remorse or that he has done anything worthy of forgiveness. You have only proved that we do have proof that he has continued to violate the rules. That does not make him an innocent because general knowledge from his friends has proved his guilt. We may not have the check books and accounts but we have his defenders admitting he has hired someone to be his proixy at shows.

Continuing this line of defense will only compell us to require that the two juniors who knowingly rode his horses need to be penalized. That his proxy whether paid or not needs to be penalized.

Do you really want to take that route or leave the issue as it is? Pv cannot be proved to have broken rules but those who consorted with him can be proved to have broken the rules of USEF. PV has been convicted by a court of law and has done nothing to regain our confidence that he has remorse because he continues to use others to do his dirty work for him. Not much of an improvement over the Sandman except that no horses have died.

Jane
Feb. 17, 2006, 10:22 PM
Why are you guys wasting so much time and energy with this "No Reinstatement" campaign and harrassing those who don't happen to agree with your tactics, if you're all so convinced PV has been bending the rules left and right? I mean, if it's that obvious and blatant to people who have no first hand knowledge of how he runs his business, then surely the USEF review board would have the same (if not more detailed) info, then there is no worries that he will be reinstated, in the event he decides to reapply, is there?


All of us know what he does is within the letter of the ruling, and not the spirit, indeed his own clients allude to that, how can one be trained by said individual and be showing with yet another trainer's name and signature on your entry blank

Simple, lots of people train with more than one trainer within the same barn. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Boberry
Feb. 17, 2006, 10:36 PM
Simple, lots of people do not have a known horse felons in the barn...why choose too?

Boberry
Feb. 17, 2006, 11:08 PM
To be frank, PV's opinion in or "out" of bounds is not one I respect. Therefore those who tell me "I rode with PV" actually step down IMO from a person who comes from a lesser name. Working to the "letter schmetter" reflects not only upon yourself but those with whom you associate. Killing horses for insurance fraud is not cool, and hanging with the "killing" crowd is not cool...and why do we have to splain killing healthy horses isn't cool anyway. George Morris complains of the swaybacked, leave early, high crested equitation riders from the 80's on, and so many credit PV with accolades from this, maybe it's truely natural selection to pan out the posers who would "kill for it" to the true artists.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
Chanda, you have stated before that you are friends with PV and his clients. Enough said on the subject. You can sit on here and quote rules and regulations from now until forever, but the fact of the matter is, killing a horse because it does not live up to your expectaions and promises is just wrong. Disagree with me if you must, but, fraud is a crime.

But he still has the right to petition for readmission.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by Boberry:
Simple, lots of people do not have a known horse felons in the barn...why choose too?

how are they different from those who have other types of felons in the barn?

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 04:17 AM
Excuse me C.Boylan but you limited your debate to Article 704 on GR68 however...
Article 702 on page GR67 is more difficult to evade.

GR702 Violations
1. A violation is any act prejudicial to the best interests of the Federation, including but not limited to the following:

c. Penalization by an administrative agency, human society or<span class="ev_code_red"> court of law </span> for violation of Federation Rules.

g. Failure to obey any penalty imposed by the Federation.

<span class="ev_code_red">h. Exhibiting any horse while in the care and training or custody of a suspended person.

i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit , credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended person.</span>

I think by virtue of all of your statements and those others who ride with PV you have certified that all of you are in violation of these rules. By placing people in violation of these rules PV has proved that he has no remorse and no intention or regard for his penalty as worth following.

Further he has corrupted the system by permitting those who are his friends to be in jeopardy of being violators of these rules and therefore subject themselves to penalties by the USEF.

Wouldn't it be a pity if he were re-instated and all his clients were then suspended?

Boston Chicken
Feb. 18, 2006, 05:06 AM
Sticking a second toe in http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Wouldn't PV have been already cited for any subsequent violations by now had he been out of line? I'm not certain, but would suspect these types of possible infractions would have already been looked at?

ise@ssl
Feb. 18, 2006, 05:44 AM
Boston Chicken - you are kidding? correct? Do you really think they expected this tidal wave of protest? Against someone who's been OBVIOUSLY fluttering on the edges for the past 10 years - the USEF puts blinkers on for some people.

The USEF won't even see some violations in front of them so why would they be looking outside the line? There is clearly some sort of hierarchy to the policing of those who break the rules and if it involves some BN's - it takes a horrendous situation like this one. And as you know it resulted from a FEDERAL insurance fraud investigation - not the USEF (or AHSA as it was back then).

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 18, 2006, 05:50 AM
George Morris complains of the swaybacked, leave early, high crested equitation riders from the 80's on, and so many credit PV with accolades from this, maybe it's truely natural selection to pan out the posers who would "kill for it" to the true artists.
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif..pretty damn spot on... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Boston Chicken
Feb. 18, 2006, 05:59 AM
ise - no, I wasn't kidding. I was asking a question.

Forgive me if I am not as well-schooled at the ins and outs of this debate as the regulars here.

Perhaps this "movement" would have more people who are on the fence swayed if it would entertain questions from those who genuinely want to understand the situation better.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 06:03 AM
In as much as I sent the film clip and Joe Plemmons made his confession on national TV. He confessed to killing a horse owner because she was going to the DA to have them all prosecuted.

I received no answer at all from John Long or anyone from USEF in response to my suggestion of the rules that could be used to immediately ban him from any USEF show even until he had a hearing.

Now, if someone who was essentially unsavory to say the least...and the court ruled the AHSA the had a right to ban unsavory characters from their shows if that did not get any reaction! Would you not wonder if others would be afraid they might wind up like Helen Brach by the same people?

I hope that satisfies as an answer as to why no one has enforced the existing rules Boston Chicken.

Boston Chicken
Feb. 18, 2006, 06:12 AM
Thanks, Snowbird for addressing my question but are you saying that the current USEF turns a proverbial blind eye because they're concerned about retribution?

Admittedly, I don't understand all the rules for a suspended person but am reading the last few pages here to understand them.

I'll take my toes out of here now - it's too hot for me http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 18, 2006, 06:13 AM
Snowy..Is Joe Plemmons out and about in society at this moment?!...AND allowed to ply his "trade" at horse shows? I remember he was hanging out in New Hope a few years back..I think we had dinner with the guy occasionally http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif...Christ.

Hopeful Hunter
Feb. 18, 2006, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by Boston Chicken:
Sticking a second toe in http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Wouldn't PV have been already cited for any subsequent violations by now had he been out of line? I'm not certain, but would suspect these types of possible infractions would have already been looked at?

BC, I think that IS a very, very good question. I don't know the answer, though.

Is it possible that there are no "official" complaints on file? Would asking USEF to check this out also cost someone, as protests at shows do? Maybe we need to have some USEF members request a review?

The only thing I can think of is that, since PV IS suspended and not a member currently, the USEF does not have any jurisdiction under which to investigate, nor any recourse should actionable proof be found. I guess they'd have to actually look at his associates - barn associates, trainers, riders, horses maybe - and THOSE people, if they were USEF members, could be subject to penalties.

Anyone with a better sense of how this works want to comment?

EDITED TO ADD - I DO have to agree, though, that the reaction to his potential reinstatement has most likely caught "the establishment" by surprise. I don't think there was much consideration that anyone cared, and the fact that we DO care, and can even get the media to notice that we do, is probably quite unexpected. Whether or not it will be effective, we don't know. I do think that there are now over 3000 people who will be carefully considering where they spend the time and money and offer their support, and this could have the potential to be a very significant event for the USEF.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 06:26 AM
The USEF has traditionally been reactive and not proacive. Someone needs to file a protest or an Official needs to file a complaint. Unless that happens they can waffle.

They only file complaints against members by USEF is if they fail to pay their fees, or give the USEF non-negotiable checks. If members have not paid their memberships or if they have claimed to be a member when they were not. Filling out your entry form incorrectly is something they get to file a charge against as well.

Rather than believing that all those fine folks in Wellington like rubbing shoulders with convicted felons I would prefer to think that the majority are afraid of retribution in many ways.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 06:54 AM
Racetb To the best of my knowledge Joe Plemmons said he was welcome at Wellington and he goes down just to sell some horses. Personally, since admitting to killing his last disatisfied client; I think I would be a little cautious about buying from him under any circumstances.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 18, 2006, 07:28 AM
Joe Plemmons said he was welcome at Wellington and he goes down just to sell some horses.

Christ with an alligator clip.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 07:59 AM
I am prefacing this by saying it is my opinion only. We as members gave more credit to the then AHSA now USEF as a parent organization then they could do. They heard, set down and went about their business. When something occured, it took weeks, even months to fully get it looked at. IE: suspended persons being on show grounds, horses of suspended persons being shown. Stewards, judges, show managers are not police. Nor should they act as such. They are rule keepers. Trying to work within the confines of said rules. When given facts concerning rule infractions, AHSA/USEF looked at it. Many rule changes were put into place to allivate these problems. So they thought.

It is unfortunately similar to the drug rules. For every drug which is banned, someone somewhere, will come up with something new. For every rule on felons within our organization, someone is out there figuring out how to circumvent it. It is a game to many as we have seen.

Stopping a trainer, rider, owner, exhibitor from being reinstated is the one thing which USEF has come up with, that works. It won't stop business as usual, but it does mean they are not welcomed back with open arms either.

Yours Truly
Feb. 18, 2006, 08:02 AM
I have a couple of question, some of which may have been answered already, so bear with me. Also, I'm ignorant of USEF Rules on this matter, so forgive any goofy statements on my part.

1) If PV is currently in violation of the Rules, can any USEF member lodge a complaint? Has this been done?

2) Is there a mechanisim to monitor who is applying for reinstatement? (Does USEF post this on their website?)

3) Once someone does apply for reinstatement, can any USEF member submit comment? What is the comment period?

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 08:27 AM
YT these are not goofy what so ever!!
To the best of my knowledge here are your answers: 1) yes and yes. 2) yes they do monitor it, but each case has to be looked at individually. So far this is not posted on their web site. Excellent thought tho. 3) do not know. Comments may be submitted on liscensing of officials whose names are in the magazine. But haven't seen anything concerning re-instatement.

N&B&T
Feb. 18, 2006, 08:52 AM
YT, the answer to number 3 appears to be yes, based on the USEF quote in this Nancy Jaffer article in the New Jersey Star Ledger (http://www.nj.com/columns/ledger/jaffer/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1139722677231210.xml&coll=1)

Also see the Get Out Your Pens thread started by Coreene for further information on letter writing.

To consolidate, http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif this thread (http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/7076024331/m/143201398) contains links to the above article and to two other articles, in the Providence Journal and the Palm Beach Post.

Finally, waaaaay back somewhere in the beginning of this thread, Erin mentioned that this issue was suitable for someone wishing to submit commentary to the Horsemens Forum.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Excuse me C.Boylan but you limited your debate to Article 704 on GR68 however...
Article 702 on page GR67 is more difficult to evade.

GR702 Violations
1. A violation is any act prejudicial to the best interests of the Federation, including but not limited to the following:

c. Penalization by an administrative agency, human society or<span class="ev_code_red"> court of law </span> for violation of Federation Rules.

g. Failure to obey any penalty imposed by the Federation.

<span class="ev_code_red">h. Exhibiting any horse while in the care and training or custody of a suspended person.

i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit , credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended person.</span>

I think by virtue of all of your statements and those others who ride with PV you have certified that all of you are in violation of these rules. By placing people in violation of these rules PV has proved that he has no remorse and no intention or regard for his penalty as worth following.

Further he has corrupted the system by permitting those who are his friends to be in jeopardy of being violators of these rules and therefore subject themselves to penalties by the USEF.

Wouldn't it be a pity if he were re-instated and all his clients were then suspended?

Yes, but none of that is applicable

1. No one was penalized by a court of law for violation of Federation rules--they were all found guilty of insurance fraud.
2. No amatuer rider is exhibiting a horse while in the care of a suspended person--PV, BW and others only give lessons and clinics.
3. Amateurs can't ride, exhibit, train, etc. for the benefit of a suspended person--they would have to be professionals to do any of those things, and they are not...

Being able to critically read is important in reading these legal rules.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
In as much as I sent the film clip and Joe Plemmons made his confession on national TV. He confessed to killing a horse owner because she was going to the DA to have them all prosecuted.

I received no answer at all from John Long or anyone from USEF in response to my suggestion of the rules that could be used to immediately ban him from any USEF show even until he had a hearing.

Now, if someone who was essentially unsavory to say the least...and the court ruled the AHSA the had a right to ban unsavory characters from their shows if that did not get any reaction! Would you not wonder if others would be afraid they might wind up like Helen Brach by the same people?

I hope that satisfies as an answer as to why no one has enforced the existing rules Boston Chicken.

yes, but killing horse owners is not a violation the the USEF rules--it is not even a federal crime.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
I have a couple of question, some of which may have been answered already, so bear with me. Also, I'm ignorant of USEF Rules on this matter, so forgive any goofy statements on my part.

1) If PV is currently in violation of the Rules, can any USEF member lodge a complaint? Has this been done?

2) Is there a mechanisim to monitor who is applying for reinstatement? (Does USEF post this on their website?)

3) Once someone does apply for reinstatement, can any USEF member submit comment? What is the comment period?

the answers to your questions, are yes you can file a complaint, but he is not in violation of the rules--and the hearing committee has the sole right to decide who is readmitted [not a few members]

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:06 AM
Yes! it really is! We have two reports published by Phelps Media saying that Equitation Riders in the Maclay were showing horses owned by PV.

We have friends of PV who stable with him saying he has a proxy on his payroll. We have all of you that are his students and show giving PV credit and we have ads in the Chronicle giving him credit and Thank you! for his teaching.

Tsk! Tsk!

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:11 AM
Last I checked horse owners are usually human and it is illegal to assault a human and certainly criminal to shoot them in the head and then burn the body in a steel furnace.

I am certain that killing even a "horse owner" is a capital offense. Conviction for which should be an automatic ban if the person happens to have been a client who bought horses from said killer; or was hired by same to do the deed.

I do agree that most of these types do not consider a person to whom they have sold horses more than sub-human and a "target".

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:17 AM
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.

You see you really can't have it both ways. You can't say no one who isn't rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.

And, if they lose their non-profit status they can't be an NGB so we're all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the "Go to Jail" card.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Yes! it really is! We have two reports published by Phelps Media saying that Equitation Riders in the Maclay were showing horses owned by PV.

We have friends of PV who stable with him saying he has a proxy on his payroll. We have all of you that are his students and show giving PV credit and we have ads in the Chronicle giving him credit and Thank you! for his teaching.

Tsk! Tsk!

PV doesn't own any horses--those were horses owned by others and held for sale...the kids took lessons from PV/and there is no rule stating that you cannot take lessons from a suspended person.

PV does not own Acres Wild Farm, and he has no payroll.

TSK/TSK yourself

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.

You see you really can't have it both ways. You can't say no one who isn't rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.

And, if they lose their non-profit status they can't be an NGB so we're all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the "Go to Jail" card.

I think with the move to KY, the USEF changed their state of incorp...but that is not the issue...their charitable status is not in any jeopardy in the Real World...

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.

You see you really can't have it both ways. You can't say no one who isn't rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.

And, if they lose their non-profit status they can't be an NGB so we're all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the "Go to Jail" card.

If the members are the ones running it, what do you need all these petitions for?

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:48 AM
Maybe! but then maybe not! I don't Think you have the full story either. Mason Phelps said he owned the horses. SO! suspended person got credit and benefit...don't you think?

Of course I guess the USEF could just punish the kids.

SheilaH, just to tell the employees what the Federation expects them to do as Members in good Standing who pay their salaries. Those who are not members are stating the fact that it is not in the best interests of the sprt to permit convicted felons to be members in good standing.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Maybe! but then maybe not!

Are you sure about that?

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Boberry:
George Morris complains of the swaybacked, leave early, high crested equitation riders from the 80's on, and so many credit PV with accolades from this, maybe it's truely natural selection to pan out the posers who would "kill for it" to the true artists.

Typical of that twisted old fruit to complain about something he created.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:01 PM
Hmmm! not according to the required current Membership form where it counts.

And, yes! their non-profit status is definitely at risk. Having just incorporated as a sport club 501(c)(3) in New Jersey there are big differences between classifications to the IRS. Do you have any idea what the penalties could be if they are found in violation?

An Educational Charity has a lot of trouble running horse shows. That's what the whole issue of Conflict of Interest is about. The Board can decide to overlook a conflict of interest for David O'Connor but that doesn't make it legal...It just makes them guilty too.

Erin
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:02 PM
Sheila H... contribute like an adult, or don't contribute.

For the record, the only one who can state unequivocally that PV is in violation of any USEF rules is a USEF official. I don't mind people citing the rule and questioning whether or not what he's doing is kosher under the rules, but I DO mind people stating that yes, he is definitely breaking rules. Rules are subject to interpretation, and since no one here is a steward, I don't think anyone can unequivocally state that they know for sure how the rules are interpreted.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:16 PM
that twisted old fruit


Okay, okay..I'll return to the leper colony; But you gotta admit..you all cracked up at THAT one http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:36 PM
Meadowlark, according to the USEF, PV does in fact still own Aces Wild Farm in RI. It is in good standing and listed as active.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:40 PM
Well here's a news flash for you: thats wrong.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by Erin:
Sheila H... contribute like an adult, or don't contribute.

For the record, the only one who can state unequivocally that PV is in violation of any USEF rules is a USEF official. I don't mind people citing the rule and questioning whether or not what he's doing is kosher under the rules, but I DO mind people stating that yes, he is definitely breaking rules. Rules are subject to interpretation, and since no one here is a steward, I don't think anyone can unequivocally state that they know for sure how the rules are interpreted.

I think its unlikely that not one person on this bored is a steward. How do you know I'm not one my own self?

ise@ssl
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:00 PM
Helloooooooooomeadowlark - Insurance Fraud is FELONY - covered by FEDERAL LAW. Helloooooooooo!!


YEAH!! sheila - I LOVE YOUR POST ABOUT GM http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

The USEF is still incorporated in NY - that's why they maintain a small office there.

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:01 PM
Ah... Aren't stewards fairminded sorts? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:03 PM
I will give you this, though, Sheila. Spelling is not required.

Duffy
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:04 PM
There are some stewards on the BB. But, the ones I know are stewards haven't been on this thread to my knowledge...(Can't say that I blame them. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:04 PM
All the ones I have met have been. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

"Typical of that twisted old fruit to complain about something he created." Have to admit, that is a good one Sheila H. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:06 PM
I don't know. Why don't you ask Mr Valliere?

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:08 PM
YOU don't know??!!! (she faints dead away http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif)

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by ponybreeder Aefvue Pig Farm:
YOU don't know??!!! (she faints dead away http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif)

Thats right. I've never bothered to speak with a steward. I let my awesomeness speak for itself. Urging officials to intervene on their behalf has always been the refuge of the incompetent.

Seal Harbor
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:24 PM
What do you do when you don't follow the protocol - beat them up behind the barn? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by Seal Harbor Aefvue Farms PNW:
What do you do when you don't follow the protocol - beat them up behind the barn? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif

I'm pretty much doing what I do when I dont follow the protocol when I'm doing what I'm doing right now.

Seal Harbor
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:35 PM
I see, you talk circles around them that make no sense and they do whatever you want.

Hmm probably pretty effective.