PDA

View Full Version : Paul Valliere



Pages : [1] 2 3

jogem
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:21 AM
Paul Valliere has declined to judge the Equus Equitation class in Wellington. I guess he got wind of discussions posted on COTH bulletin boards??

jogem
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:21 AM
Paul Valliere has declined to judge the Equus Equitation class in Wellington. I guess he got wind of discussions posted on COTH bulletin boards??

MareOne
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:29 AM
Wow. That is great news. How did you find out this information?

nails
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:30 AM
Thanks for the update. Maybe he got wind of the discussions or the charity that was to benefit did. He may have also seen some of the new or longer suspensions that were handed down to people not adhering the rules and being involved in horse shows etc while still on suspension. Oh well, can't try and figure what is in the head of a person like that-just glad this is over for now.

JEP
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:37 AM
Wow. Perhaps those of you who expressed your discontent with this situation contributed to this decision in some way-if so, I applaud you for being proactive and taking a stand.

I also applaud Paul. I did not jump in on the last thread because I didn't really have a problem with him judging the event (just my opinion).

However, I'm sure that he was aware of the controversy his appointment caused (even Towerheads had the headline "PV causes quite a stir..."), and I think it was a rather thoughtful and mature move to turn down the offer. I think this is another example of Paul actively working to give himself the best chance for reinstatement.

Of course I'm sure many will disagree with me, and that is fine-to each his own. Regardless of your personal opinion of Paul, however, I hope that at least a few of you will give him at least a little recognition for taking steps in the right direction. There are plenty of those who went down with him that have made it quite clear that they have no remorse, no desire to play by the rules, and no respect for their suspension.

jogem
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:39 AM
Read it on the scrolling banner on Towerheads. You can read without logging in.

Flashy Gray
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:54 AM
Hmmm, interesting to note according to the Theads scroll that it was Mason Phelps who made the original request for PV to judge.

Of course, you can't always believe everything you read in the 'media', can you? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Maybe someone on the ground at WEF has some input?

JulieMontgomery
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:14 AM
This is an appropriate decision on his part.

Good.

"He is your friend, your partner, your defender, your dog. You are his life, his love, his leader. He will be yours, faithful and true, to the last beat of his heart. You owe it to him to be worthy of his devotion."
Author Unknown....

War Admiral
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:20 AM
While I applaud him for doing the right thing in this instance, I do not think that his decision should either prevent or preclude a concrete rule change proposal to prevent this sort of thing occurring in the future. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

______________

"Those who use horses just for the business are crass, classless horsemen."
--George Morris

Snowbird
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:30 AM
Well said and therein is the secret of the power we can have. If we only sit here and post our complaints it accomplishes nothing; but turn it into affirmative action we will prove it is our Federation. We pay the bills, and we pay all those salaries, and we can choose not to belong.

I hope that you will all keep this in mind when the information from the NHJA is finally published so you can see that it is designed to be a democratice and representative Hunter Association.

We need to not only flex our muscles against things but also to take affirmative stands when we see things that are better and improving. We need to look past the fancy packaging and see what's really inside the box.

Battle Scarred Veteran

CuriousGeorge
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by War Admiral:
While I applaud him for doing the right thing in this instance, I do not think that his decision should either prevent or preclude a _concrete rule change proposal to prevent this sort of thing occurring in the future_. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WA, how exactly do you propose to make this rule "change"? The USEF is not a legal entity and cannot have any authority over equine events that have not requested to be under the USEF umbrella.

If Joe Doe wants to have a nonrecognized horse show that doesn't follow USEF rules and regs, the USEF has no legal right to make him stop. If he wants Paul to judge, that's Joe's choice.

War Admiral
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:59 AM
I'm working on it... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif There are lots of ways it could be worded.

For one example, establishing a time frame would have precluded this particular issue. Suspended persons not permitted on the show grounds within 30 (60, 90, whatever) days before or after a rated show. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

______________

"Those who use horses just for the business are crass, classless horsemen."
--George Morris

Medievalist
Mar. 2, 2004, 10:22 AM
Sorry, WA, but that would never work. You can't just tell someone that they can't be on a property for a certain amount of time. How would that ever be enforced? USEF doesn't have jurisdiction like that. They aren't a police force....they don't have the authority outside of their shows to enforce rules like that.

Centre Equestre de la Houssaye (http://www.eii.fr/club/houssaye)

Snowbird
Mar. 2, 2004, 10:52 AM
No they are not a police force but we are members and we can report information that is certifiable. For example you could make a rule that a suspended person cannot officiate at any horse show whether recognized by the Federation or not and that to do so would be a violation that would prevent reinstatement or would extend their suspension by (5 years?).

That would be simple to document from posted results in the Chronicle or newspapers if it were extended to include not ony officials.

We also need to send emails and request that there be a long term cross-index of suspended persons on the web in the same detail as is published in Equestrian. In other words, it is public record and we should be able to put in a name and find all the records of suspensions for some period of time and even if it just starts now because the labor of data processing would be prohibitive it could at least start at some point.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Janet
Mar. 2, 2004, 11:27 AM
Well, the USEF DOES make and enforce rules that apply to the time before the show starts. For instance, in eventing,<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
By 3:00 p.m. of the day prior to the start of the entire competition, or upon arrival if later, each horse shall be issued a number. This number must be worn at all times when the
horse is being ridden or exercised.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>and <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The Cross-Country course will be closed to all competitors on the same date. The
course closed date must be published in the prize list of the competition. The Dressage
arena may not be used after it has been prepared for the competition and closed by the
Organizer. The Jumping arena may not be used after it has been prepared for the
competition and closed by the Organizer. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The closing date for the course is typically several WEEKS before the competition.

So there is no hard and fast rule about limiting USEF rules to the days of actual recognized competiton. In principle, they COULD make rules about the day before and/or the day after an recognized competiotn.

But I don't think they would have any jurisdiction in the case of a completely unrecognized competition.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Snowbird
Mar. 2, 2004, 11:31 AM
They wouldn't have jurisdiction to prevent it, but if it was certifiable They could use that as a mitigating circumstance to extend existing punishment, I'm no legel but I think there could be a case made for that.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Janet
Mar. 2, 2004, 11:35 AM
I think that they could ONLY use it in the case of a lifetime suspension with the right to reapply after X years. In that case, they get to consider all sorts of subjective stuff, and what happens away from recognized shows could "count" under the "subjective stuff". But I don't think they could put it in a fixed term suspennsion.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

RumoursFollow
Mar. 2, 2004, 11:45 AM
Good decision on his part- I'd imagine there are people with "the powers that be" that weren't happy that he was using a loophole to judge.. If hes hoping for a reinstatement in two years, the best thing to do is to keep everyone happy. Smart thing for him to do, imho.

This is not a statement about how I feel about PV, btw.

Pictures: My Album (http://www.picturetrail.com/romeorocks)

Silver Bells
Mar. 2, 2004, 12:25 PM
I also think this was a good decision on PV's part.
This BB is read by more people than everyone thinks.

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 2, 2004, 12:40 PM
Well....maybe those calls and letters DID help!

I can say I never got any response to either my call or my letter, but I applaud this decision. And I agree that a rule change or clarification to prevent such a situation if possible in the future is a grand idea. I'd say I'd vote for it since I've now formally re-joined USEF after a number of years' absence, but then we can't vote, can we ....

Sean D. Rogers
Mar. 2, 2004, 01:46 PM
That's a shame. Unfortunately I think that decision is more the sport's loss than his. Few know more about equitation than he does and his participation would've made the class only better.

Anyway, like many others I look forward to his returning to the sport soon. He produces first class horse(wo)men & horses and the sport will definitely benefit from his return.

Oh wait, I almost forgot... JMHO. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Coreene
Mar. 2, 2004, 02:01 PM
Sean, I'm sure if you had two lines, one of people who thinks he should stay away forever and one who thinks he should be allowed back, the one who thinks forever isn't nearly long enough would be many, many, many times longer than the ones who think he should be reinstated.

Not just MHO, but many.

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 2, 2004, 02:07 PM
Coreene, as you and the board know from my posts and letters I've reposted here, I totally agree. But, sadly, I fear Sean's line might actually be longer...

There seems to be a very strong contingent of people who feel that the ends justify the means -- any means. And in this case, PV's students win, so whatever manner of man he is may be irrelevent to them. It's not to me, nor to you and others, but it is to a lot of folks, I think. For some character and methods count, for others only results and winning excuses all.

That maxim, and the rule of expediency are the two things I see governing much of life, and two things with which I disagree with all my being. Cuts off a number of career options and does sometimes limit my social circle, but I feel I'm the better for it. JMO.

lauriep
Mar. 2, 2004, 02:17 PM
HH, there is also a very large contingent of people that were friends and colleages of Paul's (and others) long before this ever happened, and while certainly hate his actions, have made the CHOICE to not ostracize him and in fact, remain his friend. To me, that is what real friendship is about. It isn't all "the ends justify the means" and if you were anywhere near the situation, you might have a clearer view of.

I know who my close friends are, and I personally cannot think of a single thing they could do that would make me eliminate them from my life without trying to understand the actions and help them through it. But, that is just my view of friendship.

Laurie

nycjumper
Mar. 2, 2004, 02:31 PM
LaurieP- Out of curiousity, is there anything your friends could do that would make you walk away? I'm not trying to be a rabbler-rouser, just curious. Your post made me think what I would do if one of my friends arranged to have an animal killed for financial/professional considerations. And for me, I decided that if someone could do that, they weren't the person I thought they were & they certainly aren't a person I would want to know. And I have friends that I have been to hell and back with & certainly am not judgemental about 99% of things. However, there are deal-breakers for me. Knowingly hurting something defenseless (animal, child, etc) is one of them.

Anyway, I don't know PV & have nothing to say about him on a personal level in either a positive or negative manner. For me, its a simple case of the facts speaking for themselves.

[This message was edited by nycjumper on Mar. 02, 2004 at 05:43 PM.]

Snowbird
Mar. 2, 2004, 02:55 PM
While I might feel great empathy for a friend who went wrong and be willing to help them, I have to agree that there is a point to draw the line. I feel if we don't have some criteria for civilization we will lose that civilization and return to a very primitive state.

If they have killed a dog deliberately then they should be punished by never being permitted to have a dog. If they injured a child deliberately and for profit then they should never have custody of children and thereby if they had a horse killed for profit they should have a long and healthy life but never be with horses.

Battle Scarred Veteran

MAD
Mar. 2, 2004, 03:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:
HH, there is also a very large contingent of people that were friends and colleages of Paul's (and others) long before this ever happened, and while certainly hate his actions, have made the CHOICE to not ostracize him and in fact, remain his friend. To me, that is what real friendship is about. It isn't all "the ends justify the means" and if you were anywhere near the situation, you might have a clearer view of.

I know who my close friends are, and I personally cannot think of a single thing they could do that would make me eliminate them from my life without trying to understand the actions and help them through it. But, that is just my view of friendship.

Laurie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I am not and never have been PV's friend, I think this is an excellent post. Having had the most rotten year of my life (for other reasons than breaking the law!), all I can say is, thank God for friends - many of them I made on this BB.

Loyalty and true friendship is everything.

Editing to add: To nycjumper...yes, I could forgive. That is what I was taught to do as long as they asked for forgiveness (and that is as close as I'll get to religion, Erin).

Sean D. Rogers
Mar. 2, 2004, 03:16 PM
Coreene, I don't recall signing up for a competition, so don't enter me in one.

Judging from your 8,558 posts (Is that a typo??? When do you find the time to ride??) you've had ample practice at internet message board debate but I'm afraid I don't share your interest. I'm entitled to my opinion.

Heidi
Mar. 2, 2004, 03:24 PM
Odd how disparate our definitions of friendship.

If you accept that friendships are premised on mutual trust, respect, shared values, I expect more from my friends than I do of strangers, trainers, and acquaintances. To discover a trusted friend could be capable of such brutality would devastate me and undermine, and destroy, the very tenets of friendship - and I would be forced to ask myself how well I knew that person in the first place.

Who would you rather think capable of such an atrocity? A stranger -- or a trusted friend?

PV isn't worthy of your friendship, Laurie. And I'm glad that someone realized that he wasn't worthy of participation in the class.

Coreene
Mar. 2, 2004, 03:30 PM
Sean, I never turned it into a competition. You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine, both of which have been shared.

fleur
Mar. 2, 2004, 03:57 PM
honestly coreene, and i'm not sure how i feel about this, i think the lines might be more even than many on this bb would think. plenty of people who don't post here respect him as a horseman (and rightly so) and see that as separate from his 'history'.
i know that i would never get into any kind of horse-buying that involved PV, but i also know that (a)if i had a nice horse (b)and lots of money (c)and was close to him, i would probably train with him. if i was big into equitation (hah) than i would probably want to show under him.
i met him last year and he was very friendly and nice. he also seemed like a great trainer.

Coreene
Mar. 2, 2004, 04:14 PM
"Horseman" is a big stretch. JMHO, but I think that adjective fell off his resume when "arranged to have a horse killed for insurance money" was added to it.

Box-of-Rox
Mar. 2, 2004, 04:22 PM
Many people know that I have very conflicting feelings about Paul. On one hand, I hate what he did. On the other, I have seriously considered quitting riding about 4 times. The first time, Paul stopped me. I don't know if he knows that he did, but he let me sit on really nice horses, gave me help when I desperately needed it, and let me overhear him saying some extraordinarily generous things about me to other people, which was at that point much needed, as my confidence was absolutley shattered. i hated him for that, too, the next 3 times I wanted to quit, simply because if he hadn't imparted to me the amazing feeling of a well jumped course or or how it feels to be sitting on a horse when you are perfectly balanced with them, or the simple satisfaction of a job done well enough to please his standards, I would have quit and not put myself through the next four years. But now, when, for the first time in a really long time, I am consistently enjoying riding, I am very grateful that he gave me those kernals of good riding memory to keep me from quitting. Yes, the fact that for those last four years I've had the most amazing horse to walk the face of the earth has a lot to do with it, but there were times when it wasn't enough, and if I didn't know what riding could be like, I wouldn't have stayed with it.

So now, when I can't wait to get through these midterms and papers and get down to florida to be at the barn and ride my horses....well, I OWE Paul something. And a lot of people in the horse world owe Paul something. Whether, like me, he gave them horses to ride and lessons and advice, or he trained them to make them the professionals they are today, or he taught them how to manage a barn, or he was simply a friend (and he has been a long time friend to many), there are a lot of people in the horse world that are not willing to throw him out. He made a mistake, he made an epic mistake, and I am not one to say "he made a mistake, so what." It was a big deal mistake. And now, people, like me, for example, who might idolize him, never will. My opinion of him will always be qualified, and so will everyone else's, even those for whom he was a personal friend.

He has/is working to make ammends for his mistakes, and he, like everyone else, knows that he never will make up for what he did.

But just because all of his actions and his future are framed by that mistake doesn't mean that they ARE that mistake. Paul is an excellent trainer of horses and riders, he is always willing to help people who sincerely want to do well, and, unlike other noted horsemen, although he is exacting and strict he will never humiliate you, ever, and will never make jokes at your expense when you are having a less than brilliant moment (should you win with a lucky rub, though, he'll be the only one to mention it http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ).

so do I respect Paul? no. Do I think that the majority of riders who were going to compete under him are disappointed because they will not be recieving his opinion? yes.

I guess what I am trying to say is this: Paul will NEVER be able to be in a group of horse people and be "just like everyone else," ever, because of what he did. However, his suspension, the extensive coverage of it, and threads like this will make sure that his example is not one to be followed. Any action against him beyond his fullfillment of his suspension and free discussion of his actions, which are a part of horse show history--with dissenting opinions being tolerated--is to shoot ourselves in the foot. Paul knows a lot, and he is an asset to the training of American riders and their horses because of that knowledge. His positive actions speak as loudly to that end as his negative actions do to explain the general opinion of him and his ethical decisions, and to prevent him from imparting his wisdom and judgement--within the bounds of his punishment for his mistake--to the practice of American jumpers and equitation is a mistake.

BoR:
"I always feel like an idiot. But I am an idiot, so it kinda works out."--Billy Madison

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."--Churchill

fleur
Mar. 2, 2004, 04:28 PM
great post, b-o-r! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Vandy
Mar. 2, 2004, 04:33 PM
Box-of-Rox - excellent post.

Coreene
Mar. 2, 2004, 04:35 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but his suspension didn't stop him from training horses, just from showing and being on show grounds. So he's still imparting whatever to whomever wants to pay for it, just not imparting it at shows.

BoR, I do believe that Paul, as owner of that horse, also owed it a lot.

SED
Mar. 2, 2004, 05:34 PM
Box-of-Rox -- That was a very eloquent post. But after having read these threads -- and then done a little research on my own -- I end up siding with the group that says that, while he may still have value to society, such a fall from grace cannot be recouped professionally in the horse world. Frankly, I can't think of anything worse. I would forgive someone who ripped off their clients (see the many threads on sales commissions) much sooner than what he did. I would forgive what KK is alleged to have done much sooner.

Mr. Valliere, is -- I would hope from the many supporters on the various threads -- redeemable as a person. That doesn't mean he should ever have anything to do with the horse world.

Snowbird
Mar. 2, 2004, 05:47 PM
Box of Rox it is nice that Paul Valliere has some good things that can be said about him and certainly noone challenges that he is a knowledgeable Horseman.

We do not have licenses in this industry if he were a doctor and had been convicted of disposing of a patient accidentally he could have lost his license to practice medicine, if he were a lawyer guilty of breaking the rules or convicted of any crime he could lose his license to practice law. He may have created a reason why we should license trainers inadvertently.

While he may have many redeemable qualities the fact is that he agreed to have killed a helpless animal in his care for the money. The only thing that animal, that horse did was not to fulfill the winning expected of him. To me the crime was a heinous violation of his committment to the care and custody of all in his care.

Just as a trainer may violate his obligation by being a sexual offender with a child that he teaches, the child doesn't die but is damaged and people who do not have the ability to make good choices even one time are guilty of abusing their authority and the reverence they may have earned.

He has not been prevented from being a trainer, or a horseman or earning what appears to be a very good living, he is simply prevented from being at Competitions and if he honored his remorse he would respect us all by not having anything to do with competitions,unrecognized or sanctioned.

I would find it easier to believe in his remorse if he had respect for those who don't agree with what he did. I feel offended by the fact he was invited and accepted the invitation to "JUDGE". I am offended by the fact that he bends the rules rather than honoring the intention of the rules and the suspension he was given and that makes it difficult to believe in his remorse. Did he change his mind just because he is hoping to have that suspension lifted or because he respects us and his responsibilities?

Battle Scarred Veteran

lauriep
Mar. 2, 2004, 05:55 PM
Actually, PV isn't a close friend of mine. Barney is. But my post is a general post that attempts to explain that there are reasons other than winning for people to remain in Paul's corner. It is a personal decision, but not one that I think anyone here should take potshots at. And one that I honestly don't think that you can truly answer until you have "been" there. When one of your friends commits an action that you think is unforgiveable, and you choose not to continue the friendship, I'd like to know what that is.

And if you are truly that incapable of forgiving, perhaps you aren't the friend that others would wish to have. MY friends have no such lines; whatever I do, or whatever they do, we know that somehow we will get through things and come out still friends.

And whoever told me that Paul isn't worth my friendship - thanks, but I'll continue to make those decisions for myself. I think I can handle it.

Laurie

Molly99
Mar. 2, 2004, 06:11 PM
Well, I have walked away from friendships because of actions that they CHOOSE to take. Falling victim to drug abuse, wasn't a choice for someone, but the choice to commit adultery, murder, abuse are just that CHOICES. Those are choices that I do not want to be involved with, nor do I want my children to see that I approve of those actions.

Not to say that I don't continue to speak or socialize with them, but I would no longer count them in my close group of friends. I will say that given time and no new issues, I have grow closer to people, but I will say that I have never forgotten why our relationship became strained in the first place.

dogchushu
Mar. 2, 2004, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
While I might feel great empathy for a friend who went wrong and be willing to help them, I have to agree that there is a point to draw the line. I feel if we don't have some criteria for civilization we will lose that civilization and return to a very primitive state.

If they have killed a dog deliberately then they should be punished by never being permitted to have a dog. If they injured a child deliberately and for profit then they should never have custody of children and thereby if they had a horse killed for profit they should have a long and healthy life but never be with horses.

_Battle Scarred Veteran_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I'm not sure I'm ready to say this is the end of civilazation http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif , I agree with your second paragraph 100%!

To me, the guy was responsible for having a horse killed. That doesn't mean I'm hoping for a piano to fall on him or anything, but I don't think he should continue to be supported by horses.



"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison

mbp
Mar. 2, 2004, 06:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Mr. Valliere, is -- I would hope from the many supporters on the various threads -- redeemable as a person. That doesn't mean he should ever have anything to do with the horse world. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That seems to sum it up.

Laurie - of course your true close friends stay your true close friends. But I tend to be honest with my close friends and I would honestly and repeatedly tell them they have no business in the horse business after what they pulled. Not that I don't love them, but they have to accept consequences and where they are. If I had a family member who was a child abuser, I would still love them and I would never ever ever let them be unsupervised around children if it was in my power and I would object to their face to any plans they come up with to work in daycare centers or as peewee soccer coaches, etc.

I would still love them, but that doesn't mean that I would sit back and support them in efforts to exploit the horse industry for gain again after killing horses and defrauding insurance companies. For example, I have a friend whose dog kills cats. SHe has gotten cats more than once, only to let them be killed. I tell her to her face this is wrong and I took a kitten out of her hand that she was going to be given and told her "no, you should not take this cat, it would be WRONG." Why would I pretend it's ok just bc she is my friend?

Right and wrong are still there, even with friends you love. It doesn't do them any good for you to pretend they haven't screwed up or to "support" them in their efforts to evade consequences. That kind of blind love and support is horribly destructive.

I find it saddest of all that someone who was given so many gifts, chose to act the way he did. I guess to the supporters I have to wonder if, after you had a bad ride PV took the horse, walked it into a stall, and while you watched hooked up the tongue and anal clips, plugged it in and fried it in front of you and said, there there, now we can get you a good horse with the insurance money -- would you still think of him as such a great horseman? If you can tell me that you could walk out of the stall with the smells and sights happily go show for him the next day bc he is such a great horseman, fine. If not, then there is a lot of rationalizing going on.

Box-of-Rox
Mar. 2, 2004, 07:26 PM
see, i don't know, i guess i see it differently. I think that it's as a person that Paul should not be forgiven, and as a horse trainer that he should. I draw a dichotomy between profession and love...MOST professonals are in the business because they sincerely love the animals, and that's a character thing, not a necessity for this business. some professionals are in it because they're good at the professional aspect of it, and don't have the compassion for the animals that others do.They can still be good horse people, but their faults are as a human.

but this could be why i'm not at all interested in the horse profession--because all i really like about it is the horses--and if i viewed it differently, then i'd be more into it (and less ok with paul being allowed to train/judge/whatever.)

BoR:
"I always feel like an idiot. But I am an idiot, so it kinda works out."--Billy Madison

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."--Churchill

Snowbird
Mar. 2, 2004, 08:06 PM
Box of Rox, I think that is saddest comment I've read here.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>but this could be why i'm not at all interested in the horse profession--because all i really like about it is the horses--and if i viewed it differently, then i'd be more into it (and less ok with paul being allowed to train/judge/whatever<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That you don't want to be in this as a profession because what you love is the horses is a spin-off pf what PV did and that's a great pity and a damage to us all that we may not be able to repair. Thta's the price we all pay for knowing people who kill for profit.

Battle Scarred Veteran

oxer
Mar. 2, 2004, 08:47 PM
Sean D. Rogers--i couldn't agree more. with the rotation of a very few good judges left, it would be wonderful to have someone so incredibly knowledeable as paul back in the ring judging.
i too look forward to the day when paul can be back taking his students to the ring and back in the judges' chair. he has remarkable talent at both, and will add much to the show circuit when that happens.

JEP
Mar. 2, 2004, 08:54 PM
Box of Rox-I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciated that post of yours. You managed to articulate so many of the thoughts that I have neither the time nor the eloquence to post right now. Thanks for making such a thoughtful and important contribution to this discussion.

Black Market Radio
Mar. 2, 2004, 08:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:
Actually, PV isn't a close friend of mine. Barney is. But my post is a general post that attempts to explain that there are reasons other than winning for people to remain in Paul's corner. It is a personal decision, but not one that I think anyone here should take potshots at. And one that I honestly don't think that you can truly answer until you have "been" there. When one of your friends commits an action that you think is unforgiveable, and you choose not to continue the friendship, I'd like to know what that is.

And if you are truly that incapable of forgiving, perhaps you aren't the friend that others would wish to have. MY friends have no such lines; whatever I do, or whatever they do, we know that somehow we will get through things and come out still friends.

And whoever told me that Paul isn't worth my friendship - thanks, but I'll continue to make those decisions for myself. I think I can handle it.

Laurie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Laurie, I had a VERY good friend do a VERY bad thing. I am not going to say what it was, but suffice it to say that he harmed an innocent being as well. I am NOT nor ever WILL be friends with him again. I have forgiven him as I believe in forgiveness, however, I also believe that in some circumstances I am NOT obligated to go on being friends with someone after they do something like that. It isn't a matter of me not being a good friend, it is a matter of me standing up for what's right and what I believe in. You can be friends with whomever you wish, but please don't tell me that I am not a good friend because someone (read: like a BROTHER) did something horrible. I consider arranging the deaths of horses to be horrible. If I found out my trainer had been involved in that, I would leave and never return. That does NOT make me a bad friend.

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
The Walrus was Paul...

Beezer
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:34 PM
I'm not EVER going to tell someone who they can and can't be friends with.

But, since you asked, Laurie, yes I have terminated friendships with people I considered longtime, close friends over what I saw as their breaches of ethics. (I've also ended professional relationships with some very BNTs over what I saw as ethical lapses.) Some had to do with drugs, some with other legal issues, some with other forms of cheating. Do I miss the friendships we had? Sure. And when I see them even now, I am polite and pleasant -- but I no longer consider them friends.

Sometimes, in real life, people DO get voted off the island. I guess it just all depends on where you place the ballot box.

***** Currently assigned to the mouth-gaping, lip-flapping, head-twisting, wood-chewing, boot-shredding phase of baby greenie ownership! *****

RumoursFollow
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:50 PM
Thumbs up for Beezer... if I were going to express an opinion on here, I would have said exactly that. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Im so far removed now from the circles that PV travels (or would travel) in that if he does return to shows, most likely he and I will never cross paths with him. That said, because it doesnt have an effect on me, although I certainly have an opinion about him, I wont express it here because to me its not worth the fight. I believe what I believe and thats just that.

I will however say, that I too would never call someone with (what I considered to be) no morals a friend. I've ended relationships with people who did questionable things. Its not my place to change them- but it is my place to not associate with them. I dont want to be "RF - close friend of Joe Schmoe, convicted murderer/rapist/drug dealer/whatever" and yes, that is largely because society judges you on who you surround yourself with, like it or not. But I also do it for myself. I deserve and can have better than people who do questionable things and harm innocent people.

If I may, I'd like to get teenagerish on us for a minute (for the record, its been a while since I was one) and quote the great Dave Matthews.

"Turns out not where but who you're with that really matters."

Pictures: My Album (http://www.picturetrail.com/romeorocks)

nhwr
Mar. 2, 2004, 09:54 PM
Friendship is based on many things, common values and trust being paramount to me. If you think you can trust someone who has a value system that allows them to commit a crime, I'd say you are being naive. Commiting a crime, particularly one like this, means you put your personal interests are above those of society and social relationships, not great credentials for friendship, IMO. Every action should have a consequence. If more people were up front about the consequences, perhaps people would consider their actions more carefully.

I personally could never be friends with someone who has done what he did. Forgive? Yes. Forget? Never.

bluewatersail
Mar. 2, 2004, 10:18 PM
If what they say about this man is true, and I have to believe what "they" say as it seems he is a convicted felon,what he did constitutes the essence of evil. I don't applaud anything he does. He stepped down because he couldn't face the heat and/or organizers told him to leave.

Did someone say a child molester was also working at this event? What is his name? Where did this take place?

Kryswyn
Mar. 2, 2004, 10:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:
When one of your friends commits an action that you think is unforgiveable, and you choose not to continue the friendship, I'd like to know what that is.

And if you are truly that incapable of forgiving, perhaps you aren't the friend that others would wish to have. MY friends have no such lines; whatever I do, or whatever they do, we know that somehow we will get through things and come out still friends.

Laurie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Laurie while I respect your feelings and opinions I think you may be blurring the line between 'forgiving' and 'forgetting' to wit:

I learned a very valuable lesson watching the best horseman I've ever worked with riding a totally green youngster. It went around the ring quietly then (as youngsters do) went into bronco mode at a particular spot in the ring. The consumate horseman not only rode the bucks but managed to discipline the colt simultaneously so the colt actually chose to stop bucking, and was not reined in or forced by the rider's strength to stop. The horseman continued riding as if nothing had happened and when they got to that spot again, while the colt got a wide-eyed spooky look in his eye, stiffened and went on. The next circuit, he relaxed and the ride then ended immediately.

The horseman explained to those watching: "I forgive the colt for bucking; he's green. But I don't forget that he bucked and may buck again. Because he chose to buck once, I don't trust that he will never buck again."

Paul Valliere chose to do something a true horseman would find unethical, unprofessional and unforgivable. If his friends want to forgive him for his actions, that's their choice. But the world at large will not forget what he's done, and should not trust that he will not do it again.

That he IS such a good trainer, with the special talent to connect and know exactly how to motivate students (ie B-O-R) is what makes his actions so regretable. Because his knowledge should be lost to the community, the way a doctor guilty of malpractice loses his ability to practice medicine depriving the local community of a qualified doctor.

The same horseman also taught me that a rider is only as good as his worst ride. Surely that can be extropolated to a person is only as good as their worst decision.

As for your question, what would be "unforgivable" in my book... letting an animal suffer; causing deliberate permanent harm to an animal or child, sexual abuse, rape, child molestation.

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

JulieMontgomery
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:08 AM
Thank you Beezer. Thank you RumoursFollow. Thank you nhwr. Thank you bluewatersail. Thank you Kryswyn.

All excellent posts. Excellent.

"He is your friend, your partner, your defender, your dog. You are his life, his love, his leader. He will be yours, faithful and true, to the last beat of his heart. You owe it to him to be worthy of his devotion."
Author Unknown....

Silk
Mar. 3, 2004, 04:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jep:
Box of Rox-I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciated that post of yours. You managed to articulate so many of the thoughts that I have neither the time nor the eloquence to post right now. Thanks for making such a thoughtful and important contribution to this discussion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Although not popular at the moment, I second this. Again, I DESPISE what he did...but it doesnt take away from the good he has done.

**Here is the Uber-Pony 1:** http://www.equinesitegallery.com/VBG/LgSmokeyHead.jpg

MAD
Mar. 3, 2004, 04:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:
Actually, PV isn't a close friend of mine. Barney is. But my post is a general post that attempts to explain that there are reasons other than winning for people to remain in Paul's corner. It is a personal decision, but not one that I think anyone here should take potshots at. And one that I honestly don't think that you can truly answer until you have "been" there. When one of your friends commits an action that you think is unforgiveable, and you choose not to continue the friendship, I'd like to know what that is.

And if you are truly that incapable of forgiving, perhaps you aren't the friend that others would wish to have. MY friends have no such lines; whatever I do, or whatever they do, we know that somehow we will get through things and come out still friends.

And whoever told me that Paul isn't worth my friendship - thanks, but I'll continue to make those decisions for myself. I think I can handle it.

Laurie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Laurie - you keep saying what I want to say! THANKS!

MAD
Mar. 3, 2004, 04:52 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Beezer:

But, since you asked, Laurie, _yes_ I have terminated friendships with people I considered longtime, close friends over what I saw as their breaches of ethics. QUOTE]

I think in times of need/hardship is when true friends show their true colors. Who you consider your true friends often turn out to be not. Found that out the hard way...

Lord Helpus
Mar. 3, 2004, 05:01 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bluewatersail:
He stepped down because he couldn't face the heat and/or organizers told him to leave. [\QUOTE]

An excellent point. As an example: The West Wing is my favoritest show ever. Recently they had a replay in which the Surgeon General made a comment to the press. The President thought it was inappropriate, and asked for her resignation. (She refused and said she would only leave if she was fired, but that is beside the point here...)

The point here being that it is common for management to ask for someone's resignation. So, while I think that SOMEONE was influenced by the outcry on this issue, I do not think that we can automatically give PV kudo's for making the right decision.

Yes, he did make the right decision if he wants to be reinstated. And perhaps that is why he offered his resignation. But, the fact that he resigned does not mean that the initial decision was his.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Do you know why they call it "PMS"? Because "Mad Cow Disease" was taken

lauriep
Mar. 3, 2004, 05:25 AM
As I said, friendship is a very personal thing, and everyone has their definitions and comfort zones. My point was to refute the argument that anyone that has stuck by PV is there only for personal gain (win at all costs, ends justifies the means). I merely pointed out that that is NOT the case.

I'm not blurring anything, Kryswyn, I am very clear on my feelings. The last 20 years of my life have made me more tolerant of others' flaws and have shown me that rehabilitation is possible in many cases, even though the "experts" on this BB would say it is not. Again, personal choice. Since nothing is completely black and white, other than the colors, in my view, I refuse to say as a blanket statement that x actions would cause me to summarily disown a friend. Offhand, I cna't think of anything, but each instance would have to be judged, by me and my moral framework, and ability to see beyond the actual instance, and only then would I make a decision. No absolutes for me, sorry.

Laurie

BO DA COUS
Mar. 3, 2004, 05:52 AM
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif Devil's advocate here - I have a problem with something Snowbird said. "If they have killed a dog deliberately then they should be punished by never being permitted to have a dog." Note - not that they should never be around dogs in general. "If they injured a child deliberately and for profit then they should never have custody of children" - not ever be in attendance of children. So why therfore, should P.V. "never be with horses."? OWN horses I might agree with. Custody of horses I might agree with. Never be "with" horses? Sorry I can't agree. I disagree that he is a true horseman considering his behavior, but he is a brillant TRAINER. There is a difference ya'll. A big one. Unfortunately IMO there are very few horsemen left - but that's a different topic. However, despite what I personally feel is horrible, professionally I can't argue with his skill. I have used his services since his suspension to some very nice results ( not as primary trainer, but as extra help ) and would do so again if I felt the need for my amatures. Would I invite him to dinner? No. Would I leave a horse in his care? NO. - but then again there are very few trainers that I would give unlimited acess to my horses. Sorry to say, there are many unscrupulous people out there. But for his knowledge... he is hard to beat. Bottom line. For the sake of a ribbon? Yes - that's what showing is about. The pride of a ribbon. Otherwise you could save money and stay home and still know where you are personally in your riding. But it's also about the knowledge. That's why we pay trainers. Otherwise, you could save money and just have fun. Figure it out on your own. I will choose to use the best teachers - not horsemen - around me be it a trainer, or vet, or groom. And I will be responsible for making myself a true horseman.

Cowboy Up Y'all

nycjumper
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:06 AM
Lauriep, Please don't think that the rest of us are a judgemental, narrow-minded bunch. I have certainly forgiven (& been forgiven) many mistakes over the years. And I would like to think that I would forgive/be forgiven 99% of the mistakes pepole make. However, for me, I do have an absolute. Someone knowingly hurting something powerless (animal, child, etc) is NOT someone I want to be friends with or know. It is that simple. Would I sit there & condemn him to everyone I meet or publically scorn him - no. However I certainly would not remain close friends with him.

For me, if someone makes that choice to knowingly hurt someone, then clearly he wasn't who I thought he were when I became friends with him. And again, he certainly wouldn't be someone I would be interested in getting to know all over again.

Policy of Truth
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:51 AM
I agree that PV is an excellent judge...however, that doesn't change my belief that he should stay away from horses.

I don't care how good he is...think of it this way: say there is an excellent homicide detective who can see things in cases most good detectives would miss...say he becomes entangled with a group that offeres him big bucks to "miss" a few details and not bring the criminlas in a case to justice. Say this comes to light. Would you think it wise for him to continue working as a homicide investigator? Maybe you would, but that crosses the line of ethics and logic for me.

You can forgive someone, but not allow them to go back to the thing that got them into so much trouble.

Maybe PV should start training other up and comming judges....at least his expertise wouldn't be lost, as so many have been concerned about.

I'm just glad he did the right thing...not sure how it came about...just glad he did it.

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:54 AM
It's really good to see such thoughtful posts!

BoR and LaurieP -- good points, and well articulated. I think that the issues of "limits" in relationships is so very personal that all of us have our own definitions, but you've both certainly eloquently stated very good arguments. I don't personally share all of your sentiments, although I do agree with some, but I'm sure those who are among your friends are lucky for it.

As to separating personal from professional, well, that's rather what I was doing. See, I do this in many areas of life -- if I learn that Company X is doing something or if their CEO publicly and with company money supports something which I disagree with, I choose NOT to associate with Company X. And if someone asks me if I want some of their product, I'll say no and tell them why. They can draw their own conclusions from that as to whether I'm fanatical about principles or if I have a point, but I've done what my moral compass requires.

Similarly with friends, I DO have lines of behavior I can't and don't condone. I had a very close, very long time friend with whom a relationship ended because of a choice and consequences and what I saw to be a lack of critical understanding on his part. And I've had less intimate friends whom I have chosen to no longer associate with because of their actions, also.

I hold people responsible for their actions and their choices. I believe in consequences. I also believe in love, and certainly feel that everyone deserves that. But...I'm not a therapist. I'm not a minister. And I'm not a doctor. If someone has a problem - as demonstrated in their choices or actions - that troubles me very deeply, I am not equipped necessarily to help them with that. Love is critical, but to me it can't overcome some choices.

So, I can tell someone that I love them, I'm deeply disappointed that they did X, that I really hope they find the help they need but that I can't give that to them, and I can't stand by knowing their choice and endorsing it. Now...if it's something like alcohol abuse and someone gets help, I won't abandon a friend. I may pull back from the relationship -- maybe for a long time -- until I see that there has been a real change and an understanding of the previous actions and consequences. But unless that is present, and until that is present, the relationship isn't.

It may be that makes me somewhat cold, and perhaps in some eyes judgemental. That's a valid opinion I'm sure, and perhaps that's just one of the reasons that everyone in the world isn't bosom buddies with everyone else.

But...it's also very valid in a professional relationship to BE judgemental, imo. I CAN decide that I don't want to work with or for someone whose ethics are not in line with mine. In PV's situation, that is the case. I abhor his ethical choice, and however skilled he is as a teacher, I do not want my sport of choice to support people with those ethics. Others do, and feel the teaching talent overcomes the moral lapse.

My complaint from the start was that by endorsing PV after his conviction by his peers, I feel we are sending a strong message that there are no limits of behavior in our sport. And I don't want to believe that. Just as every society has conventions against killing, has things that are decided to be bad enough to cut the person from the society, our sport should, too, IMO. But if killing a horse for profit isn't sufficient to warrant that, regardless of past or future talents, then I don't think we DO have those lines. And that saddens me.

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pacificsolo:


I don't care how good he is...think of it this way: say there is an excellent homicide detective who can see things in cases most good detectives would miss...say he becomes entangled with a group that offeres him big bucks to "miss" a few details and not bring the criminlas in a case to justice. Say this comes to light. Would you think it wise for him to continue working as a homicide investigator? Maybe you would, but that crosses the line of ethics and logic for me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a very interesting point PS. My gut says to continue to let the detective work on cases because to not could possibly allow future murderers to go free. To me the possibility that the detective could apprehend criminals in the future, and has better skills than everyone else, outweighs the fact that he made a bad decision at one point.

Similarly for me, if PV was asked to judge a class that by the rules he was allowed to judge, the benefit that those riding under him may experience (and to be honest I think riding with him as a trainer is by far more beneficial than riding under him as a judge) should not be thrown aside because he made what I don't think anyone will dispute was a horrible decision. I guess for me as long as he is following the rules set down for him I don't see the problem.

THIS IS MY OPINION.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

SGray
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:25 AM
so you weigh the good against the bad

imho: teaching someone how to ride just doesn't even register on the scale as a 'benefit' or 'for the greater good' against the BAD of the crime that was committed

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:31 AM
SGray - You are entitled to your own opinion. I was just stating mine based on the logic posted by Pacific.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

Policy of Truth
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:41 AM
"To me the possibility that the detective could apprehend criminals in the future, and has better skills than everyone else, outweighs the fact that he made a bad decision at one point"

So, in effect, you have no problems trusting someone who has proven that they are untrustworthy in such a blatant and important manner? I'm not saying your opinion is somehow wrong...just that I strongly disagree...

I find it interesting that in my scenerio, the public as well as the employer would not even contemplate allowing such a person to continue in that type of employment. Yet, it would be ok with you, just because they were unusually good at their job? The one they compromised their ethics in? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Pocket Pony
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:45 AM
Excellent post, Hopeful Hunter. My thoughts exactly.

"Both rider and horse must enjoy the work. This is the essence of success" - Reiner Klimke

shade
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:49 AM
I keep hearing about all the good PV has done for our sport..i'm sorry I don't agree...what about the almost irrepairable damage he did to our sport by having a horse horribly killed not to stop any suffering but for the money alone. That is a hugh black mark against our industry that may never be erased. People remember the bad not the good and the general public will not soon forget the horrendous acts commited by all those involved. By welcoming anyone involved in the killings back into our world with open arms is IMO is stating to the world that what they all did was "not that bad" and we accept it because he has done so much good for the sport..any good he might have done was and IMO will forever be erased by his as others have said bad decision.

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 3, 2004, 10:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pacificsolo:
"To me the possibility that the detective could apprehend criminals in the future, and has better skills than everyone else, outweighs the fact that he made a bad decision at one point"

So, in effect, you have no problems trusting someone who has proven that they are untrustworthy in such a blatant and important manner? I'm not saying your opinion is somehow wrong...just that I strongly disagree...

I find it interesting that in my scenerio, the public as well as the employer would not even contemplate allowing such a person to continue in that type of employment. Yet, it would be ok with you, just because they were unusually good at their job? The one they compromised their ethics in? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have no problem with you disagreeing with my opinion. And yes, I stick by my opinion that if that detective could solve my murder, despite making mistakes in the past, I would want him working on my case. I have made mistakes, as we all have some larger than others of course, but I would hope that my one pretty serious mistake would not end up painting me only with that brush.

Maybe over the years I have become numb to ethics questions, but this is my opinion and I stick by it.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

lauriep
Mar. 3, 2004, 10:37 AM
HH, et al,

This is one of the most thoughtful threads we have had in awhile. And wouldn't it be a boring world if we all agreed.

I have spoken with many of my friends about this issue, and with only 1-2 exceptions, all would or do remain on cordial to friendly terms with PV and BW. Each for their own reasons, but all of these very intelligent, horse-loving people have chosen to continue including these people in their lives. Just an interesting point.

Laurie

SGray
Mar. 3, 2004, 10:45 AM
I would suggest that if one desires to 'make amends' for an act of extremely cruelty to an animal and one wishes to be involved with horses one could: a)volunteer with a rescue group, rehabiliting abused or neglected animals so that they might be adopted b)volunteer with a group such as Rerun or Canter to aid in retraining those animals for a new career c)volunteer with a theraputic riding program helping sick or disabled with rehabilitation d)volunteer to teach special olympics or para-olympics riders, etc. In some way put the expertise to use to the good of animals or persons in need.

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

DMK
Mar. 3, 2004, 10:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shade:
I keep hearing about all the good PV has done for our sport..i'm sorry I don't agree...what about the almost irrepairable damage he did to our sport...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

shade, it's a funny sort of world. It's quite possible he has done both. If a person thinks that the bad outweighs the good, then that is certainly a valid position to own. But you can't make the past disappear unless you are into revisionist history.

The de Medici family was a seriously not nice group of folks who terrorized a good part of Europe in their day through a position of supreme power (the Papacy). I am pretty sure a lot of people died painful, unwarranted deaths and many, many more paid a lot of money to either have their souls "saved" or avoid the aforementioned painful death (probably all of the above for some unlucky people). But they still were also primarily responsible for the artistic and scientific freedoms that made up the Rennaissance (Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Galileo, and so on). You can't consider their benefits without acknowledging the harm they caused, and I wouldn't expect a history book to be written that called them exclusively evil or exclusively beneficial.

(the following is a general rant and not aimed at any one poster).

Honestly, most of what bothers me about trying to sell issues as exclusively black and white is it doesn't seem to give us as individuals much credit for being smart enough to understand, weigh and consider the nuances when making a decisions.

"Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony." - Monty Python

wanderlust
Mar. 3, 2004, 11:21 AM
This has been an interesting, thought-provoking and thoughtful conversation. I think Hopeful Hunter had a fantastic post, and I agree wholeheartedly.

From the time I was little, my father told me that you needed to be careful with whom you associated, and the two qualities he used to choose friends and professional relationships were integrity and compassion. Thankfully, we had a large family to keep us entertained, as there were precious few people who met both my father's criteria. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

My father's words and values have stayed with me, and I find myself looking for those same two things in friends and associates. I have found myself in the same situation as my father- a small circle of friends, all of whom I trust implicitly because of their values. I use these same criteria to choose trainers, the people to whom I entrust my animal and my own safety. I do not know PV, but no matter how wonderful a trainer he is, by his actions he demonstrated a complete lack of integrity and compassion. Therefore, he is off my list of people with whom to associate in any way/shape/form.

~formerly Master Tally~

shade
Mar. 3, 2004, 11:24 AM
DMK..hmm...good point..I confess I do get a bit of tunnel vision on this issue as it just infuriates me to no end the blemish that is now forever on our sport due to the actions of ALL of them not just PV. And I think it's very sad that we have now lost, to a degree the invaluable knowledge that these people gave to our sport. I worked for BW for over a year and am still astonished at his knowledge and what i learned working for him. I was also thinking the same thoughts as SGRAY. Now THAT would be THE way to redeem themselves. It would change my tune immensly...by the way is their a spell ck on this bb?

DMK
Mar. 3, 2004, 11:35 AM
no spell check, sigh... But you can always zip back in and edit like the rest of us!

I am guilty of the exact same tunnel vision when it is something that outrages me as well. I'm sure we all are. But it's good to be able to pull back from those issues and look at it from another angle. It may or may not change your mind, but you will be smarter than you were before you considered it, right? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And I do think it would be far more worthy for any of these individuals to do charity work, but I keep in mind that I haven't a clue if they are or are not doing work already. And the one time PV ran an ad about donating lesson money to some charity in the wake of 9/11, a goodly number on this BB reamed him up one side and down the other for being self serving for running the ad touting his actions. Hey, he may very well have been self serving. He may also have done it to prompt others to follow his lead. I am in no position to make any judgement call on that one, so I'll just take it at face value. But if I was sitting on the committee that considers reinstatement, and that was the ONLY charitable work done over the suspension period, I would probably assume the former, not the latter.

"Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony." - Monty Python

shade
Mar. 3, 2004, 12:08 PM
DMK...you are right..and maybe PV has been doing charitable work, but if if he is he needs to let it be known. I for one would be thrilled if any of them were doing such..but sadly I doubt any of them have. Maybe someone should suggest that to PV???? By the way does he still teach out of Acres Wild in RI?

CuriousGeorge
Mar. 3, 2004, 01:17 PM
Shade, the last time Paul tried to "let it be known" that he was trying to do charitable work, people on this very forum caused a stir similar to this one and complained to the Chronicle for even publishing his ad.

LucianCephus
Mar. 3, 2004, 01:31 PM
Did you all see Michele Dargan's article on PV's withdrawal in the Daily News? I thought the most interesting comments were those of Phelps, as follow.

"Phelps said he never thought Valliere's participation would produce any backlash. Phelps said he received two phone calls and heard from only a "handful" of people on the horse show grounds expressing concern. Where he did see a difference was in the low number of tables booked to watch the event.

"I squarely am the responsible party for asking Paul to judge," Phelps said. "I put Paul in a bad situation. Paul has played by the rules. He's done what he was supposed to do. Maybe I made the mistake of thinking the horse world was more forgiving after all these years. I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving.""

Very strange.

Medievalist
Mar. 3, 2004, 01:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shade:
By the way does he still teach out of Acres Wild in RI?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, he has since moved.

Centre Equestre de la Houssaye (http://www.eii.fr/club/houssaye)

DMK
Mar. 3, 2004, 01:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LucianCephus:
Did you all see Michele Dargan's article on PV's withdrawal in the Daily News? I thought the most interesting comments were those of Phelps, as follow.

"Phelps said he never thought Valliere's participation would produce any backlash. Phelps said he received two phone calls and heard from only a "handful" of people on the horse show grounds expressing concern. Where he did see a difference was in the low number of tables booked to watch the event.

"I squarely am the responsible party for asking Paul to judge," Phelps said. "I put Paul in a bad situation. Paul has played by the rules. He's done what he was supposed to do. Maybe I made the mistake of thinking the horse world was more forgiving after all these years. I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving.""

Very strange.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Stranger yet, is the fact that Mason Phelps, president of the "premier PR company to the equestrian world and beyond" would supply such a backhanded slap to all these "little guys" who buy these tables. (By the way, I count myself among the little people and I never even thought about trying to afford one of those tables!)

I can only hope that in the entirety of his comments he didn't sound quite so insulting to all those people whom he wants to buy tables and donate money to a worthy charity.

"Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony." - Monty Python

Coreene
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:00 PM
Great spin, Mason. PR 101: don't s**t on the customers. Maybe time to go back and review that lesson.

nhwr
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:00 PM
I think PV should take up golf. Then OJ would have someone to play with and maybe together they could find the "real killer". I'd happily participate in something PV is involved with then. Til that day comes, I'll avoid him.

Sleepy
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:04 PM
I found this comment by Valliere himself even MORE interesting -

"There were only a handful of people [dissenting] — enough to stir up a problem."

''Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.''
- Pablo Picasso

CuriousGeorge
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:06 PM
Maybe in the grand scheme of things the number of people who cared enough to actually follow through on complaining WAS a "handful".

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LucianCephus:
Did you all see Michele Dargan's article on PV's withdrawal in the Daily News? I thought the most interesting comments were those of Phelps, as follow.

"Phelps said he never thought Valliere's participation would produce any backlash. Phelps said he received two phone calls and heard from only a "handful" of people on the horse show grounds expressing concern. Where he did see a difference was in the low number of tables booked to watch the event.

"I squarely am the responsible party for asking Paul to judge," Phelps said. "I put Paul in a bad situation. Paul has played by the rules. He's done what he was supposed to do. Maybe I made the mistake of thinking the horse world was more forgiving after all these years. I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving.""

Very strange.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can someone post a link to the full article? As one of the "two phone calls" Phelps received I'd love to see it http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I have to say, Mr. Phelps is imo doing an outstanding job of showing why so many people rate PR pros up there with used car salespeople and slimy late-night get-rich-quick dudes as ethical. *sigh*

He's sorry he put PAUL in this situation???? How about the Sponsors? Or the management? And last I checked, there were a whole lot more of the "little guy" amateurs than there were pros at their shows paying their bills and his salary, weren't there?

And -- totally regardless of anyone's personal relationship or opinion of PV -- may I say from a PR standpoint it is no less than suicide to suggest that PV "played by the rules" and that a major show manager doesn't get why people won't forget? EVEN if they feel that way, I cannot imagine what kind of arrogance and blindness would prevent them from seeing how the selection might play in Peoria to those not "in the know" or at the higher levels.

If Mr. Phelps is the best PR person in the horse show world I can understand why there is no coverage of our sport outside of the enthusiast press!

MBS
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:25 PM
Although I have not voiced my opinion on this thread (I dont think didnt go back to read all the pages), in the horse show world I am a "little person" with limited funds.

But as a former marketing/PR person, I found Mason's comment quite contradictory. Those tables are certainly not purchased by little people like me. And as a former activist, I see that there were certainly some of the "Bigger" people voicing their opinions with their Pocket books which is a very effective way to Protest!

SGray
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LucianCephus:
....."Phelps said he never thought Valliere's participation would produce any backlash. Phelps said he received two phone calls and heard from only a "handful" of people on the horse show grounds expressing concern. Where he did see a difference was in the low number of tables booked to watch the event.....

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well three cheers for those that voted with their wallets and did NOT buy tables

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

Mom
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:37 PM
There were some positive comments in that article, also, which I notice were conveniently ignored by several posters.
www.palmbeachdailynews.com (http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com)

BusyBody
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:40 PM
Here (http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/newsfd/auto/feed/news/2004/03/03/1078293502.26609.6989.2176.html;COXnetJSessionID=A GcN3MwQtck4s1oTukVI8d9Flx1ZN7P10VARTxdgP6ZU6ErEErr 6!1694449110?urac=n&urvf=10783530379260.0473553868204436) is a link and the article is quoted below:

"Outrage spurs judge for Equus to withdraw
By MICHELE DARGAN, Daily News Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 3, 2004 — Paul Valliere, an elite trainer banned from horse shows after admitting his part in a 1990s horse killing scandal, stepped down Tuesday as a judge for the upcoming Equus Medal class when his appointment touched off controversy.

Dozens of e-mails expressing outrage at Valliere's appointment were posted on the Chronicle of the Horse message boards at www.chronofhorse.com, (http://www.chronofhorse.com,) an equestrian Web site tied to the weekly equestrian magazine.

Mason Phelps Jr., organizer of the event, said Valliere has "graciously" withdrawn as one of the three judges of Monday night's event at the Palm Beach Polo Equestrian Club. The class will benefit the Wellington Equestrian Alliance, an organization established to protect the equestrian preserve in Wellington. Valliere has been replaced by Leo Conroy, who will join Norman Dello Joio and Ellen Lordi as judges.

Phelps said he never thought Valliere's participation would produce any backlash. Phelps said he received two phone calls and heard from only a "handful" of people on the horse show grounds expressing concern. Where he did see a difference was in the low number of tables booked to watch the event.

"I squarely am the responsible party for asking Paul to judge," Phelps said. "I put Paul in a bad situation. Paul has played by the rules. He's done what he was supposed to do. Maybe I made the mistake of thinking the horse world was more forgiving after all these years. I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving."

In 1994, Valliere admitted in federal court in Chicago that he paid to have his show horse, Roseau Platiere, electrocuted five years earlier in order to collect the $75,000 in insurance money. In 1993, a federal grand jury indicted 23 people in related cases of killing expensive show horses for insurance money. Most of them pleaded guilty or were convicted at trial, including cellular phone heir George Lindemann Jr., formerly of Palm Beach, and show jumper Barney Ward, father of three-time AGA Rider of the Year McLain Ward.

Valliere said Tuesday he hasn't discussed the case in 10 years and is "very remorseful" for his part. Valliere said he has done a lot of charity work and he thought people would be more forgiving.

"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."

Before the scandal, Valliere was one of the nation's top equitation instructors. He coached countless students to wins in the Medal and Maclay classes. Valliere cooperated with the federal government in its investigation into the horse killings, wearing a wire to gather evidence for prosecutors on his one-time friend, Barney Ward. Valliere, of Rhode Island, was sentenced to four years probation. Barney Ward and Lindemann both served prison time.

In April 1996, Valliere was banned for 10 years from participating in sanctioned events by the governing body of equestrian events in the United States, U.S. Equestrian Federation. He is unable to be on the grounds of any horse show sanctioned by the group.

Monday night's benefit event is not sanctioned by the U.S. governing body, and Valliere could participate as a trainer or a judge. He coached some of the competitors in last year's class.

"I'm disappointed, but I feel more comfortable with this [decision]," Valliere said. "I don't want to create any problems. I was going to do the best job I could. It would have been fun working with Norman [Dello Joio] and Ellen [Lordi]."

Dello Joio, the 1992 individual Olympic bronze medalist, said Valliere has admitted his crime and has paid the price.

"It takes a little bit of character on everybody's part to forgive," Dello Joio said. "He was a top horseman before he made this mistake, and he's a better horseman and a better person now because of it. He goes the extra mile now in his care of animals. Paul has done more for the equestrian community since he's made this mistake."

Grand prix rider Debbie Stephens will compete in the Equus Medal, but declined comment on whether she would have competed if Valliere judged the class.

"Why people have done horrible things in our industry, I don't understand that," Stephens said. "[Valliere's] punishment is not mine, and I prefer to talk about the positive things in our industry and not the negative."

Grand prix rider Schuyler Riley of Wellington participated last year and again will ride in the Equus Medal. Valliere trained Riley when she competed as a junior, and she later worked for him as a professional.

"I don't respect what he did years ago, but I do respect how he's conducted himself recently, and I do respect him as an instructor," Riley said. "He's taken what was handed to him. He's done the time and he's done it very respectfully. I didn't feel it was offensive to have him judge at all. It's not a recognized event." "

—mdargan@pbdailynews.com

Portia
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by oxer:
i too look forward to the day when paul can be back taking his students to the ring and back in the judges' chair. he has remarkable talent at both, and will add much to the show circuit when that happens.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Even if he was ever to get reinstated as a USEF member, I've gotta think the odds of him getting his official's licenses back is pretty remote.

Letting him be a member again would generate enough negative reaction from "the little guys" for USEF, but letting him be a licensed official sanctioned by the org? I don't think that's gonna happen for a very, very long time.

It's the "little guys" who make up the vast majority of the USEF membership. Not to mention that a whole lot of the board of directors are not from hunterland and won't know him well or have worked with him. My personal opinion is that its very doubtful they would be willing to take the heat from their constiuencies (more of those pesky little guys again) that would come from letting him be an LO again.

[This message was edited by Portia on Mar. 03, 2004 at 05:49 PM.]

[This message was edited by Portia on Mar. 03, 2004 at 05:50 PM.]

CBoylen
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:44 PM
Just to be clear, I highly doubt the drop in table sales has anything to do with whomever is judging. Most of us have learned over the years that buying a table for any of the special events (AHJF, Equus Medal, ect.) is a colossal waste of money at $3500 (and no, the circuit table owners are NOT exempt) for mediocre food and a worse view than you get sitting outside on the benches.

http://community.webshots.com/user/anallie

Pocket Pony
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:44 PM
"He was a top horseman before he made this mistake, and he's a better horseman and a better person now because of it. He goes the extra mile now in his care of animals. Paul has done more for the equestrian community since he's made this mistake."

Huh? Norman Dello Joio, you're off your rocker.

"Both rider and horse must enjoy the work. This is the essence of success" - Reiner Klimke

mbp
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:54 PM
So the charity that would be benefitting is the Wellington Equestrian Alliance - right? The one for which Phelps is listed as the registered agent?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> wearing a wire to gather evidence for prosecutors on his one-time friend, Barney Ward <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the discussion of friendship, forgiving, etc. has been interesting and that piece from the article made me think - how would you characterize that action? Good friend? Bad friend? Friend, but trying to do the right thing? Friend maybe, but more concerned with saving themselves than the friendship? I can see it more than one way.

bigbay
Mar. 3, 2004, 02:55 PM
Phelps called us "little guys". http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

"It is good to be fine."

LLDM
Mar. 3, 2004, 03:09 PM
This has been the best thread I have ever read. It has made me think. Hard. Here's my thoughts:

If someone, anyone, was, as PV was, convicted of this crime...

A) Is there anything they could do to redeem themselves?

and if so,

B) What would it take?

At first my answer to "A" was "no". But after really reading many of you thoughts and ideas, I have come up with a senerio I could live with. It would be tough and I don't think PV is close. But, given forgiveness is something to strive for, I could, under certain circumstances. Something very much along the lines that SGrey proposed.

JMHO

SCFarm

A Leg at Each Corner

Snowbird
Mar. 3, 2004, 03:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving.""

Very strange.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is the knowledgeable professionals who are at Wellington and obviously they don't think that the tables were a wise purchase or a good donation.

The little guys are either not there at all or far from being able to spend thousands for a charity donation.

But, Mr. Phelps in case you haven't noticed 98% of the members of the USEF are not at Wellington. You have a very small select group of the very rich or famous from which you gain your opinions. And, the others that are there probably can't afford to be there.

Times are changing why is that strange? If as Mr. Long says the mission of the USEF as a Federation is to welcome everyone then the "everyone" will have opinions that may differ from your clientele. They do matter because they are the spectators you will want to see buying seats so that the very Rich Corporate Sponsors are willing to put all that money in your prize baskets.

So let's play nice and not be disparaging of people who may have a different set of values. There are many who feel that someone who has admitted his guilt and did it for the money is not a good role model, no matter how talented.

And, has PV played by the rules has he respected the fact that he's been suspended or has he tweeked the interpretion just a little to make it easier to earn more money.

If someone really has remorse and wants to prove he will never again break a rule it isn't done by bending the rules to the point where they are a bad joke and badly deformed.

There was a comment which shocked me by it's simplicity that says how much damage has been done to this industry by that whole scandal.

"A $25.000 equitation class judged by a convicted insurance fraud criminal, announced by a convicted sexual offender and unrecognized so that all the horses can be drugged out of their minds".

What an image and commentary that was to make parents want their children in our sports activity.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Eddina Monsoon
Mar. 3, 2004, 03:24 PM
MOM, once again, sticking up for the bad guys.

nhwr
Mar. 3, 2004, 03:59 PM
This has nothing to do with forgiveness, IMO. I think what he did was horrific, but I forgive him for it. I really do. However, forgivenss doesn't mean you pretend like it never happened. I can acknowledge that PV has done everything discussed here; killed his horse for money and spent the last several years making amends for it. Good for him for trying to rehabilitate himself. But what he did has consequences. Plus by participating in this event, although, he is not violating the letter of his penalty, he is clearly violating the spirit of it. That the event management could and would overlook this is a major faux pas.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The "knowledgeable professional" is more likely the person with a conflicted position than the "little guys". I wouldn't use them as a credible yardstick.

Box-of-Rox
Mar. 3, 2004, 04:24 PM
ha! i think it's really funny that Mason Phelps thinks that who is sitting in the judging booth has ANYTHING to do with why those tables didn't fill--but it sure was a nice way to make his (or rather Paul's) exit happen.

Those tables are way overpriced, you get nothing for them except a bad view and (usually) bad company, and above all, i'm sorry, but this event in particular is not conducive to filling those tables.

when you have grand prix, the tables are filled by horse owners and their guests, sponsors and their guests (and on a sunday people can come have a nice afternoon at the show), and people who have houses in the equestrian/polo club and their guests (who most likely just come down for a few long weekends each season.) When you have hunter shows, they are filled by the owners and aformentioned people (Again it's a weekend) and also the family and friends of the riders that are competing, because there are many amateur and junior riders.

but trying to fill those tables on a MONDAY NIGHT, for a class that is not going to feature very many syndicated horses, over not very big jumps (and watching equitation is like watching paint dry for many), with largely professional riders--so no or few family/friend contingents--and, again, on a MONDAY night.l you've got ot be kidding me.

trainers do not buy those tables, riders don't, either, and the "little people" sure aren't buying those tables. Ugh. idiot.

BoR:
"I always feel like an idiot. But I am an idiot, so it kinda works out."--Billy Madison

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."--Churchill

clearound
Mar. 3, 2004, 04:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by C.Boylen:
Just to be clear, I highly doubt the drop in table sales has anything to do with whomever is judging. Most of us have learned over the years that buying a table for any of the special events (AHJF, Equus Medal, ect.) is a colossal waste of money at $3500 (and no, the circuit table owners are NOT exempt) for mediocre food and a worse view than you get sitting outside on the benches.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldn't agree more.

If Mason Phelps actually believes that the drop in tables has anything to do with PV judging, then I have some ocean front property in Kansas City to sell him.

Although I "received" an invitation to purchase a table for a mere $5000 for the Hunter Classic (something which I did the first year when they were much more reasonably priced), my friends and I purchased a piece of sod, brought dinner and drinks and had the best seats in the house for a mere $5.00 per person.

Perhaps if Mr. Phelps lowered the price of the tables and limited the tables to people who want to see the class rather than be seen, he would sell more.

Policy of Truth
Mar. 3, 2004, 05:27 PM
Mr. Phelps, not that you care, but this "little person" has lost all remaining respect for you. You are a mental midget by the mere fact that you have adorned nearly the entire horse show world with such a broad generalization. Not that my opinion actually matters...or did it http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Pet Psychic
Mar. 3, 2004, 06:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Portia:
It's the "little guys" who make up the vast majority of the USEF membership. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dear Mr. Phelps:

I'd like to introduce The Lollipop Guild, and welcome you to Munchkin Land. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Signed,

One of the Little People

Vandy
Mar. 3, 2004, 06:43 PM
It's nice that Paul has given back to the horse community by supporting various charities...But as Sgray said a few pages ago, wouldn't it be great if he donated some time to retraining OTTBs, marketing CANTER horses, something along these lines? What a difference he could make by taking some of these unwanted horses in and preparing them for the show ring, something at which he is still one of the best in the business.

Of course what PV did was terrible - I don't think anyone's denying that - but maybe he could make a difference, and more appropriately make amends, by donating some hands-on work (not donating $) to horses that might end up going to the "humane" killers otherwise.

Forgive my ignorance if this is something he is already doing, but as far as I know, his "charity work" has been limited to giving monetary donations.

[This message was edited by Vandy on Mar. 03, 2004 at 10:00 PM.]

Fluffernutter
Mar. 3, 2004, 06:44 PM
Mason Phelps is such an *******.

[This message was edited by Erin on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:16 PM.]

Snowbird
Mar. 3, 2004, 06:53 PM
Look the simple fact is if you are a criminal its because you think you can beat the system. And, whatever else PV has done he has not proved that he learned his lesson, he's still trying to beat the system and he still doesn't play by the rules.

He wouldn't be 12 inches off the show grounds and call it legal if he was sorry just like the ones who drugged and send their horses into the ring with someone else, that doesn't make them rehabilitated.

It's all a game and Phelps is playing the game.
Well, I like being part of the honest "Little People" with morals and integrity who don't work the system but try to follow it.

I like horses better than a lot of people and the horse that died didn't do anything wrong except not pass the standard to win enough.

The horse didn't get a second chance at all and PV has had 10 years to prove he can follow the rules and he didn't pass. That's all just simple facts.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Black Market Radio
Mar. 3, 2004, 06:58 PM
Do we have big hairy feet as well? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
The Walrus was Paul...

ohnowwhat
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fluffernutter:
Mason Phelps is such an *******.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, why don't you tell us what you REALLY think? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

But really Fluff, how can you say such a cruel thing about the social arbiter of Wellington and all things horsey?

I think the number 1 rule of the PR kingdom is this: Thou shalt not believe thy own hype.

[This message was edited by Erin on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:17 PM.]

Nikki^
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:07 PM
Late to the party again and it looks like the keg is about dry http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Kioko (http://www.geocities.com/area51/crater/5267/HeartofGold.html)

Look up your TB's bloodlines (http://www.dmtc.com/dmtc98/Pedigree/)

What did the five fingers say to the face? SLAP!!!!

buryinghill2
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
Look the simple fact is if you are a criminal its because you think you can beat the system. And, whatever else PV has done he has not proved that he learned his lesson, he's still trying to beat the system and he still doesn't play by the rules.

He wouldn't be 12 inches off the show grounds and call it legal if he was sorry just like the ones who drugged and send their horses into the ring with someone else, that doesn't make them rehabilitated.

It's all a game and Phelps is playing the game.
Well, I like being part of the honest "Little People" with morals and integrity who don't work the system but try to follow it.

I like horses better than a lot of people and the horse that died didn't do anything wrong except not pass the standard to win enough.

The horse didn't get a second chance at all and PV has had 10 years to prove he can follow the rules and he didn't pass. That's all just simple facts.

_Battle Scarred Veteran_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Snowbird, I never thought I'd say this, but I completely agree with your post! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

J. Turner
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:21 PM
"You bow before no one." -- Aragorn to the hobbits.

Ha, we halflings will bow to no one.

My Photo Albums (http://community.webshots.com/user/jessicaseamus)

"When I bestride him, I soar, I am a hawk: he trots the air; the earth sings when he touches it; the basest horn of his hoof is more musical than the pipe of Hermes."
-- Shakespeare, Henry V

Sean D. Rogers
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:33 PM
Excellent quote by Norman! I agree wholeheartedly. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Mahatma Gandhi was right on the money too...

"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong".

lauriep
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:38 PM
Well, so much for the nice, thoughtful track this thread wa on. Now, you all have gotten your wish, it "seems" that you made a difference and STILL you must go on trashing people you don't know. PV isn't judging (mind you, he didn't seek out this assignment, he was invited), for whatever reason, so let it go!

Mason is a terrific guy, very good at what he does, and as I expressed earlier, MOST people down here do not ostracize BW and PV. Many feel that they HAVE done their time, are making amends (can any of you say with certainty that they are not?) and MAYBE judging a charity class for no pay also seemed a way to "give back."

Let's not start another thread of trashing people that you don't know, don't know the full story, and are only guessing at. If you want to address specific comments made by Mason or anyone else fine. But I assure you, he is NOT an *******, and I'm not going to tolerate you going there. Erin???

Laurie

[This message was edited by Erin on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:18 PM.]

Beezer
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sean D. Rogers:
Mahatma Gandhi was right on the money too...

"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but Gandhi also said: "Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony."

As well as: "Always aim at complete harmony of thought and word and deed. Always aim at purifying your thoughts and everything will be well."

One can always find a quote from someone to fit an occasion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Oh, and Laurie, sorry ... but having had my first introduction to Mason waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back when I was a kid who rode with the trainer who taught him, yeah, I have to agree the opinions of others here. As I said, sorry if that bothers you.

***** Currently assigned to the mouth-gaping, lip-flapping, head-twisting, wood-chewing, boot-shredding phase of baby greenie ownership! *****

MHM
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:52 PM
A duel of Gandhi quotes- what a thread!
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Fluffernutter
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:53 PM
Laurie, please do not assume that I don't know Mason personally. In fact, I knew him back when he was running the Jumping Derby in RI. You aren't the only one who has been around the block. Perhaps I should have been more PC and called him a "jerk"...but methinks the shoe fits either way.

Uberraschung
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:56 PM
Sean, you are the best! You always seem to show up at the right time with the right thing to say! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif I like Paul. I don't really get why everyone got so upset over a class (1) in which I can't imagine 99.99999% of them will ever be eligible to participate and (2)it's unrecognized and outside of the regular show circuit. Obviously I am in the minority here though with that http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

heelsdown
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:57 PM
I think that some small measure of justice has been served here, albeit it was served by the "little people" justice nonetheless. A small dose of it in the big scheme of things but I am encouraged that there are enough people who can collectively voice a social outrage, a sense of shame against the person who has committed heinous acts that strike at the very heart of our sport, and our inner convictions and most basic beliefs of right and wrong. Paul Valliere's case boils down to wanton cruelty against a defenseless animal for financial gain. And this was not a desperate man, driven to this madness because he was trying to feed his family.

After such an act one can never walk in reverse and go back to the other side of that line. I don't care what justifications you use, it cannot be done. So there. I forgive and forget
mountains of stuff my friends have done, things that I know
many of them would never forgive me for. It's "small stuff" in the big scheme of things as far as I am concerned. But there are things that do cross the line that my moral compass cannot tolerate and at the top of the list is abuse and killing of defenseless animals or children. That it was all done for money, within a sport that I still hold dear makes it even worse.

No I will never forget what the horse killers did, and I can never condone their presence in any kind of horse showcase/event/show. Ever.

If Paul V. wishes to present the reasons why he did what he did and the details of his self prescribed rehabilitation in a public forum go right ahead, but admitting to crimes does not make them okay.

My question now is what happens if PV is your "trainer" and your horse does suffer a mortal colic? Do they honor the claim? Demand a necroscopy? What?

And I am sorry about the whole long, awful story. There was a time when I would have given my left leg to just take a lesson with you.... many years ago, I thought you were the absolute tops, and you were one of my idols. What happened?

Snowbird
Mar. 3, 2004, 07:57 PM
OH! Lauriep now you have lost your credibility.
If you are so defensive that you cannot even concede that Phelps was patronizing and should not be rude to future athletes and that he is foolish enough to think that it was our humble opinion that was the reason his tables didn't sell, even PV was more gracious if not sincere.
If you are surrounded by people who all agree some new concept is hard to comprehend.

Buryinghill there is always a moment in time when great minds although diverse can meld. There may not be many but I will cherish this one in my memory book.

Battle Scarred Veteran

lauriep
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:04 PM
Snowbird, for about the 4 millionth time, I have no problem if you have a direct gripe about Mason, or anyone else. A quote you think is inappropriate, a personal experience (no problem, Beezer, if you had a problem with him). But calling him, or anyone else an "*******" when you DON'T have either of the above references isn't cool. And I thought it isn't tolerated on these boards.

Stick to the facts. Plain and simple.

And no, Snowy, I'm not so defensive to not be able to concede anything. But I HAVE known Mason since 1974, so feel that I have just a LITTLE justification for defending him to people that have NEVER met him.

I shant sleep tonight because I've lost my credibility with you. Oh, by the way, Bill Maroney says hi. Nice guy, I just met him this week and praised his presentation as presented in the write-ups of the convention.

Laurie

[This message was edited by Erin on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:19 PM.]

ohnowwhat
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:06 PM
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Actually, it looks like you are having to tolerate it for the moment, right?

Fluffernutter
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:07 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

SED
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:08 PM
Reading this and related threads has been a learning experience. I feel like I've been surfing through slime. Since our family's entrance to the horse world post-dates the Valliere, etc. scandals, I have had to do some online research to try to make sense of what I read here. From that, I have reluctantly come to believe the following:

1. That one of the leading equitation trainers participated in killing healthy horses for money and still thinks he is justified in making -- and should be welcomed in making -- a living in the industry he tarnished.

2. That an equally well known horsemen, Barney Ward -- whose son is an incredible horsemen himself -- was even more complicit but, according to the articles I found on line, refused to abide by his suspension until forced by the NY Supreme Court. (This one was a shocker. I had never heard that McClain Ward's father was so immeshed in the scandals).

3. That one of the premiere announcers at Florida horse shows has been convicted of child abuse.

4. That Mr. Phelps, a premiere promoter of the industry, considers that the vast majority of the membership of the U.S. equestrian organization are "little guys", who from his comments he believes to be naive and foolish.

5. That there are prominent riders and others on this Board who seem to think that nothing is wrong with all of this.

This is too discouraging. I'm going to bed...

SBT
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:09 PM
You know, I'm just so disappointed in you guys. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif I opened this thread expecting to find a mud-slinging, bitch-slapping brawl, but instead, just about EVERYONE has come out with these wonderful, thought-provoking, considerate posts. BRAVO to all of you. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

What bothers me most about the PV issue is that he seems to think he should be able to buy his way out of suspension by making donations to animal welfare organizations. Donations are a good thing, but all the good deeds in the world will NOT erase that one horrible thing he did.

Should he be shunned forever? Maybe, but I'm not really sure. I believe people reap what they sow, and PV will, to some degree, pay for his crime for the rest of his life...as will BW, GL, and everyone else involved. There will always be someone who says, "Hey, isn't that the guy who..." And that's a fine punishment all by itself.

I'm on the fence about the whole forgiveness/friendship thing. I do not believe they are mutually exclusive; in other words, you can forgive someone for their wrongdoings, but still choose to not be associated with them. It's all about setting personal boundaries and deciding what behaviors you will and will not tolerate within a friendship, and obviously this varies from person to person.

So while I can forgive PV for what he did, I hope to never be within 100 feet of him. Whatever drove him to kill that horse is, IMO, probably something that is a part of his psyche, personality, DNA, whatever...and I don't want to be around that. Just knowing he was/is capable of such a horrible thing would be enough to make me sick if I ever met him.

I'm sure he is a nice guy, as a few posters have attested to. Each of the convicted felons I've met has been a very nice person. Con-artists and abusers don't win their victims' trust by acting like jerks. So I don't think remorse can necessarily be measured by outward appearances and acts of generosity. If someone wishes to come clean, he must do so based on how he lives his life from here on out, not through continual acts of public repentence. For example, the fact that PV has accepted the punishments given to him and heretofore respected the conditions of his suspension means more to me than the money he's given to charity. Anyone can give money to charity. Not everyone can graciously accept due punishment (think BW). That's not to say I think PV is ready to be reinstated; all other arguements aside, he clearly doesn't "get it" if he still thinks penance can be bought.

Just my 2 cents...late as usual. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

"Good horses train themselves. It's the common ones you can't figure out what to do with."
~Jim Dennis 1923-2004

sherman1
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:20 PM
Although I "received" an invitation to purchase a table for a mere $5000 for the Hunter Classic (something which I did the first year when they were much more reasonably priced), my friends and I purchased a piece of sod, brought dinner and drinks and had the best seats in the house for a mere $5.00 per person.

Perhaps if Mr. Phelps lowered the price of the tables and limited the tables to people who want to see the class rather than be seen, he would sell more.[/QUOTE]

Just a little FYI while you are all trashing people.....the tables sold at hunter night, while still expensive, have absolutley nothing to do with Mason or any of his dealings. Most of the proceeds from those tables go to the American Hunter Jumper Foundation-- which is one of the few associations around the horse show that I think does a pretty good job and is something I don't mind giving money to because I'd like to see it around for awhile.

Snowbird
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:21 PM
OH! Lauriep you did give moi my daily chuckle we do agree that Bill Moroney made a wonderful Presentation and that he promised this was the best of all possible worlds for everyone whatever their perspective.

He just forgot a couple of little things like democracy and representation but what the heck if we can forgive murder for profit and we can forgive sexual offenders and we can make excuses for medicating horses by accident; why not forgive Bill Moroney too.

Oh! Lady you are a piece of work! I wish I could shut out the world the way that you do. Life would be so simple.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Erin
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:21 PM
You can have whatever opinion you want, but keep the language PG-rated, please.

lauriep
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:23 PM
Snowy, it is ever so clear that that is exactly what you do up there on the mountain...

Laurie

nhwr
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:26 PM
You know it isn't even about him paying his pound of flesh. He is doing that in his way. But to all the people who know him and claim him as a friend, I have a question: Are you saying that the knowledge of what he did has no effect on your opinion of him? It isn't like this was a momentary impulse or lapse in judgement. What he did was a calculated plan that he worked to implement over a period of time. It can't really be dimissed in an "Oh, he made a mistake" fashion. He made a mistake when he concocted his plan, again when he implemented it, again when he filed the claim with the insurance company, again when they investigated, and on and on. I dare say a person who just "made a mistake" would have cracked under the pressure of their own guilt early on. I'd forgive him, if I knew him because that is our obligation in society. But I would never forget the person he was and still is.

I am really curious about this.

[This message was edited by nhwr on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:39 PM.]

xegeba
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:26 PM
Speaking of Ghandi... What if a cow had been wired up?

Snowbird
Mar. 3, 2004, 08:27 PM
Well now lauriep just think of all the people from history and theology who went to the top of a mountain for new thoughts and clear heads.

You should try the altitude it might lighten you up a little you'd be really surprised to discover what you've been missing. You're welcome to visit any time and enjoy a dose of real oxygen.

OH! and Ghandi didn't believe in killing flies either! nada

Battle Scarred Veteran

Erin
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:06 PM
lauriep, snowbird... if you want to make this personal, take it outside.

Snowbird
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:15 PM
Yes! Ma! But she started it Ma! I was being good and minding my manners. She hit me first.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Black Market Radio
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:41 PM
http://www.minijuegosflash.com/juegos/bateaping.swf

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
The Walrus was Paul...

Beezer
Mar. 3, 2004, 09:55 PM
AAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH , Devildog!!

Please, for the LOVE OF GOD, do not torment me with that %$!$@$@ Penguin!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

I think I am the only person on the face of the Earth who simply cannot hit that damned bird. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

***** Currently assigned to the mouth-gaping, lip-flapping, head-twisting, wood-chewing, boot-shredding phase of baby greenie ownership! *****

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 3, 2004, 10:05 PM
WEll...

Thank you for posting the link and the article. Two things that jump out at me:

1. The official PR rep for one of our sports more prestigious shows finds it perfectly appropriate to insult, demean and dismiss the majority of the riders who could be his future exhibitors and audience members by calling them naive little people. That probably doesn't even need additional comment from me again - on either the barrel of implications or on his ability to execute his job in a manner much of the PR profession would find acceptable.

2. Kudos to Debbie Stephens for understanding how to not comment gracefully.

ssaymssik
Mar. 3, 2004, 10:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>2. Kudos to Debbie Stephens for understanding how to not comment gracefully. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because of things her first husband did...

Stupid people bug me.
STOP!!! Where's that sense of humor???

DoubleTwistedWire
Mar. 4, 2004, 12:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by whatdoIknow:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>2. Kudos to Debbie Stephens for understanding how to not comment gracefully. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because of things her first husband did...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif Do explain, please.

Kestrel
Mar. 4, 2004, 02:02 AM
It looks like in Phelps' eyes, there are only two kinds of people in the horse show world: knowledgeable professionals (the kind who drug horses, kill them for insurance, or look the other way when others do) and the stupid little people who don't really count anyway. He doesn't get that there are knowledgeable professionals who don't tolerate the crap and knowledgeable little people who won't tolerate it either. We are his worst nightmare http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

dogchushu
Mar. 4, 2004, 04:27 AM
So in this world the "little people" buy $5,000 tables? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Good lord, I must be one of the "microscopic people!"

You're right lauriep, I don't know Mason Phelps and probably wouldn't recognize him if he were standing right next to me. However, that doesn't mean I can't be offended about the patronizing comments made in the article. In my opinion, those comments showed an extreme lack of tact and judgement.



"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison

Jumphigh83
Mar. 4, 2004, 04:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:

... and as I expressed earlier, MOST people down here do not ostracize BW and PV. ......
Laurie

[This message was edited by Erin on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:18 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doesn't say much about WElly World now does it????

Betsy
www.threewindsfarmny.com (http://www.threewindsfarmny.com)

Lead, follow, or get out of the way...

MAD
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DoubleTwistedWire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by whatdoIknow:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>2. Kudos to Debbie Stephens for understanding how to not comment gracefully. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because of things her first husband did...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif Do explain, please.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

NEW BB'r: "oh my, do I think there might be gossip or scandal in that comment?"

OLD BB'r: "yep, let's pull out World Book Encyclopedias and history books and educate everyone on new/old subjects and get going on a NEW raves and threads and drag other names through the mud."

NEW BB'r: "Yipee! It has been quiet on COTH H/J for 27 hours!"

buryinghill2
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:

... and as I expressed earlier, MOST people down here do not ostracize BW and PV. ......
Laurie

[This message was edited by Erin on Mar. 03, 2004 at 11:18 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doesn't say much about WElly World now does it????

Betsy
http://www.threewindsfarmny.com

Lead, follow, or get out of the way...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No Betsy it doesn't. The major reason I chose not to be there anymore. There are people on this board that just live in a world of denial. Perhaps as Snowbird was saying, life is just easier that way. Maybe it is, but I for one cannot forgive the crimes that are going on down there on a daily basis. I had finally gotten to the point where I felt like just being there was condoning all the crappy stuff that was going on. I chose to leave.
I think it's great that all this stuff comes out on these boards. More people need to know what the "A" circuit is really all about.

Magnolia
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:18 AM
But MAD, without some new gossip, my work day would be oh so boring! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The witchy witch witch of south central NC.

MAD
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by magnolia:
But MAD, without some new gossip, my work day would be oh so boring! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The witchy witch witch of south central NC.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OLD. OLD. OLD.

ssaymssik
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:38 AM
YES, VERY OLD...

Stupid people bug me.
STOP!!! Where's that sense of humor???

nails
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:49 AM
My last post on this suject but had to comment on a few issues:

1-wonder if PV's "charity work" ie money giving, would have happened if he had not gotten caught killing a horse for money?

2-wonder how all you who defend him would feel it he killed your horse?

3-Thank you Beezer for being smart and knowing other Gandhi quotes, so that you could counter Sean D. Roger.

4-Sean D. Roger- http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif please go on now, buy your $5000.00 table and lunch with your pals PV and Phelps. Water seeks its own level.

Good bye and thank you..

Sorry almost forgot-whatdoIknow-there should be no sense of humor when horses (or any animal) is killed or abused for money or any other reason...

ok-bye

MHM
Mar. 4, 2004, 05:57 AM
Please don't make assumptions about everyone in Wellington based on the statements or actions of a handful of people.

There are many, many good horsemen, good trainers, good riders, good caretakers, etc., in Wellington and at most big shows who treat their horses extremely well. As usual, all those people do not generate as much discussion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 06:00 AM
nails - I see NO one defending PV's actions.

I just don't think he should be prevented from doing things that by USAEq regulation he is allowed to do. I am most certainly not condoning his actions nor am I defending them, but in my opinion if the Equus class is not regulated by the USAEq then PV is allowed to judge if he is offered the chance.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

Quinn
Mar. 4, 2004, 06:03 AM
One of my favourite quotes is "life is not a dress rehearsal."

I do believe what it boils down to is who you choose to align yourself with. We all want to be the best we can be BUT not all of us choose to do so at ANY cost. Again, only my opinion.

http://community.webshots.com/user/ballyduff

"If you are going through hell, keep going." ~Churchill~

Magnolia
Mar. 4, 2004, 06:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>" I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving."
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I kind of agree with where this statement is goin, despite the poor wording. For most of the people on this BB that partcipate among all the "bad" people in question - (people caught drugging, PV etc. etc.) it seems like they have come to terms with these issues and know the people in question well enough to judge their character.

The "little people" (imho, not a very good term to use - many "little people" are every bit as talented as those on the A circuit) don't see this enough to pass judgement based on anything but the facts they see, which are not to stellar. What are we supposed to think of somebody who killed horses for money or drugs some of their horses? We don't see their busy barn where medications may slip through cracks, the care they may lavish on their horses, the big donations to charity, or the pressure clients may place on them.

Unfortunately for the top players in the sport, they are going to be scrutinized, criticized and slow to be forgiven. Their actions shape outsiders views of HJ competition. People outside our sport don't see the Snowbirds of the world, and sadly, instead of flocking to the good stories, flock to the sordid. (A great example is this - 8 pages on PV (& countless other topics on him) and what, 4 pages on a star like KP and when was the last time we had a chat on good goings on - we even criticize 17 year old girls!)

Mason Phelps needs to realize that those "little people" are the ones that grow into the big people..... and that for many little people their understanding of horsemanship does not include drugging or killing horses - and to understand and forgive takes much more than some time, a donation or two and an apology. People just may question the sincerity, and why not?

And I apologize regarding my gossip makes work interesting comment. This is hardly gossip and it sure isn't about entertainment....

The witchy witch witch of south central NC.

nails
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:10 AM
Clemsongraduaterider-read again....

nycjumper
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:12 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SED:
Reading this and related threads has been a learning experience. I feel like I've been surfing through slime. Since our family's entrance to the horse world post-dates the Valliere, etc. scandals, I have had to do some online research to try to make sense of what I read here. From that, I have reluctantly come to believe the following:

1. That one of the leading equitation trainers participated in killing healthy horses for money and still thinks he is justified in making -- and should be welcomed in making -- a living in the industry he tarnished.

2. That an equally well known horsemen, Barney Ward -- whose son is an incredible horsemen himself -- was even more complicit but, according to the articles I found on line, refused to abide by his suspension until forced by the NY Supreme Court. (This one was a shocker. I had never heard that McClain Ward's father was so immeshed in the scandals).

3. That one of the premiere announcers at Florida horse shows has been convicted of child abuse.

4. That Mr. Phelps, a premiere promoter of the industry, considers that the vast majority of the membership of the U.S. equestrian organization are "little guys", who from his comments he believes to be naive and foolish.


That certainly sums up the facts succinctly. I'm with you - this is all just too depressing & as one of the "little guys", it really makes me question my desire to show competitively on the A circuit. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

ChromeOnAllFour
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:17 AM
This is a very long post, this question may have already been asked. If he is banned for 10 years wouldn't be up for reinstatement very soon?

Quinn
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:22 AM
If I am not mistaken, he is able to apply for reinstatement in 2 years. It is not automatic.

http://community.webshots.com/user/ballyduff

"If you are going through hell, keep going." ~Churchill~

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:42 AM
okaaayyy.......

Apparently Debbie Stephens -- who, regardless of what she or her associates may or may not have done, DOES know how to gracefully not comment from a PR POV -- has some history. *sigh*

See, folks, this may make me one of the naive, dumb, Little People, but NOT ALL OF US KNOW THIS CRAP!!! I know Debbie Stephens in the following way ONLY:
* Nutramax Labs was a client of mine in their earlier days. They added Debbie Stephens as one of their spokespeople and stuck with her when she wasn't winning or really doing much. She was easy to work with from a marketing standpoint (ie: didn't object to signing autographs, etc). And now she has made a smart PR comment in response to a negative situation.

What I DID NOT know - and still don't:
* her marital history
* her personal suspension history
* the history of anyone associated with her

It honestly didn't occur to me that I or my client might need to probe into this -- which IS a naive and sad remark, I know. I guess it just leaves me wondering if ANYONE at the top of the industry has any character? And that is not fair, nor is it how I want to view the sport.

Any suggestions on what we can do to avoid discouraging people like me? I DO NOT think NOT talking about these things - past and current - is smart. If you do that, and then things come to light later, there is an added layer of betrayal felt by people. Nor do I think that indiscriminate nasty gossip is good, for anyone. BUT...if there are legitimate suspicions or concerns, how DO we find out? That seems to be becoming the eternal question -- if you're not "in the loop" where is information available? And how do we learn what is and is not "good" information?

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nails:

2-wonder how all you who defend him would feel it he killed your horse?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did read it again and you are claiming that there are people defending his actions. Not so much. They might be defending their friendship with him, or the fact that they might train with him etc, but I see no one saying that he was right to kill this horse.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

Magnolia
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:58 AM
I'm pretty sure Debbie Stephens was not a suspension issue along these lines, but had another non-horsemanship related issue that was fairly high profile.

And who knows where the "good information" is. I suppose the USEF could be a source on suspensions etc., but I don't think you can ever get a whole story on a lot of this stuff.

I suppose if I were seeking a rider to sponsor, I would poke around suspension records, then ask some of the well regarded riders and players associated with the sport (and I'm sure if you were in a position to sponsor riders, they'd talk to you!). And then, you can never predict behavior - look at Kobie Bryant! And who knows the whole story behind that?

The witchy witch witch of south central NC.

Medievalist
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ClemsonGraduateRider:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nails:

2-wonder how _all you who defend _ him would feel it he killed your horse?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did read it again and you are claiming that there are people defending his actions. Not so much. They might be defending their friendship with him, or the fact that they might train with him etc, but I see no one saying that he was right to kill this horse.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good post, CGR. I agree 100%.

Centre Equestre de la Houssaye (http://www.eii.fr/club/houssaye)

Portia
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
OH! Lauriep you did give moi my daily chuckle we do agree that Bill Moroney made a wonderful Presentation and that he promised this was the best of all possible worlds for everyone whatever their perspective.

He just forgot a couple of little things like democracy and representation but what the heck if we can forgive murder for profit and we can forgive sexual offenders and we can make excuses for medicating horses by accident; why not forgive Bill Moroney too.

Oh! Lady you are a piece of work! I wish I could shut out the world the way that you do. Life would be so simple.

_Battle Scarred Veteran_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That was uncalled for Snowbird. There is absolutely no basis for lumping Bill Maroney or the USHJA in with "murder for profit or sexual offenders."

You may not like the fact that this new organization is challenging the org with which you are associated to become the H/J affiliate to USEF, but nasty comments like this are beneath the pale. You should be ashamed of yourself.

BLBGP
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beezer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sean D. Rogers:
Mahatma Gandhi was right on the money too...

"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but Gandhi also said: "Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony."

As well as: "Always aim at complete harmony of thought and word and deed. Always aim at purifying your thoughts and everything will be well."

One can always find a quote from someone to fit an occasion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aw, heck, while we're at it....

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
-- Gandhi

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:42 AM
thought of another 'volunteer' idea - buy some of the pmu babies - some draft-cross ones perhaps - to raise and train for use in theraputic riding and/or for special-needs riders

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

Vandy
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:47 AM
Sgray - right on again http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

PV could do so many good things for the horses if he was willing to donate some time and not just some money. It seems that these boards have had influence re: the judging thing (apparently the "little people" can have a big influence!). I only hope that some suggestions like yours will also be recognized.

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:50 AM
Okay, so you all who are so violently against PV judging this non-regulated horse show WANT to put horses in his care? I thought that you all were appalled that he was even working around horses in the first place?? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ClemsonGraduateRider:
Okay, so you all who are so violently against PV judging this non-regulated horse show WANT to put horses in his care? I thought that you all were appalled that he was even working around horses in the first place?? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Clemson, the orginal was prefaced thusly "I would suggest that if one desires to 'make amends' for an act of extremely cruelty to an animal and one wishes to be involved with horses one could:" - the suggestions being alternatives to judging a non-rated class

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

Vandy
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:02 AM
Just for the record, I have never said I was appalled that PV is working around horses.

My point is, that if he is going to continue to work in the horse industry, and follow the guidelines of his AHSA/USEF suspension by contributing to charities, that perhaps giving time rather than money would more appropriately demonstrate his rehabilitation.

Tiger
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:22 AM
Okay - How many of you have read Mason Phelps interview in the Palm Beach paper? Nice. I will say, I know Paul, have known him for twenty years, and like him. I am certain he is remorseful. However, banned is banned. He commited a heinous crime-this is the price you pay whether or not you are remorseful and help animal charities.

By the way Mason, I'm not a professional-I'm one of your "little" guys. Guess whose money funds your charities, pays for the entries on horses, funds the horseshows and most importantly, your salary and livelihood?! You might want to rethink your comment.

Snowbird
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:40 AM
That was most unfair of you Portia since you know that Erin has prohibited further discussion on this BB regarding Lauriep by me, I cannot answer you except to say that it was not me but Luariep who brought up his name and endorsement in the same place and time and threw him in the stew pot with the others.

Not fair to chastise someone with hands tied behind their back especially a legal and a moderator. Sorry Erin, I did promise and will keep my word unless attacked again.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Portia
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:58 AM
No, Snowbird. Erin did not say you could not defend yourself. She told you and Lauriep to stop making personal attacks on each other.

What I quoted above was not a personal attack by you on Laurie, it was a personal attack by you on Bill Maroney. All Laurie said was that she had seen him and he had said "hi." You were the one who chose to lump him in with horse killers and child abusers, and take an opportunity to press your personal political agenda.

I stand by my position that you should apologize. It was a low, uncalled-for personal attack on an individual who has no part in this thread.

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SGray:
Clemson, the orginal was prefaced thusly "I would suggest that if one desires to 'make amends' for an act of extremely cruelty to an animal and one wishes to be involved with horses one could:" - the suggestions being alternatives to judging a non-rated class

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess I have some really crapped up logic but speaking in generalities here, for the majority of people on this thread who are disgusted he could have been judging wouldnt you RATHER he work at a non-rated show where there wouldn't be much unsupervised contact with horses, instead of having him at his own home barn with many horses?

Personally I don't have a problem with either of the above situations but I am just trying to figure out the advocating PV having horses to rehab vs. him judging a non-rated class logic.

I'm not trying to attack anyone just trying to understand what is not clear to me.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

poltroon
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:16 AM
As far as I'm aware, the "charity work" has been mostly along the lines of donating money from his existing training business. In other words, business as usual.

If I were on the committee, I would want to see actual TIME donated by the person in question, in the trenches. Part of the value of that kind of contribution is not just that it helps the organization, but that it helps to give the volunteer a different perspective on what is important and how other people see the world.

Parminch
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:45 AM
I think there have been some very valid points made on this thread as well as some thought provoking, soul searching, gut wrenching points too.
I did write to the powers at WEF and tell them that I was sorry that they had made this choice and wished that they would reconsider. The reason that I feel that Paul should not have been asked to judge is that he is serving a suspension and until that suspension is finished and has he has been reinstated, I do not feel that one of the biggest most prestigious horse shows in the country should allow anyone to try to get around it. Sure, it was an unrecognized day, event etc. but the "little people" who are thinking about joining us in this sport, do not know that. They hear that a person who is not allowed on the horse show grounds on regulay days is judging. What message does this send our children? It is the appearance that the bottom line is all that matters. It is the appearance that one's morals and ethics and beliefs about what is good for the entire sport just do not matter.
I was not a close friend of Paul's before, just an acquaintance, and I am sure that his true friends have had a tough time of soul searching trying to figure out how much they do want to let him back into their lives, and I feel for them. But the truth of the matter is that most people just know of him by reputation.........both good and now bad. As many have said on this thread, he made decisions and now must live with the consequenses. He and his family and his friends have to figure out how to put the peices back together and go on from here. The average person going to the horse show, or looking into the sport for themselves or their children does not need to be forced to make a decision, until the day comes that he is allowed back at the horse shows (if that day does come). At that point, some will decide to go on as if nothing happened and some will keep their distance and choose to have nothing to do with him. That is everyone's right.
I do think that Mason made a poor decision hiring Paul. Then to make it sound as Paul has "paid his dues" when according to the governing body of our horse shows association he has not, and to make it sound as if the only people who were against this were the "little people" who do not know the facts,(or count) was bad judgement.
Paul has done more than his share of hurting the business and he will certainly have to do more than his share of good for the business to hope to be a part of it again. If and when that day comes, the people will have the chance to decide how much of a part of their lives and businesses that they want him to be, Until that day comes, I feel like the "powers that be" should not be trying to get around the intentions of our governing body and then pretend that they did not have any idea that people would be offended or outraged by this.

~Pine Meadow Farm~

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ClemsonGraduateRider:
I guess I have some really crapped up logic but speaking in generalities here, for the majority of people on this thread who are disgusted he could have been judging wouldnt you RATHER he work at a non-rated show where there wouldn't be much unsupervised contact with horses, instead of having him at his own home barn with many horses?

Personally I don't have a problem with either of the above situations but I am just trying to figure out the advocating PV having horses to rehab vs. him judging a non-rated class logic.

I'm not trying to attack anyone just trying to understand what is not clear to me.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My reasoning is that as far as I have heard or read the livelihood of the individual in question has changed very little over the course of his suspension and that if the individual would like to demonstrate contrition in order to bolster his case for readmission into the national federation then he might consider putting in some time and effort working for some worthy causes. I threw out some suggesions of ways in which such an individual might contribute to the societal good while also working with horses.

It is my personal feeling that an individual that - while on suspension for having a horse needlessly killed - conducts 'business as usual' with only minor modifications in how said business is handled, such as maintaining training/coaching one-step-off-the-showgrounds, is not demonstrating compunction.

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

MAD
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hopeful Hunter:
okaaayyy.......

Apparently Debbie Stephens -- who, regardless of what she or her associates may or may not have done, DOES know how to gracefully not comment from a PR POV -- has some history. *sigh*

See, folks, this may make me one of the naive, dumb, Little People, but NOT ALL OF US KNOW THIS CRAP!!! I know Debbie Stephens in the following way ONLY:
* Nutramax Labs was a client of mine in their earlier days. They added Debbie Stephens as one of their spokespeople and stuck with her when she wasn't winning or really doing much. She was easy to work with from a marketing standpoint (ie: didn't object to signing autographs, etc). And now she has made a smart PR comment in response to a negative situation.

What I DID NOT know - and still don't:
* her marital history
* her personal suspension history
* the history of anyone associated with her

It honestly didn't occur to me that I or my client might need to probe into this -- which IS a naive and sad remark, I know. I guess it just leaves me wondering if ANYONE at the top of the industry has any character? And that is not fair, nor is it how I want to view the sport.

Any suggestions on what we can do to avoid discouraging people like me? I DO NOT think NOT talking about these things - past and current - is smart. If you do that, and then things come to light later, there is an added layer of betrayal felt by people. Nor do I think that indiscriminate nasty gossip is good, for anyone. BUT...if there are legitimate suspicions or concerns, how DO we find out? That seems to be becoming the eternal question -- if you're not "in the loop" where is information available? And how do we learn what is and is not "good" information?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HH - let me reword the questions in black and white...if it is marital history or suspension history or the history of anyone associated with her, do you think a BB is the place to get this info [accurately]?

1. Is her marital history really anyone's business? And should it be posted on this BB?

2. I'd think her *suspension* history (if there was one) would be more accurate from the USEF, certainly not from the BB. Isn't it a rule of the BB that we aren't supposed to post anything that we can't back up in writing?

3. Her friends? Or the history of who she has associated with?

My gosh...this is beginning to sound like she is being STALKED! I don't believe the USA even has such a complete list on ANY citizen...kudos to this BB if such a list is kept (and if it does, it can not be posted because it can not be verified as accurate, right ERIN??? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)

Snowbird
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:54 AM
Well Portia in that case I will start a new thread with you because I don't want to divert attention from this dialog which I find very constructive and shows that the majority of us horsemen (I will not define knowledgeable for the sake of brevity) do not agree with the evaluation of the responsibilties of friendship.

This was posted by Lauriep:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>so feel that I have just a LITTLE justification for defending him to people that have NEVER met him.

I shant sleep tonight because I've lost my credibility with you. Oh, by the way, Bill Maroney says hi. Nice guy, I just met him this week and praised his presentation as presented in the write-ups of the convention.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So no I do not think I owe an apology to you or anyone else because I simply said his presentation lacked "democracy and representation" which is quite true. By the way if I were to accept the her presented logic my opinion is more valid since I was there for the both presentations first hand and have had the opportunity to know Bill Moroney who I think is a very pleasant well intentioned person if misguided as to what the "little people" want from their association.

I will put on the other thread my opinion as written to John Straussburger and all the other issues involved in this tangent.

I do not intend to be responsible for deviating from the purpose of this thread by your preposterous demand for an apology.

I believe like everyone else I am entitled to my personal opinion and will put my efforts in that regard at my own time and place.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Black Market Radio
Mar. 4, 2004, 10:56 AM
Many years ago, there was a MAJOR drunk driving accident that killed 8 kids from my school. The adults who supplied the alcohol to these kids were sentenced to x amount of years of community service. They were to go around to schools and have a presentation about drunk driving, and to discuss what they did and what the consequences were. I believe that their mandatory time has been up for awhile, and they are still doing their presentation in driver's ed classes and discussing what they did and how it has affected them knowing they were responsible for 8 high shcool kids deaths. That accident happened around 15 years ago. In this case, I think the people have proven they are truly sorry and continue to show their remorse for what they have done. They put in a lot of time so that hopefully no one else will make the same mistakes. It doesn't bring our friends back, but it has probably saved more from dying. I know that when I was asked to buy alcohol for some teenagers I declined. They thought I was totally uncool and a prude, but I really don't give a darn what they think.

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
The Walrus was Paul...

nelson
Mar. 4, 2004, 11:08 AM
"I think for the knowledgeable professional, it's over. For the little guys out there, they're not forgiving."

Guess what Mr. Phelps - I am a "little guy" who is perfectly happy up here in freezing cold PA far, far, far away from the "knowledgable professionals" who think it's okay to kill horses for profit. I'd much rather have you and all of those "knowledgeable" people way down there in sunny Florida than up here with me and my favorite horses! JMHO

fleur
Mar. 4, 2004, 11:31 AM
i think a lot of you are reading way, way too much into phelps' statement about 'the little guy' and 'the knowledgeable professional'. his sentence took about 15 words, so i don't really see how it led to some of what you people have taken from it.

Medievalist
Mar. 4, 2004, 11:33 AM
FLEUR!!!!! HOW DARE YOU SAY "YOU PEOPLE"!!!!! YOU RACIST!!!!!http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Centre Equestre de la Houssaye (http://www.eii.fr/club/houssaye)

fleur
Mar. 4, 2004, 11:34 AM
oh medievalist http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Snowbird
Mar. 4, 2004, 11:36 AM
Because whatever his intention he created with those few words an "us against them" knee jerk reaction. Not a good thing from a PR person.

As another "little horseman" here in the frozen north for the winter I must say I agree with Nelson. What was it my Mom always used to say "birds of a feather flock together". Something wise like that I'm sure.

Battle Scarred Veteran

ssaymssik
Mar. 4, 2004, 12:27 PM
I shall quote myself--- (note - nothing was said about Ms. Shaffner-Stevens)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>That's because of things her first husband did...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Does it really matter? He's dead now anyway.

Stupid people bug me.
STOP!!! Where's that sense of humor???

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 12:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SGray:


My reasoning is that as far as I have heard or read the livelihood of the individual in question has changed very little over the course of his suspension and that if the individual would like to demonstrate contrition in order to bolster his case for readmission into the national federation then he might consider putting in some time and effort working for some worthy causes. I threw out some suggesions of ways in which such an individual might contribute to the societal good while also working with horses.

It is my personal feeling that an individual that - while on suspension for having a horse needlessly killed - conducts 'business as usual' with only minor modifications in how said business is handled, such as maintaining training/coaching one-step-off-the-showgrounds, is not demonstrating compunction.

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not trying to argue that he is or isn't working hard for compunction. What I am trying to understand is how you think giving him extra horses to care for is a good idea with how strongly you feel about the horse killing. To me those two ideas are contradictory.

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 12:57 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif -banging head against desk-

I give up

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SGray:
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif -banging head against desk-

I give up

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Listen I am not trying to be argumentative for the sake of just arguing with you. I am honestly trying to understand how the idea, a horse killer being given MORE horses as a "charity" move, makes sense.

Here's my basic logic, a guy killed a horse for money so he should not be entrusted with the care of other horses ON PURPOSE for redemptions sake. I have no issues with clients choosing to train with him etc, but to GIVE him horses???

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

libgrrl
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:16 PM
Now y'all got me curious about the Debbie Stephens thing...

Kim
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:21 PM
LucianCephus, could you please PT me? I have been trying to reach you!

Thanks,
Kim

HSM
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:38 PM
I have been reading this thread (and the other) from the start and wasn't going to chime in, but here's the thing... maybe ya'll don't realize how distorted your point of view about this issue has become. All this talk about what is and isn't appropriate restitution is beginning to get to me.

Am I wrong, or is it not true that in virtually any other professional field, an offense such as the one Mr. Valliere committed would have precluded his future participation in the profession on pretty much any level? In this case, the USEF exercised what authority it had, which was to prevent him from practicing his profession at events they sanction. Unfortunately, that's as far as their reach could go. Had he been a doctor or a lawyer or any other licensed professional, he would have kissed his license goodbye and been (as they say) sh!+ out of luck.

Maybe I look at this differently because I am not the equestrian in my family. Don't misunderstand - I have come to love the horses and what they've given to my daughter. But I have also seen that the horse world is, well, a world unto itself with it's own way of looking at things (in fairness, that's probably true for other special interest areas as well.) I really think that many people here are overthinking this: it's not about forgiveness, it's not about restitution, it's about a crime and what impact that crime has on the guilty individual's right to future participation.

Try this theory out. Find a non-horsey friend or acquaintance (if you can http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) and present them with the scenario:

A professional has admitted to committing a crime that involved the murder of a living creature that they were professionally responsible for. The admission took place as part of a deal with law enforcement to implicate the person's co-conspirators in exchange for leniency in their own case. The murder of the living creature was solely for their own personal financial gain. This person is permitted to continue earning a good living in this profession, serving many people who are apparently willing to look the other way in regards to the criminal actions because of this professional's abilities and how he can benefit them. The "restitution" that the person offers up to the public is in the form of some charitable donations that were made possible because of the "good living" the person was able to make even after they admitted to their crime.

I would be very surprised if anyone outside of the horse world would express anything other than shock at this scenario. But then, maybe I am the deluded one...... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

------------------------------
I'm just the mom....

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:43 PM
okay Clemson - let me try again

as I understand it, attempts at charity thus far have been 1)an offer to donate $s made giving lessons/training (for a period of time) to any horses affected by 911 events 2)accepting judging job (presumably for free)(acceptance later recinded presumably due to public outcry) at a charity horse show event.

the point that I was attempting to make was that giving lessons, coaching students, training horses, judging, etc. are all his business and that making a nominal donation from the proceeds of business-as-usual is NOT giving back to the community commiserate with the offense for which he was convicted

and that IF an individual cannot or will notwill not divorce himself from the horse community (and there is not enforcement mechanism to make him do so) then there are areas of the equine community that could possibly benefit from the expertise which has been loudly proclaimed here

that rather than continuing with business-as-usual; with stand-just-on-the-other-side of the show-grounds property line; with judging non-rated shows; etc the individual could perform some actual charity work

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

nelson
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:44 PM
HSM - you are right on the money!

Thank you for your post.

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:50 PM
very true HSM - but we cannot keep him from "practicing" in his choosen profession and we cannot keep his students from training with him

we CAN make sure that others know what his history is - as has been seen on this board

and we CAN write letters to the Fed. expressing our opinions when the decade of suspension is over and if/when he applies for reinstatement

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

[This message was edited by SGray on Mar. 09, 2004 at 11:49 AM.]

Erin
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:51 PM
SGray, I think you and CGR are at a communication impasse. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

What I think CGR is asking is if it isn't a contradiction to be so offended at what PV did against a horse, and yet suggest that part of his "penance" be to take horses into his care as a charity-type thing. (I think you suggested training PMU babies?)

Some people on the thread have claimed that PV should have no contact with horses whatsoever, much like a convicted child molester would not be permitted to be in contact with kids. It sounds like CGR is in that camp, and is just wondering if it isn't a little incongruous to want a convicted horse-killer to care for horses as part of his "doing good deeds" stuff.

I don't think she's arguing against your point that he should be doing his good deeds outside his usual circles. She's just questioning one of the proposals you made for doing that.

And my apologies if I'm misrepresenting anyone's argument... just trying to clear up the confusion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

HSM
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SGray:
very true HSM - but we cannot keep him from "practing" in his choosen profession and we cannot keep his students from training with him <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is the sad truth, and one of the points of my post.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>we CAN make sure that others know what his history is - as has been seen on this board

and we CAN write letters to the Fed. expressing our opinions when the decade of suspension is over and if/when he applies for reinstatement

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed - it was on this board that I learned the history (as did many others.) And when the decade is up I will gladly write a letter (for what little good it will do, in light of the limited reach the USEF has in this situation. But we have to take what we can get, right?)

------------------------------
I'm just the mom....

ClemsonGraduateRider
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
SGray, I think you and CGR are at a communication impasse. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

What I think CGR is asking is if it isn't a contradiction to be so offended at what PV did against a horse, and yet suggest that part of his "penance" be to take horses into his care as a charity-type thing. (I think you suggested training PMU babies?)

Some people on the thread have claimed that PV should have no contact with horses whatsoever, much like a convicted child molester would not be permitted to be in contact with kids. It sounds like CGR is in that camp, and is just wondering if it isn't a little incongruous to want a convicted horse-killer to care for horses as part of his "doing good deeds" stuff.

I don't think she's arguing against your point that he should be doing his good deeds outside his usual circles. She's just questioning one of the proposals you made for doing that.

And my apologies if I'm misrepresenting anyone's argument... just trying to clear up the confusion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh thank you Erin!! The only part that is not true is me not wanting him to be around horses. Personally it doesn't bother me, but everything else you said is exactly what I was trying to say, only better!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

- - - - - -
"I found my inner bitch and ran with her." ~ Courtney Love

Sam Iam
Mar. 4, 2004, 01:59 PM
HSM,

You are definitely not deluded. The horse business was/is/and most likely always will be completely nonsensical. It appears too, that the more deeply people get in it the more deluded their thinking becomes.

In any other business people would run, not walk away from PV and the others. They wouldn't want to be associated with them for fear of their own reputations in the business community. These individuals would absolutely not be making a living in this industry. Do you see other companies lining up to hire the former execs. at Enron? I think not.

It just makes no sense to me in the "real world" outside the horse business. Just look at some of the threads lately. People being charged for services they didn't receive and posters defend the practice. What? A convicted sex offender being hired for a job where there are children running all over the place. Wouldn't happen in the "real world" - the hiring authorities would be terrified of a negligent hiring/retention claim.

I don't get it either, but please don't think you're losing it. I often read these boards and have to scoop my jaw up off the floor.

HSM
Mar. 4, 2004, 02:05 PM
nelson-thanks to you too! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SamIam- Thanks for the little reality check there! I was beginning to get woozy! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif So, what you're saying is that the horse world isn't the real world? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

------------------------------
I'm just the mom....

Hopeful Hunter
Mar. 4, 2004, 02:11 PM
MAD -- this BB, or any BB, is certainly not the place I would counsel a client to "rely" on for accurate information. But it is a place where an exchange of information occurs, and one that sometimes lets slip the old secrets that "everyone" knows.

I posted my comments about Debbie Stephens NOT because I'm particularly dying to know what the allusion was to, but because it disturbed me. See...I'm very much one of the "little people." Actually, if you look on the Suspensions thread, I seem to also be a rather dumb little person. By that I mean that I DON'T know all the history, I DO have problems understanding the reasoning behind suspension terms and the D&M rules, and I AM becoming confused and depressed by all that is coming down these days.

Without a searchable historic database of USEF/USAE/AHSA suspensions I have no way of "checking up" on someone. And honestly, I didn't realize back then that it might be so necessary! Perhaps I or my client could have asked other riders what they thought of Ms. Stephens (actually, I think they did ask one eventer they know...) but from what I've read on this thread, could we really trust that those people would have mentioned any past issues?

So...I'll ask my question again -- HOW do those of us not plugged into the current gossip/upper-level show scene know what may be going on? HSM hit it on the head, I think -- this is a world unto itself, and often it seems one with a very seedy underbelly...

SGray
Mar. 4, 2004, 02:28 PM
restrictions could be arranged

one could think of it as punishment fitting the crime - the crime being making $s off of needless death of healthy animal

the punishment could be taking animal that would otherwise die (auctioned for slaughter), training it into an animal worth $s and having no financial stake in the animal - any and all $s produced by sale given to SPCA

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

buryinghill1
Mar. 4, 2004, 02:39 PM
Yo! COTH!
If you get COTH BB t-shirts printed up that say "One of the Little Guys" I would like to buy two, please http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Erin
Mar. 4, 2004, 03:00 PM
LOL... ooh, bh1, you just gave me a GREAT idea! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LucianCephus
Mar. 4, 2004, 03:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by buryinghill1:
Yo! COTH!
If you get COTH BB t-shirts printed up that say "One of the Little Guys" I would like to buy two, please <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is so, so funny. Oh, please, Erin, do it! And could you print on the back, "Maybe you just suck"?

If so, I'd buy one for every horse-loving little guy I count as a friend.

A Splash of Color
Mar. 4, 2004, 03:28 PM
Posted by Erin on Mar. 04, 2004 06:00 PM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>LOL... ooh, bh1, you just gave me a GREAT idea! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ohhh, I think I'm going to like this!

Joan S.
Photo Albums, including early 1980s Grand Prix (http://community.webshots.com/user/jsflwr)

LLDM
Mar. 4, 2004, 03:37 PM
Erin - Oh please do! Both sides!

SGrey - I think I understand you. The term you're looking for is "supervised visitation". Not put rescue horses under his care, but rather under supervised visitation to help retrain them for a useful career. Thus saving the lives of horses who might not otherwise have a chance. If I understand you.

SCFarm

A Leg at Each Corner

OneonOne
Mar. 4, 2004, 03:51 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif Has Erin got something up her sleeve? I hope so!

_____________________________________
Any coupon works! Beware of paper cuts!

Black Market Radio
Mar. 4, 2004, 04:37 PM
Erin's ALWAYS got something up her sleeve http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
The Walrus was Paul...

Portia
Mar. 4, 2004, 04:48 PM
Take a look at Erin's new "COTH slogans" thread on Off Course. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Discussing concepts like fair play and decorum with certain marketing people is like discussing salad with your cat." Bruce Davis, Executive Director, Acadamy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences (Feb. 26, 2004)

MAD
Mar. 4, 2004, 04:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HSM:
nelson-thanks to you too! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SamIam- Thanks for the little reality check there! I was beginning to get woozy! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif So, what you're saying is that the horse world _isn't_ the real world? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you know what? Life at WEF is NOT the "real" world...

DMK
Mar. 4, 2004, 06:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hopeful Hunter:
So...I'll ask my question again -- HOW do those of us not plugged into the current gossip/upper-level show scene know what may be going on? HSM hit it on the head, I think -- this is a world unto itself, and often it seems one with a very seedy underbelly...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If it was me, I would ask a potential "sponsoree" to sign a full disclosure form. If you ask people to disclose any suspensions, pending actions, felony convictions, etc. (within both their sport's governing body AND in the state/federal system) and sign on the dotted line, you have certainly taken aggressive action to ensure that the person you are giving money to is suitable to carry the company banner/name.

But for what it is worth, and I am only working on dim recollection, Debbie Stephens has no suspensions on her record. From my limited and secondhand experience with her, I would say that she runs a very professional, businesslike outfit, and that is a bit of a rarity in the horse world. I adore my trainers, but I have never accused them of being business school grads. Even the ones who were. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Sometimes I think I understand everything, then I regain consciousness.

portrock
Mar. 4, 2004, 06:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hopeful Hunter:
I have no way of "checking up" on someone. And honestly, I didn't realize back then that it might be so necessary! Perhaps I or my client could have asked other riders what they thought of Ms. Stephens ..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Perhaps KGB might help

buryinghill1
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by portrock:
Perhaps KGB might help<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Kim Benzel??? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

bluewatersail
Mar. 4, 2004, 07:34 PM
How old is Valliere or how old was he when he killed the horse(s)? Does any know where I'd find an online pic of Valliere?

lauriep
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:


He just forgot a couple of little things like democracy and representation but what the heck if we can forgive murder for profit and we can forgive sexual offenders and we can make excuses for medicating horses by accident; why not forgive Bill Moroney too.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Snowy, this little gem came from YOU, not me. I think this comparison is what Portia is objecting to.

Laurie

Snowbird
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:19 PM
Sorry Lauriep but Ma told us to take this outside remember. So I can't answer you. But since it's such a dreadful statement why would you repeat it? Be careful or Portia will want you to apologize too.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Erin
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:31 PM
Snowbird... don't call me Ma. I don't find it funny.

Talk about smoke and mirrors... why is it everytime someone points out what YOU said and why it's inappropriate, you try to pin it on lauriep?

lauriep
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:33 PM
I'm not rejoining the battle. I am just pointing out to you what Portia had a problem with, which DID NOT come from me.

Laurie

Rocky
Mar. 4, 2004, 08:36 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif I have nothing of any value to add to this topic BUT...

For Pete's sake (who is Pete anyway) "can't we just all get along" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Changed my barn mantra to...My new barn mantra...when the h@!! is it going to dry up?

Snowbird
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:05 PM
Sorry Erin, but I haven't be reprimanded so many times in one day since it was my Mom so I thought it was lightening the dialog. I certainly didn't intend to get you angry.

Lauriep and Erin I am not stupid and understood perfectly what you intended. I just didn't want tp play that game. I don't blame Lauriep for anything at all I simply chose to respond in kind.

Erin, don't you think she was being a touch provocative when Lauriep brought up the subject of Bill Maroney knowing my position. He certainly didn't need to be included within the perimeters of this thread.

It was LaurieP that mentioned his name here and not me, it was she that put him in the context of Mason Phelps and the rest of the discussion. I personally don't think he should have been brought into this discussion at all but once he was what's wrong with saying that he forgor about democracy and representation when the USHJA which he founded, controls and is President of does not propose representation and includes the unrecognized shows which I personally find offensive.

I don't think that it equates with convicted criminals but then I didn't bring him into this dialog and was quite contented to be discussing the issues as defined.

I think it is too bad the thread was derailed and a relatively interesting and worthwhile discussion has ended in a discussion of T-Shirts and slogans.

But if you do print T-Shirts from COTH for us unimportant "little people" by all means count me in for a half dozen.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Erin
Mar. 4, 2004, 09:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
Sorry Erin, but I haven't be reprimanded so many times in one day since it was my Mom so I thought it was lightening the dialog. I certainly didn't intend to get you angry.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny, I thought it was just you operating under your usual MO and making seemingly-innocent little jabs at anyone who disagrees with you. Like the jabs you took at Portia earlier in this thread, and the jabs you're taking at lauriep on the other thread you started.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Erin, don't you think she was being a touch provocative when Lauriep brought up the subject of Bill Maroney knowing my position.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, and I said so hours ago on the other thread. It's obvious the two of you never miss a chance to snipe at each other.

However, you took advantage of Laurie's jab at YOU to make a jab at Bill Maroney. The bottom line is that the comparison YOU -- not me, not lauriep, not Portia, YOU -- made was inappropriate.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I personally don't think he should have been brought into this discussion at all but once he was what's wrong with saying that he forgor about democracy and representation when the USHJA which he founded, controls and is President of does not propose representation and includes the unrecognized shows which I personally find offensive.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nothing wrong with that at all. What IS wrong is comparing that to killing horses and molesting children.

What part of that is so hard for you to grasp? Surely you fully intended for your statement to have that kind of impact... and I'm sure if people had agreed with you on it, you'd be more than willing to latch onto it as a rallying cry. But when someone tells you they think it was inappropriate, you're dancing away from the statement quicker than Bill Clinton can say "I didn't inhale."

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I don't think that it equates with convicted criminals but then I didn't bring him into this dialog and was quite contented to be discussing the issues as defined.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again, blaming someone else... and if you don't think it equates, why did you make the comparison?

And, BTW, I have absolutely no opinion on either organization or anyone associated with them, and as usual, am counting my lucky stars that the only acronyms I have to worry about are USEA and USDF. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

poltroon
Mar. 5, 2004, 04:00 AM
HSM, I think it's appropriate to add that in most licensed professions a fraud conviction will cause you to lose your license even if the fraud did not occur while you were practicing your profession.

For example, an engineer who was acting as a treasurer of a hobby club and was convicted of stealing the club's money would most likely lose his engineering license. Same for a doctor or a lawyer.

War Admiral
Mar. 5, 2004, 06:02 AM
Erin wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> much like a convicted child molester would not be permitted to be in contact with kids <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...Except at WEF apparently...

(Sorry, just had to point that out. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif)

______________

"Those who use horses just for the business are crass, classless horsemen."
--George Morris

SGray
Mar. 5, 2004, 06:34 AM
yes thank you LLDM, I'm thinking something along those lines

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

SGray
Mar. 5, 2004, 06:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
SGray, I think you and CGR are at a communication impasse. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.......

.....And my apologies if I'm misrepresenting anyone's argument... just trying to clear up the confusion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

to the first - I'd say that's an understatement Erin http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

and to the second - always happy to have you jump in - thanks for the assist http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

nelson
Mar. 5, 2004, 06:51 AM
poltroon - absolutely true! I practice in a licensed profession and can tell you that is definitely the case in my line of work.

wanderlust
Mar. 5, 2004, 07:07 AM
In agreement with the statement that if this were another kind of professional, they would be permanently banned...

Mr WL has an acquaintance from law school who was caught and convicted of laundering money for one of the interests he was involved with professionally. Not only did this person go to jail for several years, he was permanently disbarred. He will never be able to practice law again. And he received this sentence and disbarrment for committing acts of tax evasion, not killing an animal and committing insurance fraud.

Makes me think PV got off very lightly...

~formerly Master Tally~

Snowbird
Mar. 5, 2004, 11:37 AM
Amen wanderlust! I have always been opposed to licensing horse trainers and professionals but they are making a case for licensing by their own actions and attitudes.

Isn't it also true that once you lose your license to practice law you also are prevented from any free lance type of legal activities where you give legal advice to people who then have to sign the papers for themselves. Something like impersonating a lawyer!

Battle Scarred Veteran

htrqueen
Mar. 5, 2004, 12:06 PM
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. I happen to think what Paul did is truly a terrible act. I do however think that we should let Paul give his knowledge back to the horse community by having him judge, give clinics, etc... Paul still is one of the best and most knowledgeable trainers out there. The thing that most of you don't know or hear about are the trainers, both famous and local who deal with Paul on a regular basis. They buy and sell horses through Paul and send clients over for lessons. Most of them don't admit it which is their own business. Instead of taking this horrible situation and throwing stones, why not try to use his knowledge and skills and turn it into a positive for the horse community?

fleur
Mar. 5, 2004, 12:15 PM
sorry devildog, but that's the dumbest analogy i've seen on here in awhile. paul valliere is not some psycho freak who eats people. it is a terrible thing to have arranged for a horse's death, but he's not a serial killer!

TGFPT clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

lisa
Mar. 5, 2004, 12:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by htrqueen:
&lt;snip&gt; let Paul give his knowledge back to the horse community &lt;snip&gt; <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Give is the operative word here.

I, for one, *might* be willing to give him a second chance when he is up for reinstatement if there is truly evidence that he has given back. Not bought, or sold, or charged a fee.

But frankly, by him agreeing to judge a class he was "eligible" to because of a loophole, and by the fact that it has been "business as usual" for the past 8 years, doesn't give me a lot of confidence that he has reformed much at all.

fleur
Mar. 5, 2004, 12:21 PM
...just so no one thinks i'm crazy, the post above mine said "while we're at it let's all take cooking lessons from jeffrey dahmer!" but appears to have been deleted http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TGFPT clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

fleur
Mar. 5, 2004, 12:22 PM
i wasn't calling you dumb, but IMO it was a dumb analogy. sorry if you took it personally.

TGFPT clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

htrqueen
Mar. 5, 2004, 12:57 PM
Paul was approached and asked to judge this class. I think instead of jumping all over Paul, you should be questioning the committee for that decision. As far as "business as usual" for him, I'm sure that isn't the case.

Coreene
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:09 PM
And now, coming through your computer speakers, the sound of "Cry Me a River."

shade
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:13 PM
htrqueen why should he benefit from an industry that has suffered an incredible black mark in the publics eye due to his actions? And if people are sending him horses to sell, lessons etc then it is business as usual. I agree Paul gave a great deal to our business BUT and a big one, he TOOK so much away from our community by his past actions. As others have stated, in any other industry he would be banned from practicing his trade...

wanderlust
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
Isn't it also true that once you lose your license to practice law you also are prevented from any free lance type of legal activities where you give legal advice to people who then have to sign the papers for themselves. Something like impersonating a lawyer!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I believe that technically he is not allowed to provide any advice regarding any kind of legal matter. The Bar has it right... when you abuse your knowledge for something illegal or unethical, you lose your ability to use that knowledge in any way, shape or form.

~formerly Master Tally~

fleur
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Coreene:
And now, coming through your computer speakers, the sound of "Cry Me a River."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

beyonce or justin timberlake? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

TGFPT clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Portia
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:20 PM
A person who has lost their law license (been disbarred) may not hold themselves out as a lawyer or work representing clients or providing legal advice. To do so would constitute the unauthorized practice of law, whether provided by a disbarred lawyer or someone who was never licensed.

In most if not all states, however, a disbarred person may work in the legal services industry as a legal assistant or clerk in a law firm performing services not involving the use of legal judgment.

wanderlust
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:25 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Portia. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

~formerly Master Tally~

Coreene
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:31 PM
David Lee Roth.

HSM
Mar. 5, 2004, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by htrqueen:
The thing that most of you <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't you mean "most of us little people?" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> don't know or hear about are the trainers, both famous and local who deal with Paul on a regular basis. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, plenty of us DO know which is why we are voicing our disgust.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>They buy and sell horses through Paul and send clients over for lessons. Most of them don't admit it which is their own business. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Herein lies the problem. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif

------------------------------
I'm just the mom....

bluewatersail
Mar. 5, 2004, 02:21 PM
HTRQUEEN, we don't know why Valliere was approached to officiate. Maybe one of the big guys got a big tip.

Anyways, as a little person, I'd like to welcome you to the message board. I see this is your second post.

RugBug
Mar. 5, 2004, 03:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bluewatersail:
HTRQUEEN, we don't know why Valliere was approached to officiate. Maybe one of the big guys got a big tip.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ARe you suggesting that someone was offered monetary compensation if they asked PV to judge? Way to bring this discussion to a lower level.

From the support of some pros listing PV as their trainer, I'm guessing that management thought asking him to be a judge this year wouldn't cause a stir. But to insinuate that they took money to ask him is completely uncalled for.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I didn't jump. I took a tiny step and there conclusions were."

Coreene
Mar. 5, 2004, 03:07 PM
Lower level? I beg to differ. Check out the title of the thread.

bluewatersail
Mar. 5, 2004, 03:07 PM
RugBug, electrocuting a horse, insurance fraud, etc. etc. is the nadir of the entire affair. If he could do what he did back then and still have the chutzpah to show up in 2004, anything is possible. I just don't trust criminals.

RugBug
Mar. 5, 2004, 04:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bluewatersail:
RugBug, electrocuting a horse, insurance fraud, etc. etc. is the nadir of the entire affair. If he could do what he did back then and still have the chutzpah to show up in 2004, anything is possible. I just don't trust criminals.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I object to is that your post is just a way to provoke more gossip and speculation. It has surprised me how much false information has gone around on these threads. It's been interesting to see the game of "telephone" that's been going on. and your post will not only continue that, but make it worse.

Yes, what PV did is a low point in our sport. But we don't have to lower ourselves to that same place by starting rumors and insinuating bribery.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I didn't jump. I took a tiny step and there conclusions were."

Snowbird
Mar. 5, 2004, 08:35 PM
Sorry RugBug that doesn't fly. You can't equate rumor mongers and gossips; as malicious as they mey be with some one who has admitted to having a horse killed for $75,000.

If PV really had learned not to bend the rules, if he had demonstrated that he would be a willing conformist to this society as warped and perverted as it might be to use his talents to the best of his ability I'd be on your side.

But he's still bending and stretching the rules and thinking that he can avoid them. His remorse is for having got caught, and he copped a plea to keep the punishment minimal. All he had to give up was horse shows. Do you have any idea how many good horsemen there are who never go to a competition? I don't know how many, but I've known quite a few.

Battle Scarred Veteran

OLD A/O
Mar. 5, 2004, 08:49 PM
Call me stupid or call me naive but horse trainer is = to horse educator. No way do I equate horse trainer to horse killer.

I could never kill ANY horse just for money. I might be able to do a pain mercy killing but I have not done one of those to date yet. Thank God!!!! I know it would take me some time to recover from the pain mercy killing mentally.

God bless all of us true horse lovers. How do these people who kill horses for money sleep at night?

Erin
Mar. 5, 2004, 09:29 PM
Actually, RugBug is right on point. There are certain facts that are well-established and that are perfectly legitimate to post here. But one of the BB rules is that you're not allowed to allege unethical or illegal behavior without the proof to back it up.

So, please, can everyone just stick to discussing the KNOWN facts and not offer hypotheses and supposition? Thanks.

lisa
Mar. 6, 2004, 04:45 AM
Yes, obviously it was a Bad Idea for MP et. al to ask PV to officiate.

BUT... the onus should not be on them alone. It showed very poor lack of judgement on PV's part to accept.

It all goes back to "just because you can, doesn't mean you should".

Then, good grief, he could have called a press conference and said "I was asked to judge this prestigous class, and while I am technically within the rules to be able to do so, I have declined because I don't think it's the right thing to do. However, I would like to thank those who have shown their continued faith in me".

Then, people might have said, gee maybe this guy has changed...

MAD
Mar. 6, 2004, 05:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Coreene:
David Lee Roth.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

of course http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

arnika
Mar. 6, 2004, 06:35 AM
Quote from Portia: (sorry, I still can't do the lines)

"In most if not all states, however, a disbarred person may work in the legal services industry as a legal assistant or clerk in a law firm performing services not involving the use of legal judgement."

I vote we allow PV back into the industry as a groom. Seems fitting. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

LLDM
Mar. 6, 2004, 07:56 AM
Supervised groom for ex-racehorses and other rescues. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Assistant groom trainer for handicapped/special needs kids. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

SCFarm

Where's the frootbat, where's the froooootbat, where's the fwoooo.. -Elmer's Alter