• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Austrian Abuse Case

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Austrian Abuse Case

    http://www.eurodressage.com/equestri...on-nine-months

    I simply don't understand how this could result in anything other than a lifetime ban... when trace amounts of undeclared regulated substances can put riders at risk of a year's competition ban, why do electric prods result in only 9 months' suspension?

    I know it is a different level of governance etc, but if the dressage community has any hope of countering the mistaken beliefs that big movement must stem from abusive training, then really, more action needs to be taken here. JMO of course, and perhaps there's more to the story than I've read.
    Proud COTH lurker since 2001.

  • #2
    I am in no way, shape or form condoning,promoting or in other ways supporting the rider if the accusations are true....

    But I'm always leery of accusations in which there are no witnesses or really any real proof, especially in today's world of camera phones.

    "May stated in addition that "the court considers it proven'"

    As for the second charge:
    "The pair was cleared of the charges that they injured their horses with screws, nails, stones and other unwanted artefacts. Evidence lacked on this matter."

    No evidence but a he said-she said youtube battle. I'd be willing to bet that there was some ulterior motive here...

    Comment


    • #3
      amm2cd-The article states that an electric shock device was found in the tack room, and there was no explanation offered for its presence. That would be enough to convict anyone beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
      "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain" ~Friedrich Schiller

      Comment


      • #4
        Lack of evidence does not mean innocent. There just wasn't the evidence needed to support charges. Finding the electric device does lend more credence to the other accusations.
        "The captive bolt is not a proper tool for slaughter of equids they regain consciousness 30 seconds after being struck fully aware they are being vivisected." Dr Friedlander DVM & frmr Chief USDA Insp

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Eclectic Horseman View Post
          amm2cd-The article states that an electric shock device was found in the tack room, and there was no explanation offered for its presence. That would be enough to convict anyone beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
          Without evidence of use, the presence of the prod is highly circumstantial and I highly doubt a guarantee of overcoming the reasonable doubt standard.

          But IANAL......

          Comment


          • #6
            This decision was made by the District Court of Innsbruck (ref. St George). Would the FEI have the authority to sanction her ? If they do, I guess they can have a go too ? Maybe their punishment would be more in line with those handed out for doping infractions. One imagines that they would have the power to censure a rider convicted of horse abuse.
            ... _. ._ .._. .._

            Comment


            • #7
              Sounds like dressage is the new big lick.
              Hillary Rodham Clinton - the peoples choice for president.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Gestalt View Post
                Sounds like dressage is the new big lick.
                Wow. That is so horrible. Not that you said it, but that it rings true.
                I have a Fjord! Life With Oden

                Comment


                • #9
                  Sounds like dressage is the new big lick.

                  I don't see how this says anything about the sport generally.

                  Sadly,there have been bad apples in every sport and in all walks of life throughout history.

                  If you think there were never any horse abusers in the good old days, you'd be wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Crockpot View Post
                    I don't see how this says anything about the sport generally.
                    Really? When most of the posts on the thread so far have been DEFENDING her? I think that tells you a lot right there. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

                    She should have been set down FOREVER.
                    "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Really? When most of the posts on the thread so far have been DEFENDING her?

                      HUH? No.

                      Some were discussing the evidence because the article is vague on that. I'm assuming they had more direct evidence than finding a stun gun in the tack room and an anonymous report.

                      I am sure you won't find any legitimate trainers who think the use of a stun gun has any place in dressage training.

                      It is just wrong to suggest this is a trend in dressage.
                      Last edited by Crockpot; Feb. 14, 2013, 07:08 AM. Reason: clarification

                      Comment

                      • Original Poster

                        #12
                        My point was that this is an extreme exception to the rule, and that is precisely why it must be treated as such with regard to potential sanctions. I cannot comment on the validity of the ruling or the weightiness of the evidence, but if this individual is indeed guilty as described then she must be punished in a way that publicly emphasises the unacceptability of such actions.

                        Like it or not, dressage is under more scrutiny than ever before (cf. IDTC comments that warm-ups might need to be closed to the public due to circulated rollkur snapshots etc). When so many outsiders view the sport with skepticism, clear-cut cases of abuse would seem to provide a real opportunity to prove our commitment to horse welfare.
                        Proud COTH lurker since 2001.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by caballero View Post
                          Without evidence of use, the presence of the prod is highly circumstantial and I highly doubt a guarantee of overcoming the reasonable doubt standard.

                          But IANAL......

                          Actually, circumstantial evidence can be the most reliable evidence. Fingerprints and DNA, and other forensic evidence, are circumstantial evidence.

                          Wikipedia has a good basic explanation.

                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

                          There is never a guarantee of overcoming a reasonable doubt standard. But physical evidence ("a smoking gun") can be fairly conclusive absent any reasonable explanation.
                          "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain" ~Friedrich Schiller

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Actually, circumstantial evidence can be the most reliable evidence. Fingerprints and DNA, and other forensic evidence, are circumstantial evidence.

                            Wikipedia has a good basic explanation.

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence
                            Eclectic Horseman. It's obvious you have no knowledge of the law despite your legal advice here based on wikipedia.

                            You are wrong in your earlier post about circumstantial evidence.


                            The article states that an electric shock device was found in the tack room, and there was no explanation offered for its presence. That would be enough to convict anyone beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
                            Let's say a stun gun was found in your barn's tack room. This ALONE won't be proof beyond a reasonable doubt that YOU abused your horse with a stun gun.

                            Again, I assume there was more evidence than this in this case. I assume that the grooms who posted the anonymous youtube video came forth in the hearing and gave direct evidence which would be better than circumstantial evidence taken alone.
                            Last edited by Crockpot; Feb. 14, 2013, 10:40 AM. Reason: added quote

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I completely don't understand what putting screws and nails in the withers is supposed to accomplish?

                              Is that somehow a training shortcut toward some end or just for giggles?
                              The Noodlehttp://tiny.cc/NGKmT&http://tiny.cc/gioSA
                              Jinxyhttp://tiny.cc/PIC798&http://tiny.cc/jinx364
                              Boy Wonderhttp://tiny.cc/G9290
                              The Hana is nuts! NUTS!!http://tinyurl.com/SOCRAZY

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                one more point:

                                It's the governing body of the sport who sat her down.

                                all the evidence talk is more important for the courts that dish out jail time.

                                I am guessing that the evidence was pertinent enough for the comity to find her damaging the reputation of the sport.

                                I have been in many barns in my life, the only time any electric device was in the vicinity of a horse barn was when the farm also had other lifestock. One had pigs, the other bulls....in a horse only facility a cattle prod would give me cause for pause.

                                it had been rumored 20, 25 years ago that on of the leading dressage riders used electric spurs on the horses in training...to but a little extra umpf in the step I suppose....
                                Hard to tell where those rumors start, or why...but said rider was never put in front of a commission to justify the tools...

                                and I am also a bit mystified as to what could be gained by putting sharp objects under the saddle...under the noseband, I can see...saddle?
                                Originally posted by BigMama1
                                Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
                                GNU Terry Prachett

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  It's the governing body of the sport who sat her down.

                                  all the evidence talk is more important for the courts that dish out jail time
                                  Yes it's a lower standard of proof than in a criminal case .

                                  I was responding to a post which wrongly claimed that the existance of stun gun in the tack room alone would suffice as evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict someone at the barn. You would need more evidence than that to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt agst any individual .

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Originally posted by caballero View Post
                                    Without evidence of use, the presence of the prod is highly circumstantial and I highly doubt a guarantee of overcoming the reasonable doubt standard.

                                    But IANAL......
                                    She was fined and suspended by a state equestrian association. Perhaps incorrect to compare Austrian law to the North American common law but were that happening in a common law country they would apply a a civil law standard of "balance of probabilities" vs the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". Hence, while circumstantial, the presence of an electric prod in the absence of a reasonable explanation for its presence would be enough, imo, for a finding on the civil standard.

                                    This is assuming, of course, that Austrian civil law has a standard similar to that of the North American (and British) common law. The wording might be somewhat different but I would be surprised if the standard of proof was substantially different.

                                    As for the abrasive things used on the wither...yeah, cannot figure what was hoped to be achieved by that other than just plain old cruelty....

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Hence, while circumstantial, the presence of an electric prod in the absence of a reasonable explanation for its presence would be enough, imo, for a finding on the civil standard.
                                      I would agree that balance of probabilities is the more likely standard but didn't go there because unfamiliar with that jurisdiction.

                                      Even so I think you would still have a problem nailing the culprit unless there is only one person at the barn which is why, again, I assume they must have had more evidence than just that.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Originally posted by Crockpot View Post
                                        Eclectic Horseman. It's obvious you have no knowledge of the law despite your legal advice here based on wikipedia.
                                        I have been a practising attorney for about 35 years.

                                        And obviously there has to be corroberating evidence. I think that wikipedia does a very good job of explaining to laymen why circumstantial evidence, although often maligned, is as good or better evidence than eye witness testimony.
                                        "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain" ~Friedrich Schiller

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X