• 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

Doing business with JILL BURNELL? BEWARE.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Discobold View Post
    And you know this because:

    (a) Ronda told you so.

    (b) Jill told you so.

    (c) You traveled forward in time and were the judge at the trial where those issues were decided (note: whether the sale was "above board" is a legal issue).



    And you know this because:

    (a) Ronda told you so.

    (b) You work in the billing department at Davis.
    Because Ronda told me, she has no reason to lie and I know her a heck of a lot better than I know any of the KRAZEES who have been posting here, evidently including you. Nor do I want to know them. Ronda is a straight up person, and anyone who knows her will vouch for that. You don't want to believe? Don't. I don't give a rat's ass.
    Laurie

    Comment


    • Originally posted by risingstarfarm View Post
      At this time, Rising Star Farm is retracting the contractual agreement to purchase the stallion known as Romantic Star. All previous affiliations with Jill Burnell/Grey Fox Farms and Robert Maggie Weems have been discontinued and official notification to the respected parties has been given. Any financial evaluations or statements made in any legal case involving these parties is in NO WAY indicative of the previous purchase agreement between Rising Star Farm and Grey Fox Farms for the purchase of Romantic Star. It is my sincere hope that this stallion is able to find refuge in a situation where he is given the good care he deserves.
      So, did Jill refund your $100,000?
      www.DaventryEquestrian.com
      Home of Welsh Cob stallion Goldhills Brandysnap
      Also home to Daventry Equine Appraisals & Equine Expert Witness
      www.EquineAppraisers.com

      Comment


      • Carotid artery, not jugular [sic, jugular not carotid]. I am not going to get lost in that set of documents again right now.


        ETA: see Lynnwood's post #4440 for the links and corrections to my post. Thank you Lynnwood.

        I have limited access to the internet at the moment and am working (too busy to go back and look up some things), hence my mistakes on the jugular issue.
        Last edited by BaroquePony; Feb. 9, 2013, 07:02 AM.

        Comment


        • I still don't understand why some are so adamant that RS could not have been in bad shape...people, did you not look at the other poor horses that were rescued? Talk about people not getting their facts in order...jeesh.

          Comment


          • http://www.ratemyhorsepro.com/userfi...kyvMarinHS.pdf

            Comment


            • Originally posted by saje View Post
              Having seen the way RSF was vilified here for supposedly helping JB by buying the stallion, do you think anyone is going to be willing to be involved??

              I think COTH has a lot to answer for here, and I'm not talking about the auction funds.
              This. ABSOLUTELY THIS. It IS because of the lunatics here, with their innuendo, assumptions, downright lies and conspiracy theories, coupled with the crazies at RMHP who would NOT take "it's none of your business" for an answer, that sent RSF over the edge. Thanks to this delightful thread, she has had enough, and the horse loses. Good job. Keep it up, and maybe Jill will end up winning too. 99% of the posters here have never had dealings with EITHER Ronda or Jill, and so shouldn't even be speculating, but no. That wouldn't be any fun. It is much more fun, and oh, so classy, to pretend to be in the know and pass around "facts" as real facts, and denigrate good people. Again, good job!
              Laurie

              Comment


              • The "crazies" at RMHP have an actual court document posted...Now of course that was written by the supposably "crazy" lawyer, that Ronda herself admitted to hiring. Not speculation there, just FACT.

                I'm with Daventry, did she get her money refunded?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by lauriep View Post
                  This. ABSOLUTELY THIS. It IS because of the lunatics here, with their innuendo, assumptions, downright lies and conspiracy theories, coupled with the crazies at RMHP who would NOT take "it's none of your business" for an answer, that sent RSF over the edge. Thanks to this delightful thread, she has had enough, and the horse loses. Good job. Keep it up, and maybe Jill will end up winning too. 99% of the posters here have never had dealings with EITHER Ronda or Jill, and so shouldn't even be speculating, but no. That wouldn't be any fun. It is much more fun, and oh, so classy, to pretend to be in the know and pass around "facts" as real facts, and denigrate good people. Again, good job!

                  LP - wow!
                  This thread was about JB
                  I personally have no idea WHAT deal Ronda had or did NOT have with JB regarding RS - you MAY but all I learned from this thread was that RS was seized from JB's farm and from what I have READ - despite all the wannabe "vets" posting - is that RS was in bad shape. Period full stop. And for the record, I support RSF's breeding program and am excited by a breeding to one of her stallions this year - so don't go all off on the "mad folks of COTH" - I don't recall much about this smear you and a few others seem to be confabulating.
                  JB is a nightmare - and if RSF had to go through a miserable wake up call - I am very sorry.
                  PS - not all of us are "clueless" - glad you all finally got clear of all the deals made - hand in glove with JB for a number of years - good thing ended up with only one horse....
                  The vitriol got sidetracked - the person who snookered a lot of people at the detriment of good care of horses, at the very LEAST, is JB. RSF may have been the last victim of a very artful, decieving and dishonest marketing campaign -
                  As said before, may the horses end up in good safe homes, and may JB be out of business for good - soon.
                  "Her life was okay. Sometimes she wished she were sleeping with the right man instead of with her dog, but she never felt she was sleeping with the wrong dog."



                  www.dontlookbackfarm.com

                  Comment


                  • Yes, they have a legal document to which the FOIA entitles them. My comment was to their direct harrassing of Ronda about her purchase, which IS NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.
                    Laurie

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by lauriep View Post
                      Yes, they have a legal document to which the FOIA entitles them. My comment was to their direct harrassing of Ronda about her purchase, which IS NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.
                      I'm not arguing asking because I honestly do not know. Since the horse was indeed involved in a criminal case. Would weather he was owned by X or Z been as simple as providing proof of legal paperwork? Bill of sale / payment arrangement / proof of payment etc. If RMHP or MHS asked about ownership are those things not easy/or the normal legal proof of ? It seems that is the logical "here is your answer / proof now go away".
                      "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"

                      Comment


                      • If RSF is the owner of Romantic Star, as claimed in court documents and by certain people here, it cannot "retract the contractual agreement to purchase Royal Star" b/c it already owns it.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Lynnwood View Post
                          One page says 3/6 this page https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...49960997_n.jpg

                          Says under Case History: Body Condition score of 3/9

                          Editing for Dead Lame this page
                          https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...60506575_n.jpg

                          at the top "Slow jugular refill on the left jugular vein with edema present over the vein in the cranial cervical region" The next statement is is good jugular refill on the left. I am guessing a typo and they meant right. Since they would have checked each side.
                          Edema over the jugular is not exactly a serious issue, it's more like an observation. Blown carotids are not life threatening either. Temporary edema on the jugular? Again, not serious. And I think a 3/6 or 3+/9 is not typically a horse that is in danger of refeeding syndrome. It's a horse defined as follows:

                          Slight fat cover over body; individual vertebrae and ribs no longer visibly discernible; withers, shoulders, and neck do not appear overly thin
                          Ridge of spine and outline of ribs are visible; tail head may or may not be visible depending on the breed; withers, shoulders, and neck do not appear overly thin

                          Do I think a horse should be a 3 or 3+? Of course not (I've said as much. Repeatedly.) But if you could seize a horse because it was a 3, there would be a lot of horses seized. For better or worse, it's a 1 to 2+ that warrants seizure.

                          Seriously, if you had a horse in this condition, you expect this warrants a 6+ week stay at a vet hospital??? And fork over 4 grand for that care? Because that sure sounds like your position. If so, what in god's name do you do when they need sutures? Fly them to Mt. Sinai?

                          Or do you think *possibly* there is a reasonable expectation that horse in this condition should be discharged to a less acute setting where basic horse management skills would meet his treatment needs?

                          I know it's tough, but remember, I'm EMPHATICALLY not saying he should have been released to JB. I'm saying "discharged to a less acute setting". It's not fun, thinking in the grey spaces is it? It kan make yer brane hert.
                          Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Lynnwood View Post
                            I'm not arguing asking because I honestly do not know. Since the horse was indeed involved in a criminal case. Would weather he was owned by X or Z been as simple as providing proof of legal paperwork? Bill of sale / payment arrangement / proof of payment etc. If RMHP or MHS asked about ownership are those things not easy/or the normal legal proof of ? It seems that is the logical "here is your answer / proof now go away".
                            It is none of their business. Period. They are reporting on Jill Burnell, not Ronda Stavisky or RSF. She told them as much, they should have left her alone.
                            Laurie

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DMK View Post
                              E
                              Do I think a horse should be a 3 or 3+? Of course not (I've said as much. Repeatedly.) But if you could seize a horse because it was a 3, there would be a lot of horses seized. For better or worse, it's a 1 to 2+ that warrants seizure.

                              Seriously, if you had a horse in this condition, you expect this warrants a 6+ week stay at a vet hospital??? And fork over 4 grand for that care? Because that sure sounds like your position. If so, what in god's name do you do when they need sutures? Fly them to Mt. Sinai?


                              I know it's tough, but remember, I'm EMPHATICALLY not saying he should have been released to JB. I'm saying "discharged to a less acute setting". It's not fun, thinking in the grey spaces is it? It kan make yer brane hert.
                              First DMK your supercilious tone really does your position no favors.

                              2nd where out of this post :
                              Originally Posted by Lynnwood
                              One page says 3/6 this page https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...49960997_n.jpg

                              Says under Case History: Body Condition score of 3/9

                              Editing for Dead Lame this page
                              https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...60506575_n.jpg


                              at the top "Slow jugular refill on the left jugular vein with edema present over the vein in the cranial cervical region" The next statement is is good jugular refill on the left. I am guessing a typo and they meant right. Since they would have checked each side


                              Do you get :
                              Seriously, if you had a horse in this condition, you expect this warrants a 6+ week stay at a vet hospital??? And fork over 4 grand for that care? Because that sure sounds like your position. If so, what in god's name do you do when they need sutures? Fly them to Mt. Sinai?
                              I don't believe in that post I offered any position. It was simply a post pointing to facts within the horse's case study as was being discussed by prior posters.
                              As far as where and to whom the horse was discharged to that is between UC Davis , MHS , et all.
                              "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"

                              Comment


                              • It's entirely possible that there were (as is so often the case with older stallions) a performance guarantee that had to be met, upon which payment is due. I do not know one way or another, but if you buy an older stallion, and you were somewhat experienced in this market, you might reasonably expect that the horse show the ability to fulfill his breeding duties before payment was due.

                                If that was the case, it wasn't a failure of the horse to meet the contractual terms, it was the actions (even if they were legitimate) of a third party (MCHS). Even so, the terms might not be satisfied.

                                Daventry, discobold. You should check your zipper. Your agenda is showing (and your class).
                                Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                                Comment


                                • There is a difference in a horse being a 3 at a farm with no shelter, little food, and conditions that would make one believe that he could be a BS of 2 in a week. or a farm that seemed to have the actual means of caring for a horse with a BS of 3. And where exactly should this horse have gone "home" to? It may have been a matter of getting something setup to handle a stallion.

                                  As far as RSF and RS, it sounds comparable to putting a contract on a house, and having it forclosed on before you actually make settlement.

                                  Comment


                                  • lynwood, it was a simple question not derived from your one statment but the tone of all your statements. I would love to know the answer, because I read that report and think "no duh, he has inflammation and edema. The sun also rose in the east today" These are givens. Vets don't put them in the report because they are dangerous, simply observations on his condition... but you keep pointing out things that are just simply not that alarming in a manner that makes me think that you think they are alarming. So I'm left wondering if you have just not ever really been around seriously injured horses.

                                    So again, I ask, is that the level of care you would expect for your horse in a same/similar situation?
                                    Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by DMK View Post
                                      lynwood, it was a simple question not derived from your one statment but the tone of all your statements. I would love to know the answer, because I read that report and think "no duh, he has inflammation and edema. The sun also rose in the east today" These are givens. Vets don't put them in the report because they are dangerous, simply observations on his condition... but you keep pointing out things that are just simply not that alarming in a manner that makes me think that you think they are alarming. So I'm left wondering if you have just not ever really been around seriously injured horses.

                                      So again, I ask, is that the level of care you would expect for your horse in a same/similar situation?
                                      Just to sate you. Honest answer in this case and in the case of all my horses and patients I've handled. The decision to keep a horse at a referral or medical center is normally a combined effort between owner/legal representative/Medical attendants.

                                      Our doctors decide when a patient is ready to be released or should continue to be hospitalized they make suggestions to the owner/legal guardians and then treatment plans are followed through. UC Davis certainly would have NOT kept the horse if it felt he should have been gone sooner. Last I checked they are not a boarding facility.

                                      BTW DMK <--veterinary technician large and small animal on and off for the last 17 years the off was some time to raise my daughter.

                                      To more specifically answer your question. If the horse were mine I would be following the treatment plan laid out by the attending veterinarians.
                                      "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"

                                      Comment


                                      • DMK, how many horses with head trauma have you treated? Just curious and an honest question.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by Lynnwood View Post
                                          Just to sate you. Honest answer in this case and in the case of all my horses and patients I've handled. The decision to keep a horse at a referral or medical center is normally a combined effort between owner/legal representative/Medical attendants.

                                          Our doctors decide when a patient is ready to be released they make suggestions to the owner/legal guardians and then treatment plans are followed through. UC Davis certainly would have NOT kept the horse if it felt he should have been gone sooner. Last I checked they are not a boarding facility.

                                          BTW DMK <--veterinary technician large and small animal on and off for the last 17 years the off was some time to raise my daughter.

                                          To more specifically answer your question. If the horse were mine I would be following the treatment plan laid out by the attending veterinarians.
                                          That's fair enough (managed a post op layup facility with a surgical facility attached for - then moved to an industry closely aligned with the medical field - I use words like "less acute setting" carefully). But I admit, I find it hard to believe that if you had such a horse come into your care, that horse would not be discharged to you in within 48-72 hours. Because you can provide that level of horse management, right?

                                          I'm saying I have the same expectations of the organization that seized the horse. I expect that they can fulfill the needs of basic horse management, because after the initial evaluation, I see no evidence that RS needed a more complex level of care. Maybe you disagree, but honestly, I have never seen or heard of a horse that stayed that long in an i/p setting, receiving nothing more than basic medical management, unless he was potentially contagious. Which he was not. You are right that UC Davis is not a boarding facility, but they acted in the same capacity as one for the majority of the horse's stay.

                                          RS needed his wounds cleaned, he needed a sammich, a visit from the dentist and the farrier. That could have been capably handled outside of UC Davis so I am left to wonder why he did did not get discharged to one of their facilities they should maintain as part of their obligation to Marin Co. My suspicion is that they simply do not have the facilities to handle any stallion, regardless of his condition. If that is the case, that is a glaring failure on their part, and not one I think anyone (least of all Rising Star) should have to pay for.

                                          And because I feel like every post needs this clarified (again):
                                          This does not mean that I think JB should have retained possession of RS.
                                          It does not mean I approve of JB or wish her well.
                                          It STILL does not mean I like sparkly black stallions, because I do not.
                                          It does not mean I am saying that UC Davis is behaving unethically.
                                          It does not mean that I think MCHS didn't have cause for seizure.
                                          It's still more complex than that.
                                          I can appreciate that seeing the flaws in many sides makes for no fun.
                                          Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X