He’s done this for 20 years, long before CDJ incident surfaced
10 Likes
Correct Connect is no longer sponsoring him.
14 Likes
Out them, too. We need to know who these people are so that we never, ever support them.
33 Likes
ETA: Apparently he rode with Bobby Costello for quite some time. That probably helped him when it came to the grant. All of this leads to more questions though…
What program/s did he come up the ranks in? Who has he ridden with (other than WFP)?
I’m seeing so many comments about how his rough treatment of horses was well known, etc. It’s really sad and disappointing that this is only coming to light now…
15 Likes
Gallops Saddlery also ceased sponsorship!
57 Likes
No. We sure don’t want to engage in a “conversation” about blatant horse abuse, or twist ourselves into pretzels to try to find excuses, which is what you seem to want.
Resent me all you want. Good riddance.
19 Likes
Is it accurate to say that these videos have only been surfaced publicly in the last day or two, but they were provided many months ago to FEI and USEF?
I’m counting down to the CYA response tomorrow from FEI and USEF that they are “ shocked”, “dismayed” and “ take allegations of Horse abuse very seriously” 
What I think would be absolutely fantastic is if the people that shared these videos originally to social media, would take the additional step of sharing the original communications and exactly who they sent them to the organizations. Because I feel it’s long past time that those people get put on notice as well.
Social media has a lot of negatives, but this is not one of them. Being able to circumvent corrupt, cloistered, good old boy networks and get the truth out… Those days of a few people in power being able to control the narrative are hopefully are coming to an end.
62 Likes
My friends and I saw it at our barn, with our trainer at the time. We had a meeting with her and made it clear that it could never happen again and offered to pay for her to go to anger management training. All she had to do was admit she’d been abusive and promise to take steps to ensure it never happened again.
She refused to admit she’d done anything wrong.
We called around and found another trainer to take all 10-12 of us in full training, and left within a week. She was left with an almost completely empty barn.
When she called me crying, saying that her business had been destroyed overnight, I reminded her that she’d had a choice, but the horse hadn’t, and we could never trust her to be alone with our horses ever again.
118 Likes
My thoughts exactly
1 Like
Wow this is incredible. Kudos to you all 
7 Likes
A lot of men are magically able to control their anger management problems around other men they perceive as higher status but just cannot seem to manage that around anyone or anything else.
46 Likes
Disappointing response by Rebecca Farms. They say, basically, we have nothing to do with this; we don’t make the decision about who gets the grants. When pushed they admit that, of course, the family donates the money but then reassert they have no say in where it goes.
Sound, okay, that makes sense. But you know what you do have a say in: not giving the USEA another thin dime unless they handle this 
.
What is so hard about making a public statement like: we are not associated directly with AM as we have no input regarding to whom the funds are given. However, as a major donor to the USEA and a proponent of the sport of eventing, we are horrified that our funds have been given to anyone who would ever, let alone repeatedly, behave in the manner shown in the recently released videos. We have already reached out to the USEA to make our strongest possible objection to AM’s behaviour and to discuss what can be done in this case including, but not limited to, demanding AM reimburse The Rebecca Broussard Developing Rider grant fund for the full sum of the monies he received so that our gift does not directly benefit a trainer/rider who behaves this way and so that those funds can go to a more deserving recipient. We have informed the USEA that we are freezing all future donations to the grant fund, in particular, and the USEA, in general, until this is dealt with to our satisfaction.
24 Likes
I think it’s a but harsh to go after Rebecca Farm at this point. It’s become public over the last couple days. Who knows what RF has said/done privately? It sounds like the grant selection is out of RF’s control, which overall is a good thing, preventing bias in selection for funding.
Your desire for a perfect PR response seems to translate to you throwing RF under the bus rather than focus on the abuser.
ETA I personally witnessed a non-eventer (uninvited visitor) cause distress to horses and dogs at RF this summer. After taking immediate steps to relieve the animals, I contacted Sarah Broussard, who, despite hosting a 4*-L VIP party, and being essentially responsible for every single person at the show, came and personally dealt with the offender.
69 Likes
This is hugely unfair. Grants do not work that way, there is always an independent set of evaluators for legal purposes and they do the best they can with the information provided. Going after Rebecca Farm is misguided and counter reproductive.
39 Likes
I disagree. They are a sophisticated operation and a business. They do need to do better then just say, publicly, ‘not our fault’ and leave it at that. In fact, not responding to that FB post would have been better than what was done.
I don’t think it’s ‘harsh’ to express that I don’t think it was a good response and they could and should do better.
And expressing disappointment is not the same as ‘throwing RF under the bus’. When people say ‘throwing under the bus’, they mean blaming something on the party thrown under the bus. If you can let me know where you find me placing blame for AM’s behaviour on RF, please point it out. Maybe something I wrote reads that way and I’ll go back and clarify.
What I’ve done above is note that the people providing the funds thus far have done a simple throwing up of their hands and claiming no involvement in the dispersal of funds (which I agree is a good thing). I’m saying, they are NOT at fault, but they do have WAY more power to become part of the solution here b/c they hold a lot of power as a major donor. Power to hold the USEA accountable regarding this incident and, thus, power to push the governing body to respond in a way it hasn’t, heretofore, and in a way most of us cannot hope to do as either just single members of the organisation or not even members at all for those of us overseas.
And if you think I’m not focused on the abuser, I can only conclude you haven’t read anything else I wrote in this thread.
18 Likes
And attacking them online and implying they support an abuser is a great way to pressure them to do this exactly why?
12 Likes
Disagree. See above. They are uniquely placed to push for change within the USEA which lives or dies by the money people donate and pay for memberships. Donors can and do use their position to ensure that the organisations they donate to do not support abuse. I’ve represented one that was instrumental in cleaning house in a national-level non-profit by freezing future planned funding until the organisation acknowledge, addressed, and fixed the problem. That solution involved the ouster of some of the organisations corrupt board members and officers.
If we want to see these sports continue to enjoy a social license to operate, everyone who has any leverage at all needs to do their part to bring about a robust response to abuse and a house cleaning of the organisations and PTB who are turning a blind eye to, and thus helping to perpetuate, this type of abuse.
14 Likes
Nope, never said they support the abuser. Copy paste anything I wrote that suggests that.
Re-read what I wrote carefully. I am saying
-
‘not our fault’ is not an acceptable response because no one said they were at fault. The person in that FB thread merely drew their attention to the abuse by tagging them. That was all.
-
They hold a special position as a major donor and can use that position to demand change at the USEA level. I never suggest they have any influence at all over AM himself or any involvement or provide any direct support. You decided that was somehow implied, but I did not make that implication and you deciding I did does not make it so.
-
If we want this sport to continue (and I do) everyone who has any influence whatsoever needs to act on the USEA and other governing bodies and force them to do better. It appears that this was all reported quite some time ago and nothing was done.
Think of a major donor as akin to an activist major shareholder: it is a position the donor can use to advocate for and create change in the large organisation in a way individual members cannot.
I never suggested they directly support AM. I’m saying they have the power to become part of the solution and they need to use that, not simply deny involvement (which no one accused them of in the first place).
17 Likes
Most major donors are looking for an exit.
6 Likes
Like shareholders, they need not look for an exit. They can exit any time. I can stop any of my charitable giving at any time by…simply ceasing to donate.
If major donors are in fact already looking for an exit (maybe they are, I don’t know where you get this information but I’ll take it as true), they have even more influence over these orgs to demand a robust response to this kind of thing as their funding is already precarious and, if members of the public like you know it is, the orgs will know that, too.
9 Likes
