Thank you for bravely trying to extricate Romantic Star and provide quality care. I am so sorry to read this. Again, thanks so much for taking the risk and DOING something.
May MHS preside and extricate all the horses involved in this tragedy. Best wishes to both R.S.s - may each have a very bright future.
[QUOTE=Discobold;6825658]
And you know this because:
(a) Ronda told you so.
(b) Jill told you so.
© 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.[/QUOTE]
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.
So, did Jill refund your $100,000?
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.
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.
[QUOTE=saje;6825818]
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.[/QUOTE]
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!
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?
[QUOTE=lauriep;6825948]
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![/QUOTE]
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.
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.
[QUOTE=lauriep;6825991]
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.[/QUOTE]
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”.
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.
[QUOTE=Lynnwood;6825911]
One page says 3/6 this page https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/529643_10151501892144612_749960997_n.jpg
Says under Case History: Body Condition score of 3/9
Editing for Dead Lame this page
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/483464_10151501907059612_660506575_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.[/QUOTE]
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:
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TH]3. Thin[/TH]
[TD]Slight fat cover over body; individual vertebrae and ribs no longer visibly discernible; withers, shoulders, and neck do not appear overly thin[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]4. Moderately Thin[/TH]
[TD]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[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
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.
[QUOTE=Lynnwood;6825998]
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”.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=D 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.[/QUOTE]
First DMK your supercilious tone really does your position no favors.
2nd where out of this post :
Originally Posted by Lynnwood[IMG]http://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png)
[I]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
[/I]
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
[I]
Do you get :
[/I]
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.
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).
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.
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?
[QUOTE=DMK;6826045]
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?[/QUOTE]
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.
DMK, how many horses with head trauma have you treated? Just curious and an honest question.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
