All true. Except for the context that the only reason the original owner signed over the horse was because of her belief in Fallon’s lies and deception. Fallon deceived her for the purpose of gain.
We can judge an owner for our belief that they showed poor judgment for allowing a horse to go away with a complete stranger, simply because the stranger looked and sounded nice.
But the world is full of naive people who would let Fallon scam them out of a horse – obviously. I think the theory of such laws is that if the law doesn’t protect at least some of the gullible, it will encourage a lot of crooked behavior.
And if that happens, that is yet another object lesson for the daughter.
The adults in the daughter’s life may not have explained her mother’s circumstances. But I’m guessing that it’s possible that the daughter knows quite a bit. Don’t know, though.