[QUOTE=Tommy’s Girl;6965908]
AC4H is described (by itself) as a broker owned program. I was never confused that they were basically a clearing house for horses in imminent danger of slaughter - I’ve never read anywhere that they had pens of horses in dedicated long-term care. The thing is, they got their hands dirty - and saved horses. How many? Who knows? But wouldn’t a few be enough? As for making some money off of the horses they sold, perhaps that’s why they did what they do for so long - a rescue mentioned in this thread closed because of lack of funds - how are they helping now? In a perfect world it would be great if maybe AC4H’s profit margin was smaller, but ultimately, they met the goal of saving horses. And anyone who purchased from them knew they were getting a horse that had been run through auction, and all of the problems associated with it - if you had buyer’s remorse that was tough, but you knew what you were getting into.
I personally think that her operation, while not squeaky clean or morally unimpeachable, moved more horses as a “rescue brokerage” than a static rescue can manage. If that earned her a pool for hot days, then so be it.[/QUOTE]
Well, I suppose that is one interesting way to look at it.
Or you could look at the fact that she raised finds to ‘rescue’ horses, whenever possible letting the funds that were coming in exceed the amount that was needed to ‘bail’ the horse in a way that was quite shady. She was quite on top of asking for the money biut never quite on top of posting on her website that the fundas had been raised, even when repeatedly being called and emailed by multiply people to update the website so that attention could be diverted by the group for sipping the horse that had been 'bailed.
And if you feel that being a horse dealer under the guise of being a rescue is ok then that is fine. But the fact is that she was a dealer and worked closely with a kill buyer. Again, no problem with that but the horses people were buying from her were not preventing the slaughter horses from filling up the truck so to ‘sell’ horses under the guise that they were actually being rescued was a sham.
I guess you could then work around to convincing yourself that the end justifies the means and a little dishonesty would still be ok because it brought attention to some horses and found them homes.
Or hey, she is a busy woman so we can understand how she could be so quick to get those requests up on her website to raise funds but oh-so-very slow to update the site.
Or how difficult it must be to actually run a quarantine facility as claimed - you know, where a herd is closed for a specified period of time with no new auction horses added during this period. but eh, I guess it is not that fraudulent to tell people you are able to quarantine, take their board money for the quarantine period, and then send of potentially sick horses to their new, unsuspecting owners. Becasue even though she is a little ‘shady’ with the truth, in the end a few more horses get ‘saved’, right? The ends justify the means?
And I guess it is totally ok that she sold sick and elderly horses, you know, some of whom could not go on that truck to begin with due to their condition but eh, as long as someone thinks they are saving them from an awful last ride - even if it is not really true - at least the horse got a good home with an unsuspecting owner so the ends justify the means.
I mean, those new owners know that they should not really have any expectation for what they are getting when they purchase auction horses, sight unseen, right? So, if they aren’t happy with the horse, or the few thousand in vet and resultant euthanasia and disposal costs then that is their problem because it is a lot to expect the ‘rescue’ organization to provide an honest and somewhat accurate set of eyes.
I mean geesh, this rescue allegedly had only thousands upon thousands of horses come through their hands but I guess that is not nearly enough experience for them to be able to pretty quickly size up what they have and any glaring health or soundness issues. I mean, after all, they are not vets…
( sarcasm).
So, yeah, I suppose they could have done something good if you ignore all the rest and thankfully they were also probably able to make a pretty decent and probably tax free living. But why should they have to fairly represent what they are selling and have to pay taxes on it like the rest of us? That just wouldn’t be right for a horse rescue doing such good work. :rolleyes:
I’ve been saying here for years that fake rescues can be prosecuted under the mail and wire fraud statutes. Angela Freda, I know you are one of the ones who understands this. Kudos to the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for leading the way, and I can only hope other jurisdictions will have the guts to conduct similar investigations/prosecutions of other fake rescues. I don’t want to say much more because I don’t want to assume or jinx this.
What a good start to my day!