Settlements are also motivated by avoiding trial and in doing so keeping details out of public record.
I originally read about this whole situation here a while back, but in the past week or so I have seen posts all over random FB groups so I do think that it has picked back up again.
And I would imagine the jury being hard pressed to side with Ms. Eckel.
I wouldnât get near his face but i would cut the rope he was tied with.
None of these despicable people ever want to take responsibility for the horrible things they do. I hope this action taken by Eckel only helps more people become aware of what she did to Cobain. So many people today have absolutely no moral compass and she is obviously one of them.
You are not watching enough true crime shows. Homicide comes in degrees, and so would killing a horse. Negligent homicide is when the killer is criminally negligent, and this could well be the case in this situation.
when itâs an animal itâs not a homicide.
it can be neglect, cruelty, abuse or all of the above but not homicide and not murder.
I was responding to someone who said it could not be âkillingâ. It certainly could be killing.
I was making what is called an ANALOGY. Of course, it canât be homocide. Homo means human.
^This? I think you misread.
your post did not come across that way, especially the last part. Again, not murder. also not negligent anything. it can be cruelty, abuseTor neglect. To my knowledge there is no "negligent " anything in any animal laws, other than neglect in care, such as not feeding, sheltering etc but not negligent in the way itâs used in crimes against humans.
I donât quite understand this strategy because I think it brings back into question the truth of the defamatory statements sheâs alleging were madeâŠsince sheâs bringing the complaint, it would be her burden to prove the statements are false. I donât know that Iâd want to go down that rabbit hole if I were her.
However Iâm a real estate attorney and not barred in SC so this is all speculation.
Depends on the jurisdiction. We donât have 1st / 2nd degree murder in QLD, Australia. Just âmurderâ (with intent, reckless indifference, or in order to facilitate flight from a crime committed), âattempted murderâ (intent but the victim survived) and âmanslaughterâ (without intent, or if a partial defense against murder can be proven). Well, there are a few others; however if
In Greek, homo means âlikeâ or âthe sameâ. Homogenous, homosexual, homozygous.
In Latin, homo means âhumanâ. Homo sapien means âwise humanâ. (thatâs just a fun fact because I think itâs nifty)
From a trainer that seems to be, or has at one point been, close to the accused, and made a post that tried to tamp down some of the more grotesque pitchforking (a la âgo kill yourselfâ), which of course devolved and was deleted, there were NDAs signed as part of the agreement. If this is the case, then bystanders on the internet donât know what they donât know and very well could be setting themselves up for a defamation suit.
Everything about this situation is just the worst of everything rolled up into one tragedy. We have, at the very least, a lethal case of serious and possibly intended neglect, and then we have people running all over the internet screaming MURDERER and I HOPE YOU DIE, as if that is anything other than rage bait. As if it serves any purpose other than to stroke your own endorphins, and to signal your own virtue. Is that as vile as putting an innocent animal into a situation in which it could very easily maim or kill itself? No, of course not. But letâs not act like itâs a shining example of human behavior either.
This ancient Greek minor thanks you
This was my thought too. I bet this does deter at least some from posting or commenting publicly on the topic because they donât want to get sued. Of course, now Iâm seeing so many posts about the lawsuit itself soâŠ
My point is this. . if she is attempting to make a case that people saying she âkilledâ her horse are libeling her because animal laws do not recognize âkillingâ, that is a weak case. If someone is so negligent that a horse died, common usage of the word âkilledâ is not libel IMO.
Animal laws do recognize killed. They do not recognize murder.
I bed with straw and have had a succession of piggies in horse clothing over the years, and no one ever ate the straw. Currently I have two Haffies, one of which will eat ANYTHING, and she doesnât eat straw. I call BS on that and pretty much everything she said in her defense.
Oh, I know two that would eat straw. Neither of which were actually starving though they both would have told you otherwise (and then asked you to ignore the obvious fat rolls).
So, as much as I hate this âtrainerâ for what she did to this horse (and likely others), I believe that part is possible.
What I do not believe is her response to one horse that was willing to eat the straw was to tie it up all day instead of changing its bedding, giving it some hay, turning it out, or any other of the very many options one would have for a horse that is willing to eat its bedding.