The "NO REINSTATEMENT" thread.

I am aghast by one thing…IMHO he is NOT a good horseman!!!

A man who has children, pays the bills, clothes them, has them in his lap to watch TV and “LOVES” them…AND BEATS THEM AND THEIR MOTHER SENSELESS ON OCCASION…IS NOT A “GOOD FATHER”.!!! IMHO

Likewise…a man who feeds his horses, brushes them till they shine, shows them to the winners ring…and every so often KILLS one for the pure money of it…IN JUST SIMPLY NOT A “GOOD HORSEMEN”. !!! IMHO

No matter the pressure…a “GOOD HORSEMAN” is a good horseman every day of his life and would NEVER EVER stoop to that!!! “GOOD HORSEMANSHIP” is more than mucking the stall, “even when he was at the top”…IMHO!!!

psst…jetsmom… I enjoy having conversations with myself… and clearly you GOT me on the usage of the english language deal. you win.

I have an eleven year old and I don’t think he would be very forgiving if I told him the story. He is quite intellegent and very sensitive. He knows right from wrong and most of all what a mistake is vs a non mistake. I really can’t believe a ten year old child would be that forgiving and want to be around someone that had an animal killed. Was it fully explained how the horse was killed? Or was it explained in a not so graphic way?

OK, at risk of being set on fire, can I just suggest that maybe going forward we could just talk about reinstatement and not PV in particular. As I mentioned oh maybe 100 pages ago! I dont think there is much point in going around and around in circles about any one particular person’s morals and what they think or dont think or mean or dont mean, because everyone has their opinions and are NOT about to change them no matter what the other ‘side’ says.
So why not talk about bracelets, reinstatement or not, and leave suppositions and he said/she saids out of it? That way maybe we can move forward with the discussion instead of circling like a crazed disco ball.

Snowbird, back on page 22 I posted as did a few others about not signing the petition. In a nutshell, having ridden with PV years ago, I don’t wish to actively support him, yet feel uncomfortable with actively participating in his persectution.

I can certainly respect the sentiments of those who sign the petition, but IMO saying that trainers who don’t sign it are implying they plan to kill horses themselves for insurance money is way off base.

Ok! Vandy I can understand that but I don’t see calling it a persecution. I see a talented man, be he a politicial, a brilliant innovative thinker; a great musician or a physicist. No matter how great the ingenuity or the talent it does not warrant breaking our covenant with God to be the caretaker of the critters.

If we tolerate such from someone then we bring down the whole of civilization. It’s no different than tolerating children who kill their parents or parents who kill their children. There is a point in time when our gentleness is the cause our own defeat.

I could love someone, I could admire what they do well but I would find it hard to excuse them for such a petty mundane evil as killing an animal for money.I don’t think we should kill except to survive. Did PV need to kill for his survival?

Once we accept euthaniasia for money how far behind would a human be for the same reason? The Menendez boys killed their parents for their money. If you kill to save face, to build ego that is so shallow a reason I can’t accept it. I really believe we need to draw the line and just not approving is weak if that person is rewarded as he says for his crime with more business, better business. The why does he need to be a judge? Why does he need to be accepted?
Money was his master and he needs to suffer something because money is not our GOD!

Silver Bells – Exactly why was it a hard decision? Specifically how would the reinstatement of convicted animal killers to the USEF be of benefit or value to the equestrian community (not to mention horses themselves)? I am glad you signed, but I continue to not understand what is remotely confusing or equivocal about this decision. ???

Originally posted by horse_poor:

So just because it does not say they area USEF member does not mean they are not.[QUOTE]

So the USEF committee have to be psychics? or just assume everyone who signed is a member?

[QUOTE]I have said it before and will say it again”"I will be highly pissed if any of them get reinstated and I paid money to be lumped into an organization along side them.

Should I be pissed that I paid money to be lumped into the same organization as you and a few others? Geez, why don’t you guys start another petition and ask the USEF to split memberships into two catagories and keep all the crazies in one? I’ll sign that one!

Originally posted by harryjohnson:
War Admiral, unless you have someone on the committee willing to champion this for you, it is going to end up filed under waste in the mail room. Not that your intentions are not noble, and not that many are not in agreement, it is simply a case of the federation not being concerned with the opinion of the average member.

It’s interesting you should feel that way. To reiterate something I’ve said before, I have always had WONDERFUL responses from the USEF, whether it be on rules, on issues like this, or, earlier this year, a USEF rep spotting a question of mine in the Driving forum here and kindly sending me a personal e-mail.

You think they don’t listen, I know they do. Because they’ve demonstrated that to my satisfaction many a time.

Killing a horse for the sole reason of defrauding an insurance company goes way past a “mistake”.
He paid to get something killed. It’s dead. Then he lied so he could get money for it being dead.

How does that define the highest standard of horsemanship and why is it in the best interest of the animal?

He’s reformed???

What happens if he gets another horse for a client that disappoints?? Or finds himself short of cash??

Make no mistake, if he’d just have gone out and shot it, I wouldn’t be signing that petition.
But the hiring a hit man, financing the elaborate execution scheme then defrauding the insurance company???

Past what should be allowed to publically represent my sport.

Wow what did you say to make the thread Disappear? I have never seen one disappear before. PM me

no offense- i really am playing the devils advocate here- but lets say best case scenario you have a couple thousand people from COTH etc sign your no reinstatement petition- do you really think that this will have any negative impact at all when put up against the thousands of much more important signatures/support for reinstatement from trainers, riders OLYMPIANS etc? i just think that while a nice idea, if 100,000 BBers signed a petition and 100 succesful GP riders supported him, well he will be welcomed onto any showgrounds. And for the most part, all of todays showjumping “heroes” DO support him, and have remained friendly with him, and have bought horses for themselves/ clients from him, and admire the way he has stayed in this business and continued to teach younger riders how to in turn become successful in the GP ranks.

I am not saying don’t do this, because I believe you should always stand up for what you think is right, I am just saying Look who you are up against- it may be futile.

Originally posted by ponybreeder Aefvue Pig Farm:
Oh, and I should have added. My family believes in retirement. Earlier, I listed a group of retirees that I have now, I also had my show horses, Talisman, Academy Award, and 20th Century, Ltd (bought him back at the end of his career) until they died.

NIIIIIIICE

Originally posted by Erin:
anthem, the rules on this forum are clear, and I don’t care WHO is being talked about, it has to follow the rules.

PV pleaded guilty. The facts here are not in dispute. They’re well documented and therefore fair game for discussion. I don’t recall the thread you’re talking about (which is not surprising, if it was several years ago), but I kind of doubt the facts were as well documented in that instance.

Don’t make this about me and this forum because you’re not winning the argument on your own merit. This is certainly a legitimate issue that deserves discussion.

Erin, with all due respect, I have done nothing but play by the rules.
I have never been less than respectful or diplomatic, despite to personla attacks I have suffered.
Although I may be in the vast minority, I am entitled to speak my mind.

And as far as the embezzlement incident went, you personally e-mailed me to let me know you were withdrawing the thread at his request, despite the fact that you as well as the board had found it to be a rather intersting topic.

Sarabeck -
“Libel” (not liable) is when you falsely accuse someone of breaking a law or committing a crime.

If he isn’t running a business - what is his livelood now? You gals who defend what a wonderful person he is and the BEST Eq trainer out there. Is he giving lessons and clinics pro bono?

165 IQ - no way! Absolutely NO WAY.

Happy Mouth-WA is offline the rest of the day but maybe I can help you-no clue about theb racelets yet, but can help with the petition!

Originally posted by Erin:
Sheila H… contribute like an adult, or don’t contribute.

For the record, the only one who can state unequivocally that PV is in violation of any USEF rules is a USEF official. I don’t mind people citing the rule and questioning whether or not what he’s doing is kosher under the rules, but I DO mind people stating that yes, he is definitely breaking rules. Rules are subject to interpretation, and since no one here is a steward, I don’t think anyone can unequivocally state that they know for sure how the rules are interpreted.

I think its unlikely that not one person on this bored is a steward. How do you know I’m not one my own self?

yet another newspaper article

[URL=http://www.projo.com/sports/content/projo_20060201_01horse.12cecb79.html]

R.I. horse killer is eligible for reinstatement
Paul Valliere, who admitted paying a hit man in 1994 to electrocute a show horse for insurance money, could be reinstated to the United States Equestrian Federation, causing outrage among equestrians across the country.

01:00 AM EST on Wednesday, February 1, 2006
BY TOM MEADE
Journal Sports Writer

A group of equestrians has mounted an online campaign to block the reinstatement of former Rhode Island horse trainer Paul Valliere to the United States Equestrian Federation. He was one of 23 people convicted in the early 1990s for killing show horses for insurance money.

In 1994, Valliere, then the owner of Acres Wild Farm in North Smithfield, admitted he paid a hit man to electrocute a show horse so Valliere could collect $75,000 in insurance money. Valliere agreed to wear a recording device to collect evidence against associates who also were involved in killing horses. One

of his close friends, Rhode Island native Barney Ward, served jail time for his role in arranging some of the killings.

For his cooperation, Valliere was sentenced in 1996 to four years of probation and ordered to pay a $5,000 fine. Valliere also was indefinitely suspended from participating in horse shows sanctioned by the U.S. Equestrian Federation, then called the American Horse Show Association. The group agreed to periodically review the case. Valliere will qualify for a review this spring if he applies for reinstatement.

Though he may not attend horse shows, Valliere never left the training business. Today, he is coaching riders and training horses in Wellington, Fla., and Plainville, Mass.

Valliere did not return a call to his Florida phone yesterday.

With his eligibility approaching this spring, he is the target of indignation from the horse community on Web sites in the United States and Great Britain. More than 2,000 people have signed an online petition asking the equestrian federation to maintain Valliere’s suspension.

“The petition is intended to demonstrate to USEF, the [International Federation for Equestrian Sports] and the U.S. Olympic Committee that there are large numbers of equestrians who believe that reinstatement of any of the so-called horse killers is not in the best interest of equestrian sport, and is unbecoming to the national governing body, whose own charter these people directly violated,” says Liz Ireland.

A horse owner and trainer in Athens, Ga., she launched the petition on chronofhorse.com, an online service of The Chronicle of the Horse magazine.

When a federal grand jury in Chicago began indicting people involved in killing horses for illegal profit, the news appeared in publications and broadcasts all over the world. A story in Sports Illustrated and a subsequent television documentary focused on how one of the horse killers used a crowbar to shatter the leg of a horse owned by former U.S. Olympic rider Buddy Brown, once a trainer at Valliere’s former farm in Rhode Island. Brown’s ex-wife, Donna Brown, was convicted for hiring the hit man.

In 1994, Valliere admitted that he hired Tommy “The Sandman” Burns to electrocute his show horse, Roseau Platiere. Valliere wrote a check to pay Burns, who attached alligator clips to the horse’s nose and anus, and then plugged the wire into an outlet.

“We’re alarmed that more people are not aware of the killings and the potential for reinstatement [of Valliere and others who were suspended by the equestrian federation],” said Molly Williamson of White Bear Lake, Minn., another horse owner and rider working on the petition campaign.

“There is no place for forgiveness,” said Williamson. “It’s not like it was an accident. It was premeditated. I don’t think they’re sorry for what they did. I think they’re sorry that they got caught.”

Vikki Karcher Siegel, manager of Snowbird Acres Farm in Long Valley, N.J., and a member of the USEF’s competition management committee, agrees.

“It is not logical that the U.S. Equestrian Federation, which has as its mission the protection and welfare of horses, would not ban anyone from participation in this sport if they have benefited financially from the fraudulent death of a horse,” she said. “The horses involved in the insurance-fraud scandal could have been sold, even if at a loss, to people who would have loved them and cared for them. Instead, they died for people’s ego and greed.”

“I support Paul 100 percent,” Mason Phelps, Valliere’s longtime friend and former owner of Glen Farm in Portsmouth, said yesterday. “What he did is unfortunate, but unlike some of the others who did this, Paul has acknowledged what he did. He certainly has been remorseful, and he has made the appropriate apologies publicly. He has abided by the sentence put out by our equestrian federation. He’s paid his dues. I think it’s time for him to be allowed him to come back. People who have done murders and rapes do their sentence and are back on the streets.”

“True,” said Williamson, “but child molesters aren’t allowed to be around children. Why should horse killers be allowed to be around horses?”

tmeade@projo.com / (401) 277-7340

I spoke to an Ethel Walker alum today and asked her about it. She was appalled to say the least, but did say that the head person teaching there came from PV’s barn.

And some lovely horses you have on that website Fairview! Would love to see more pictures of Denali.

It doesn’t matter who owns horse C, as long as horse C is not suspended (if horse C were owned by suspended person A, then Horse C would be suspended and this wouldn’t apply).

If horse C is “in the care, training or custody of” person A when you show it, then you are in violation.

If you are riding/exhibiting Horse A “the benefit, credit, reputation or satisfaction of” person A, thren you are in violation.

If your “relationship, whether
financial or otherwise, with suspended person A would give the appearance that” you “are riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit, credit, reputation or
satisfaction of suspended person A”, then you are in violation.

So, no, I don’t think that “taking a few lessons” from person A, and then showing would necessarily put you in violation.

This rule is aimed more at the “assistant” or “alternate” trainer (person B) who is the one who shows up with horse C on the show grounds, while suspended person A is still collecting training fees for Horse C, and paying person B for being there.