Originally posted by harryjohnson:
If the USEF were to bend to what may be a majority of members who did not want him reinstated, I would bet that a civil suit would be in the making on his behalf.
Bring it on !
Again, if this were to get out into the mainstream media, that our NGB reinstated a horse killer, our industry is finito, done, no mas, nada, niente. And the USEF would be cooked, or toast, pick your favorite.
WA, you really deserve credit here - you have taken alot of shots and never stooped to the level of anyone against your position.
You are all in biiiiiiiiiig trouble when Erin gets back.
That is a tough one Silk, one has to remember C.Boylen is a part of that group, and respect her feelings as such. I disagree wholeheartedly with the train of thought that goes with it, but she, of course, is entitled to her view.
Duffy- I was simply responding to the statements made by some who think that PV has hired a professional PR staff.
I think anthem35 this says it all! we do not have the same definitions nor criteria.
Actually, Snowbird, it is NOT bending the rules.
Acres Wild Farm is operating fully within the laws as defined by the USEF.
IS IT? Not when it proprietor offers horses to competitors. It says horses owned by a suspended person cannot be shown. Using a proxy is as deviant from the rules and killing a horse to make it look like an accident. There has been no change in attitude.
Paul is NOT participating in any USEF event.
He is participating by proxy; honorable people could not conceive of such an infraction. When the Rules in place were written but they were amended and then he found anothr short cut and now the Rules say that the person riding or exhibitng for the benefit or credit of a suspended person is violating the rules. Please read page GR67 in the current Rule Book and then trace those rules down to the dates they became active. Would an honorable man let someone use his horse knowing they might be set down and their win voided because of the use of that horse?
He can and does continue to train students who choose to train with him on private property.
Yep! he does and he hires and pays someone to be his proxy. So that those ribbons and wins are all to his credit and benefit.
As far as judging the Equitation class, which year are you referring to?
Again he withdrew when us “little people” to quote Mason Phelps made a loud howl. He should have been man enough and honorable enough to have reminded them he was suspended and would be a distract to the merit of the class. That, might have been a way to apologize. But, once again and recently he withdrew and he was sorry after he got caught.
Pwynn, you’re right money seems to triumph but being the perpetual idealist and dreamer I seek a day when a sport is so governed that the talent comes first. I had thought we outgrew as a society the need for patronage with the Middle Ages.
I will die believing that if the “People” make themselves heard and stop assuming it has to be this way that it can all change. I know I’m right because that’s why this governance will not give us a vote for our money. They want to spend our money without our approval and that is against the law in a public non-profit corporation and if there are enough of us we can make it happen.
As Iremember you did already once when you were still a young idealist just as I am an old idealist.
Hmmm, isn’t this a public forum? Not being snarky mind you. He could come here and post away.
Anthem the very fact that the these children are showing under the tutelage of Mr. Valliere is indeed in violation of The Sportsman’s Charter outlined on the USEF website. Please, do not insult our intelligence, or lack thereof, by attempting to portray Mr. Valliere as a humane being. Unfortunately, he is not. I normally do not wish to take such a firm stand, but I am sorry, you kill a horse, you have a dead horse - you do not have citizen of the year.[
How do any of you think you are doing justice by being so wrong about so many thngs. For those of us who want to help your cause you are pushing us away by your rude remarks back and forth. knock it off and lets move forward.
Now more facts
1.Paul valliere does not own a horse business and has not owned one since 1994 So he has not employed anyone.
After speaking with the USEF Yesterday Paul Vallere is heldto the standard that was in place at the time. Look at your rule books at the time. Anyone of you have a rule book back then? The critia is different. Once someone is gone through the hearing process it can not be changed after the fact.
molly williamson all you have to do is look at wef and see a child molesters so your comment about we don’t let them next to our chidren isn’t too bright
Many of the names on your Petition are dulicated & don’thave the usef# next to them they won’t be considered.There is only a small number of people who have done this and as far as the usef is concerned unless there is a # by the name it gets taken out. they will not do our homework to check who is a member and who is not.if you are not a member it does not count with them
This sounds like you are after one person and given the fact his 10 year suspension was up in august of 2004 andhe has not tried to come back you are going after him & even though we have freedom of speech there is a liable problem here that you are walking right into because he has’nt tried to apply.
6.When you ask people to log on and sign a petition it says valliere. i think i would change that if i were you and have it be for everyone. But the bigger problem with the petition against valliere, The items you are acusing him of don’t pertain to the critera given to him by the Usef Why didn’t someone help yu out before you started this. You are destroying your own goal
How many of you are wiling to put your name on some thing and end up in court?
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
And Anthem, you know I applaud the fact that you HAVE been civil throughout all of our discussions, despite the fact that we are completely on opposite sides of the fence. I must say that is refreshing, considering the posts we have seen.
Ditto. Anthem, you at least, seem able to express yourself in a manner that might help PV, rather than hurt him.
FWIW, I think that if the same effort were put into ads saying he’s sorry – if indeed he is – that was put into publicizing his recent good works, and they appeared in the same publications, it would be a good start to his mea culpa. 
I truly believe in redemption. I am Pollyanna-ish enough to think that even condemned murderers can be truly remorseful and that most people who have served their time deserve a second chance (I say most, because, frankly, I think child molesters deserve their own small island hell).
But it all has to start with the person truly being sorry, owning up to their mistakes and wanting to make amends. Until that happens, everything else is moot.
Chanda, you are an intelligent person. You know that PV is bending the rules to suit his own personal objectives and business. All of us know what he does is within the letter of the ruling, and not the spirit, indeed his own clients allude to that, how can one be trained by said individual and be showing with yet another trainer’s name and signature on your entry blank, I realize you are friends with him, but please, what he is doing is just wrong.
Originally posted by xegeba:
Now I get it…the bad money planners have the E-ticket… How many horses get whacked annually?
Yeah the bad planners, the ones who did not expect that accident that left them disabled, or who had a spouse or family member become ill and rack up zillions in med bills, or those idiots that were downsized out of a job, those whose crystal ball was at the shop when they found out they have unexpected, unavoidable expenses that force them to choose between the kids and the horse.
Your arguments allow no room for this, which is of course unrealistic- Reality is where most of us reside. However I am sure there are far fewer horses whacked annually because of your eloquence on this BB. Great way to help your cause.
At this point, I think nothing short of the PR peeps who got the British to accept Camilla Parker Bowles would work.
quote:
I would like to add that someone named on the “horse welfare” committee of USHJA should have a very difficult time backing someone who was found guilty of killing a horse with the intent of collecting an insurance premium.
Why? I have made no statements on behalf of the horse welfare committee on this issue.
As a member of that committee, an opinion weighs heavily with general membership.
Xegeba, There is no way that there is a resolution to this topic. It is a discussion. A number of reinstatement supporters have commented that there is no point saying anything to this group because they don’t listen. In a discussion, both sides often feel that way, but in the end, there will always be a difference of opinion. Posters like JrJ who choose to post in and unpleasant and condescending way, do not help anyone’s cause. At some point, we will all just have to agree to disagree.
Personally I like the flasher in the subway one. 
Originally posted by Snowbird:
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.
You see you really can’t have it both ways. You can’t say no one who isn’t rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.
And, if they lose their non-profit status they can’t be an NGB so we’re all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the “Go to Jail” card.
I think with the move to KY, the USEF changed their state of incorp…but that is not the issue…their charitable status is not in any jeopardy in the Real World…
Originally posted by BaliBandido:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-title”>quote:</div><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-content”>Originally posted by Uberraschung:
Secondly, lots of things are more jeopardizing to the safety of horses than one man who had a horse of his own killed (not one of his client’s, renn…he owned Roseau Platiere) - let’s say bad fencing for one. I find that a lot more dangerous!
Just so I understand what you have said here- you find fencing more dangerous than a professional horsetrainer who due to his desire to save his own overinflated ego and satisfy his own personal greed opted to have a horse killed, entered into a business arrangement with a man who killed horses for people in ways that were hard to detect, knowingly submitted a fraudulent claim to the insurance company and wore a wire to lessen his legal punishment? 
I agree there are probably more horses who die or are injured from fences, however those we call accidents (even if due to someones ignorence) not premeditated planning to kill a healty, useful, animal and defraud the company who insured it. So if you are just going with the numbers I guess you have a point, however to me that is like saying more people are killed by automobiles than by serial killers so we should work on auto safety (I agree) and when a serial killer is at large we should not be to concerned because that one man is not nearly as jeopardizing to the safety of people as the Volvo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Huh? Of course bad fencing is more dangerous than PV, whatever way you look at it. Maybe not as sexy a cause to get worked up about, though.
People worry about things they think they don’t control – airplanes more than cars, marauding serial horse killers more than fencing – regardless of statistics. I think it’s a good point that PV didn’t kill other people’s horses, without their consent, so I find Renn/aissance’s post (however well-written) completely off base. And the outrage about anyone who would dare disagree with the No Reinstatement Party Line is really doing the cause no favors, IMO. Sanctimony and personal attacks aren’t very attractive. 
Anthem and others have stated repeatedly that if we knew all the facts, we would understand/forgive. I have asked at least three times on this thread to please share those facts so maybe we would understand and this thread would die. I haven’t received a single response.
There’s finally going to be a show (series) on a major network on the sport, which will be an introduction to the h/j world to a good percentage of its viewers. It’s not bad enough that we’re hoping the show will focus more on the sport itself, the love of horses, without making it appear to be too much of an elitist sport, but you want to go and bring more negativity to it?
Agreed, Jane. There IS such a thing as bad publicity.
A major network is promoting our sport. A family-friendly network.
The WEF public relations department has spent YEARS getting the local papers to provide any coverage. The Post has been fabulous for the last couple of seasons, showcasing the athleticism of the sport and its family-friendly appeal.
Why, in light of the recent progress made in those areas, is it necessary to drag 10-year-old dirty laundry out into the public view?
Do you honestly think that people with little knowledge of the sport want to see people on the inside bringing controversy forward? It doesn’t create the impression that the community is concerned with its image. It creates the impression that the community is inherently controversial.
It certainly doesn’t promote the sport as a good environment for people’s children.
I really think, whatever your feelings on this issue, that everyone needs to take a step back and look at this type of publicity from the view of the general public. I don’t think it’s doing our sport and industry any favors.
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
