They may be, HunterJumperLuv, but no one is debating whether BW’s wife should be reinstated.
This thread needs to keep to FACTS. I don’t think scathing personal judgments are really going to get anyone anywhere. So keep it factual, not personal.
And, well you should be! Civil right to freedom of speach is as defined by Erin and the ruless of the BB. This is not public property we are the guests of the Chroncicle.
Excuse me, but I was alluding to the fact that C.Boylen is far more esteemed than I. With that said, I fear that my concern with horse welfare goes deeper than hers. Also, Jane, I do not “play alters”. I was ambivalent towards this issue in the beginning, now I am NOT ambivalent. I have a very difficult time reconciling this issue, however, there is, in my opinion, only one “right”.
Originally posted by TWF:
Okay young ones (Sara and Varsity)Take the advise given …read the thread…I know you will not be persuaded to any other opinion…but may find the topic has been exhausted…
In April 2003 the USEF applied to the US Olympic Committee and pledged to align their rules to conform to the USOC…Everyone in the USEF is now an affiliate of the USOC. The rules AS they are…the rules apply to everyone equally.
Sorry I don’t anyone is listening to yeah…but…
another thing. you don’t know my age, and if you did, age has nothing to do with mental capacity. mental capacity has to do with IQ. mine happens to be 165.
War Admiral, I did not mean to minimize your efforts, I just feel that in this case it is a bigger battle than can be won by the grassroots members. This man has had a few years head start on his public relations efforts, and a good deal of money behind him.
He bills his clients quite regularly for the service,
Are you saying that he should provide the service and facility for free?
Originally posted by Coreene:
Dude, I was never dealing with you in the first place. I made a comment re how I thought that snorting coke was not at the same criminal level as killing horses, and you decided to make a bunch of assumptions about me. Which were all wrong.
Babe, it is Big Dawg to you, not Dude…WOOF
Originally posted by grey mare:
The reason why PV and other convicted horse felons should not be reinstated has little to do with the willingness to forgive or not forgive these people.
It has everything to do with what is BEST for the horse industry.
We owe it to future generations of horse enthusiasts.
I bet Tanya Harding is sorry too.
Yes, this is exactly what I’ve been trying to say–thank you.
Originally posted by War Admiral:
Ãœberraschung, I await with a fascination I may truly describe as “boundless” your explanation as to how anyone’s marital status/number of offspring are relevant to the instant discussion.
Nobody said anything about marital status nor number of offspring. Uber said you dont have a kid that shows. Is that inaccurate?
Moi aussi.
That was one of my points early on Hucklebug, that Barney was banned for life for sneaking in to watch his son, and yet PV taunts the ruling, and will most likely get reinstated.
Originally posted by harryjohnson:
I would believe, that because he is at the ring “on schooling day” it is considered not being on the grounds of the horse show, because the horse show states it runs from Wednesday to Sunday. Again, the walkie talkie incident(s), he is careful not to go on what is considered “official horse show grounds”, again, not in violation of the letter of his suspension, only the spirit of it. He disregard for the feelings of others is not part of the terms of his suspension, and you can rest assured he is not going to actually violate those terms in the next few months. Those against his suspension reinstatement need also consider this, he has had ten years to prepare himself for the moment, this grass roots effort has only a few months to organize against him, and not the very deep pockets of he and his supporters.
Talking by walkie talkie is not a violation in my mind…but…actual coaching would be.
If his client is telling how her round went but he isn’t “seeing” it by camera I don’t think this is a big deal. It would be normal to want to know how his client did and it would be unreasonable to expect them not to communicate after the round.
It would be wrong for him to be actually seeing and coaching her “like” he was actually present at ringside.
I don’t blame the guy for trying to make a living and doing the best he can to help his clients.
For example you can be certain the the Friesians owned by Martha Stewart are part of her corporation and they are covered as a business expense.
Snowy, I bet you are right. I know they do it with race horses all the time.
Racetb you raise an interesting question how long had they had the hoprse or better yet how long had they had the insurance premium?
My insurance agent will insure for 30 days on a phone call.
My question to each member of this board who has a strong opinion on this subject is : What would you rule if you were the sole judge and are charged with meting out justice after reviewing the past 10 years and PV’s behavior? Do you wipe out what he was told 10 years ago to encourage his charitable activities and rehabilitation and tell him it was all in vain and he will NEVER be reinstated or given an opportunity to rejoin the show horse community officially?
My question to each member of this board who has a strong opinion on this subject is : What would you rule if you were the sole judge and are charged with meting out justice after reviewing the past 10 years and PV’s behavior? Do you wipe out what he was told 10 years ago to encourage his charitable activities and rehabilitation and tell him it was all in vain and he will NEVER be reinstated or given an opportunity to rejoin the show horse community officially?
Every day I deal with criminals who do really vicious things to other human beings and it is just another day at the office. Battery, Aggravated Assault, Rape and even Murder. Most of these criminals are sentenced, many times to probation for a first offense and they re-enter society none the worse for wear for the most part. We are USED to man’s inhumanity to man and that is almost “accepted”…however, man’s inhumanity to a horse to a horseperson sends us over the edge into a state of complete unforgiveness.
Well, if you were the CEO of a corporation and a candidate came to you for a job, recommended to you by the wife of a member of the Board of Trustees, because he had done excellent work for a charitable organization she ran, and he was personable, likeable, knowledgeable, everything you could want in a Chief Financial Officer, with just the one little snag that twenty years ago he embezzled a lot of money from a company he worked for, would you hire him?
Sorry about the elaborate metaphor, but I was trying to find a transgression with less emotional content. It’s a common sense issue. You don’t give an official position to someone who had violated the fundamental tenets of your business.
PV is still making a living in the horse world, still brokering sales and training behind the scenes. Its not that he’s stigmatized even to the extent that I would have expected. He is not living in a trailer, unable to get a job. He does not need reinstatement to survive.
Just looking at my most recent COTH (dated 1/20) - in the “Look Back” section, there’s a blurb, “Florida Investigators Break Up Nationwide Insurance Scam…2/15/1991” (It’s on pages 80-81)
Hiddenlake–no problems! I TOTALLY get where you are all coming from. When the insurance fraud hit the media, and I watched an exposee about it, I was so angry, I just couldn’t do anything for an hour after the show.
I could not believe what people would do for money, and the horrific stories of what those people did to the horses just…I cringed.
I was just wondering if saying no to reinstatment would hit them in their pocketbook, or if there was another way all these intetions could really stop them, but Seven really explained it very well, and I TOTALLY respect that.
As I said, I am the eternal optimist. I like to BELIEVE that people can change, and would change. That they have seen a new light and become advocates against animal abuse/insurance fraud. Of course, I can still believe that people can change, right?
hiddenlake, thanks about the info for sinus infections. This was my very first, and so far, I’m ok. I can’t imagine having sinus infections SO bad you need root canal!! Yikes!
And I’m not going to allow any threats of bodily harm – even in jest – to remain on the thread. It’s out of line and not conducive to a productive discussion.
Absolutely right, and thank you Erin for catching this. If you’re doing it, you need to stop. If you’re harrassing anyone on EITHER side, you need to stop.
And Anthem, please DO report any abusive mails you get to Erin. I can promise you they’re not coming from anybody involved in this campaign at administrative level. 
Chanda, you have the wherewithall to take these comments and these emotions people have back to the USEF and do something positive and constructive with it.
Why can’t you see that?
a) my member name is my name
b) in parallel with the BB - I accept as fact those statements made by reputable media outlets - thus, an anonomous poster stating that “you don’t know what really happened” or “all the BNTs and BNRs are for So-and-so” has little weight behind it
c) if said BNTs and BNRs support any particular individual then I would expect them to state such support in public - without said statement then where is the support?
d) if any of the convicted individuals had evidence that would have mitigated the severity of their sentences then surely they would have stated these facts in court
e) as many of the convicted individuals were/are BNTs - the idea the other BNTs support reinstatement is neither a surprise to me nor a compelling arguement in favor of reinstatement
f) as I understand it the (then) AHSA did not have rules in place to address permanent expulsion in response to such acts - thus the indefinate suspension with possibilty of reinstatement after x years
g) an ex-groom for a convicted individual told me of other atrocities - but since there was no conviction for those I cannot speak of them here
h) the reason for discussion specific to Paul on this the anti-reinstatement thread has more to do with friends/students of Paul coming on to defend him than with any animus toward him specifically over and above any and all those convicted - the intent of the thread is to make the public aware of the atrocities and to make the USEF aware of the sentiment against reinstatement
