Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2016 17:49:12 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 17:51:19 GMT
The huntsman was found Not Guilty. The just were shown the video, I can only assume that they were supporters of hunting
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 18:31:17 GMT
The huntsman was found Not Guilty. The just were shown the video, I can only assume that they were supporters of hunting Rot! It was proved absolutely that the woman, dressed in camouflage clothes stepped into the path of the horse. Prior to that the rider had a clear path through the gate and could not have predicted that she would do that. The video was analysed frame by frame in court and the jury only took an hour to reach a unanimous verdict.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 20:11:11 GMT
The huntsman was found Not Guilty. The just were shown the video, I can only assume that they were supporters of hunting Rot! It was proved absolutely that the woman, dressed in camouflage clothes stepped into the path of the horse. Prior to that the rider had a clear path through the gate and could not have predicted that she would do that. The video was analysed frame by frame in court and the jury only took an hour to reach a unanimous verdict. From the link "The court was told the huntsman does not look back or stop. He said he thought it was a glancing blow and didn't realise she was hurt"
So he admitted that he hit the girl, but he didn't stop or return to see if she was hurt I expect he was in too much of a rush in his pursuit of his barbarous pastime
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 9:20:49 GMT
Rot! It was proved absolutely that the woman, dressed in camouflage clothes stepped into the path of the horse. Prior to that the rider had a clear path through the gate and could not have predicted that she would do that. The video was analysed frame by frame in court and the jury only took an hour to reach a unanimous verdict. From the link "The court was told the huntsman does not look back or stop. He said he thought it was a glancing blow and didn't realise she was hurt"
So he admitted that he hit the girl, but he didn't stop or return to see if she was hurt I expect he was in too much of a rush in his pursuit of his barbarous pastime
That is a different and separate issue from your spurious claim that the jury were biased. He did not stop because he claimed he thought he had only struck the woman a glancing blow, and given the venom being expressed by the hunt protesters at the time I have no doubt he also feared for his own safety. Whether you approve of hunting or not, or are ambiguous to it it is not very clever to alter the facts to make your point. As far as I am aware the hunt were working within the rules and regulations and were not chasing live quarry. The majority of people who are anti hunting disapprove of it for some kind of 'class' argument.
|
|
|
Post by marispiper on Sept 22, 2016 12:27:39 GMT
Stupid woman. She knew what she was doing...no wonder she received broken ribs. In fact, the rider AND the horse could've also been seriously injured - and we know what happens when a horse breaks a leg... No sympathy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 14:17:18 GMT
Stupid woman. She knew what she was doing...no wonder she received broken ribs. In fact, the rider AND the horse could've also been seriously injured - and we know what happens when a horse breaks a leg... No sympathy. I agree marispiper. I have seen hunt protesters/saboteurs, whatever you want to call them. I have seen them deliberately trying to spook horses and they disgust me. I saw one blow an air horn in the face of a pony and the rider, a girl of about 12 was thrown into the lane. Thankfully neither she nor her pony were badly hurt, but she was very shocked and tearful. And the reaction of the protesters? Loud cheering. The people hunting are not doing anything illegal yet the protesters are determined to stop them simply enjoying themselves. It can only be because the people out following hounds are doing something they neither understand or have any intention of understanding. I have often wondered how many of the vociferous anti hunting gang - the ones that in the words of Gus are participating in a 'barbaric pastime' have ever even seen a fox.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 15:06:23 GMT
Stupid woman. She knew what she was doing...no wonder she received broken ribs. In fact, the rider AND the horse could've also been seriously injured - and we know what happens when a horse breaks a leg... No sympathy. Have you seen the video, I cannot believe= your comment
IMO This man deliberately runs the woman down. Looking at his as he left court he seems to me to be the usual arrogant hunt supporter
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 15:08:10 GMT
From the link "The court was told the huntsman does not look back or stop. He said he thought it was a glancing blow and didn't realise she was hurt"
So he admitted that he hit the girl, but he didn't stop or return to see if she was hurt I expect he was in too much of a rush in his pursuit of his barbarous pastime
That is a different and separate issue from your spurious claim that the jury were biased. He did not stop because he claimed he thought he had only struck the woman a glancing blow, and given the venom being expressed by the hunt protesters at the time I have no doubt he also feared for his own safety. Whether you approve of hunting or not, or are ambiguous to it it is not very clever to alter the facts to make your point. As far as I am aware the hunt were working within the rules and regulations and were not chasing live quarry. The majority of people who are anti hunting disapprove of it for some kind of 'class' argument. Nothing to do with "class" However I will leave you to don your "Pink" jacket. Tally Ho
|
|
|
Post by marispiper on Sept 22, 2016 15:24:48 GMT
Well the rider did not deliberately ride his horse into the woman, that's for sure. Also, this clip is edited which does not help - presumably the jury saw the whole thing. And a jury comprising entirely hunt supporters?? Come on...
She should not have been there, protest or not. You would't protest about a motorway by standing in the middle of one!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 16:14:57 GMT
Well the rider did not deliberately ride his horse into the woman, that's for sure. Also, this clip is edited which does not help - presumably the jury saw the whole thing. And a jury comprising entirely hunt supporters?? Come on... She should not have been there, protest or not. You would't protest about a motorway by standing in the middle of one! As I said previously Marispiper the jury did indeed see the whole video, and analysed it frame by frame. There is absolutely no doubt that the woman stepped into the path of the horse when it was almost on top of her. So she knew and knows bugger all about horses. You don't get the best part of 3/4 of a ton of muscle to react that fast. And to claim the jury was biased in some way is bordering on contempt of court.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 17:29:03 GMT
Well the rider did not deliberately ride his horse into the woman, that's for sure. Also, this clip is edited which does not help - presumably the jury saw the whole thing. And a jury comprising entirely hunt supporters?? Come on... She should not have been there, protest or not. You would't protest about a motorway by standing in the middle of one! Looked to me to be deliberate, depends on your interpretation of it I suppose. I see it like a car driver heading somewhere just knocking down whoever is in their way but hopefully that car driver would stop and see if anyone was hurt. Unless it was a hit and run, like this arrogant so and so I view foxhunting in the same way I view bull fighting in Spain, cock and dog fighting in the past, badger baiting, and the royal family breeding birds to then shoot whilst expressing concern about wildlife Barbaric
|
|
|
Post by 2norty on Sept 25, 2016 11:41:18 GMT
When you're galloping along on a horse, you can obviously turn it away from danger but only if you have time. It's difficult to say whether this woman stepped into the horses path deliberately or not. She doesn't flinch when the horn goes and looks like she steps back thinking the horse is going in front of her, which is the direction the other person went before moving forward again. The woman who was hit didn't move forward again. Now was that because she had slower reactions tha n the other person standing there, or because she thought the horse was going in front of her, or because she didn't see it coming until the rider was upon her?
The rider however galloped his horse through a smallish gap that was made smaller by at least 4 people and a land rover. He could have slowed his horse down and trotted through the gap minding the safety of him, his horse and the protesters.
I think they're all to blame and the horse is bloody lucky not to have been injured.
I thought I was signed in when I wrote this and cba to write it all out again Norty2
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2016 9:39:54 GMT
[/p] Barbaric
[/quote] Do you eat meat Gus?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2016 12:22:38 GMT
[/p] Barbaric
[/quote] Do you eat meat Gus? [/quote][/p]
Yes, do foxhunters eat the foxes they have killed?
|
|