I’m really cross that the teacher shown punching her horse …..

What is considered cruelty then if not this??

Glorianny

The jury saw all the evidence and judged her not guilty.This process of trying people based on short video clips is not legal or balanced.

Absolutely. Trial by social media, where one short clip is shown of an incident, is becoming increasingly acceptable in this country. I find it abhorrent and actually very scary. Non of them condemming on here know the full story, they only see a short clip of what happened.

We all can clearly see her punching and kicking a horse in the film. Social media is not wrong in this case.

One short clip?Enough to see him kick the poor horse hard and slap it repeatedly. Disgraceful. I can't believe the verdict.

How on earth was she cleared of cruelty to that poor horse. It’s clear to see on the video.
Horrible woman!

I dont kow much about horses. So had presumed I had got things wrong.
But a vet at the trial said she had used inappropriate force.

The lady still seems to be considering herself innocent.
I think now the jury had delared her innocent, I dont thing she realises that makes everything worse for her and not better.

Freya5 what "full story" could possibly condone the fact that, however short the clip was, she was seen kicking and slapping that poor horse? She said she was 'training' the animal, I hope she doesn't train her children that way too

The video was all the evidence needed. Vile woman. Clearly the judge isn’t unbiased and should be sacked. Wonder if he’s part of her hunting fraternity. Probably took umbrage at the Sabs calling her out.

Horrible woman, I wish the horse had kicked her back!

I saw the video, like everyone posting here I found it distressing. I rode until RA stopped me. My daughters rode, granddaughter a recent 5 year old starter.
I read her defence was the horse had moved off down the road. She chastised it stop it doing this again. The most obvious concern to me (apart from kicking the animal and slapping it repeatedly round the face) was the chastisement took place after the incident. The horse had no idea why it was being hit , kicked and frightened.
Anyone working with horses/dogs knows any aversive or praise needs instant delivery, or it’s meaningless

What convinced the jury she was innocent?

Poppyred

What is considered cruelty then if not this??

Absolutely!

What was the jury thinking?

It really is dreadful, isn't it. I don't see any mention of the fact she'd left her child in charge of the horse while she loaded her own horse - on a road - and her excuse was that the horse could have caused an accident by getting away from the child and going off to explore a bit of grass ...

She was at fault for leaving an animal in charge of a child, on a road.
She was at fault for hitting and kicking the animal.

Notice too the lack of surprise or anxiety from the child while the parent does this - from which I believe this has happened before but it's not been captured on film.

Horrid woman, glad she lost her job.

The jury did not agree with the opinions of people who had seen short video clips on the media. She was not guilty. The jury saw all the evidence. Trial by newspaper and the media must stop.

Ridiculous verdict. I assume she had the best lawyers. She punched and kicked the horse. Vile woman.

Grantanow

The jury did not agree with the opinions of people who had seen short video clips on the media. She was not guilty. The jury saw all the evidence. Trial by newspaper and the media must stop.

The clip I saw was enough. The horse did absolutely nothing wrong, it just got loose and wandered off to find some grass. That is not a horsey sin, it's natural horse behaviour.

What led up to the filmed clip is immaterial. That wasn't by any stretch of the imagination, 'training', it was quite unnecessary punishment. Punishment that the horse would have no idea of why it was inflicted, and of a nature that no horse person I know (and we have horses, too, so I know a fair number) would ever dream of inflicting.

Glorianny

The jury saw all the evidence and judged her not guilty.This process of trying people based on short video clips is not legal or balanced.

I agree. No one can second guess a jury; they don't have all the relevant information.

Anyone making death threats should find themselves in front of a jury.

Freya5

Glorianny

The jury saw all the evidence and judged her not guilty.This process of trying people based on short video clips is not legal or balanced.

Absolutely. Trial by social media, where one short clip is shown of an incident, is becoming increasingly acceptable in this country. I find it abhorrent and actually very scary. Non of them condemming on here know the full story, they only see a short clip of what happened.

The people on here who have long experience with horses know that you should never, ever do what she did to that horse.

I'm sure that, this having got to trial, experts, possibly those more expert than people on here, were duly called.

I am hoping that she has learned enough now to modify her behaviour, and keep her temper in check.

DaisyAnneReturns

I'm sure that, this having got to trial, experts, possibly those more expert than people on here, were duly called.

And what 'experts' would they be, DAR?.

How do you think they might differ in their judgement from the posters on this thread who have long experience with horses? You have no idea at all about the level of expertise that exists on this thread.

But, leaving aside 'expertise'. What if the recipient of that abuse had been a child, another adult, a dog, or any other sentient being? What level of abuse are you willing to find acceptable?

Im not defending her actions. If aversive treatment is used when handling a horse or dog, it has to be instant for the animal to have any understanding that its action led to a negative consequence. Im not advocating aversive methods, the research tends to confirm positive training methods are more effective and build a stronger bond between animal-human.

Juries - I’ve known rape or child abuse trials where a NG finding was reached for reasons known only in the jury room. Whatever, her personal reputation is damaged

Far too much animal cruelty allowed. I have heard “it’s only a dog/cat/pig…..” many times as an excuse over the years. This verdict is a backward step. She is guilty of animal cruelty as was evidenced on the video. Nasty tempered woman; probably hadn’t seen enough foxes ripped to bits that day.

An expert witness is a person whose opinion, by education, training, certification, skills or experience, is accepted by the judge as an expert. In this case, the expert was a vet.

'Expertise' (your quotes) is not "being questioned"; being the expert witness exposed to the evidence in this trial is. As far as I 'm aware no GN poster acted as such a witness. Therefore, they don't know the evidence presented to the jury, which may or may not have included the piece of film - their only evidence.

You are ready to stick to facts when facts are in favour of your argument Maisie, but very thin-skinned when they are not. Your loaded comment, "What level of abuse are you willing to find acceptable?" is an underhand attack. I am never prepared to accept abuse.

Thanking the jury for their service, Recorder Graham Huston said: 'Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. I know it was not an easy case, no case is easy, but some cases are more difficult than others.

'What is obvious is you gave this case the utmost attention and you proceeded with your deliberations carefully and thoroughly and I am very grateful to you.'

You are ready to stick to facts when facts are in favour of your argument Maisie, but very thin-skinned when they are not. Your loaded comment, "What level of abuse are you willing to find acceptable?" is an underhand attack. I am never prepared to accept abuse

Except in this particular case, of course...

A jury decided that was not abuse. I don't like what we can see in the video but I don't feel I have the evidence the jury did.

All you are offering is newspaper articles you would just as easily pour scorn on if it suited you - and very nasty personal accusations against my proberty.