 |
Re: [RC] [RC] [RC] FEI determination of abuse - Beth WalkerI believe she said she thought he was in the process of losing a boot or a shoe. While I would also stop in that kind of situation, someone on an event course would not. They would continue to ride, to see if the situation corrected itself.Yes -- she should have stopped, and it is very hard to watch after the fact, when you *know* what the outcome was, but I can give her the benefit of the doubt in that I don't think she intentionally rode the horse knowing it was lame. If your initial perception of a situation is incorrect, it takes more time to correct your view and then take proper action. The Tribunal apparently decided to give her the benefit of the doubt, as they state in their report that they believe there was a significant disconnect between what her perception of the situation and what was actually occurring. Hence the lighter sentence -- she **was** negligent, but her misperception of what was going on was taken into account as a mitigating circumstance. On Jul 24, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Karen Bohn wrote: Any good rider would have known that horse was lame and should be stopped. I'm nowhere near that level and was off my horse after feeling two lame steps. I found he had wedged an Old Dominion rock in his shoe. Its unbelievable that she couldn't know. Very hard to watch, especially going over that last jump. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|