36 horses allowed to skip ex-owner's ...

36 horses allowed to skip ex-owner's trial | The Columbus Dispatch

There are 9 comments on the Columbus Dispatch story from Apr 24, 2010, titled 36 horses allowed to skip ex-owner's trial | The Columbus Dispatch. In it, Columbus Dispatch reports that:

Caregivers for 36 horses that are the subject of an animal-cruelty trial breathed a sigh of relief yesterday after it was decided that the horses do not need to be physically present for next week's trial.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Columbus Dispatch.

Ms Drivesalot

Marshall, AR

#1 Apr 24, 2010
Whew! Thank goodness the original order for the horses to appear in court was rescinded. Can you imagine the odor in that courtroom? 36 poop bags can hold a lot of sh*t !! LOL
Nice one

Hilliard, OH

#2 Apr 24, 2010
That may be the dumbest headline I've seen in April. By giving them the ability to "skip," you're implying that the horses had a choice in the matter rather than their caregivers.
pikkil47

Hilliard, OH

#3 Apr 24, 2010
Brilliant journalism. Did they notify the horses verbally or in writing??
I read the headlines that some of these alleged journalists come up mwith and think back to how Bugs Bunny used to put it.."Whadda Maroon"
Nick

Columbus, OH

#4 Apr 24, 2010
I don't mind if they skip the trial, as long as horses, in general, are not exempt from jury duty.
Gordon Shumway

United States

#5 Apr 24, 2010
I vote Mark Davis for the post of Minister of MisInformation. How one can sit there and lie is beyond me. I guess it goes with the job.

Pictures and factual proof of malnourishment don't lie.

Try another angle Mark.
lwd

Columbus, OH

#6 Apr 24, 2010
I am just glad that sanity prevailed and that these horses will now not additionally suffer from the prosecutorial agenda. The old phrase, "A picture is worth a thousand words." They have been through enough.
Paul

Kingsport, TN

#7 Apr 24, 2010
"What now, Wiiilllllber"?

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#8 Apr 24, 2010
This case was very unique. The horses had hay and grain on the property and were receiving it daily but there was not enough. The horses were starving.
Sadly, seized without a warrant, and who can forget the elderly mare Granny who was trampled so severely she could not get up due to broken bones and then they dragged her out by her head and tail onto the gravel. She suffered all night long until they called the vet the following morning. Granny aka Berri is now famous around the world. The pictures of her knocked out teeth, head injuries have been circulated to 21 countries. If it was possible the horses actually lost weight while under the care of the H.S. They restricted the feed so as to not alter their evidence. Also horses went missing during the seizure. A total of six. It took a bit of time to have them all returned. This has been a sad case but the haunting pictures of this elderly mare are heartbreaking
TMB

Panama City, FL

#9 Apr 24, 2010
That the horses weren't getting enough to eat at Ms. Vess's farm is not in question. However, once a horse is rescued, you don't feed them even less to "preserve the evidence!" You don't load 5 horses into a 4 horse trailer and then drag the the horse that was trampled in transit by head and tail onto gravel at the fairgrounds to suffer all night while you (HS employees) go home for a good night's sleep. Also, if you are going to seize animals, you typically have had to design a plan for the owner to follow (wrt feed, vet, etc.). If the owner doesn't follow it, THEN you get a WARRANT for seizure. If the horses are in such bad shape that they need immediate seizure, don't move them on the coldest, iciest night of the year, do an in-place seizure and have people stay with them all night to ensure their well-being. This was handled all wrong from day one. Silva being out at the property several times before the seizure but never citing the owner (she stated she couldn't as long as feed/hay was on premises; it was still on premises the night of the seizure so what changed wrt HS rules?) kind of rules out exigent circumstances, IMO. Let's all review our Bill of Rights, too, while we're at it. Amendment 4 ring any bells for anyone?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Clinton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Manchester Video Store... Red head that worked ... Jun '17 Panther dad 94 1
News Feds OK plan to sell Norton Homes (Feb '08) May '17 leechy 9
Canal Fulton Music Emporium (Oct '12) May '17 Musikologist 16
Election Who do you support for County Auditor in Ohio (... (Oct '10) Mar '17 Randy Miller 7
Topia Place abandoned? (Aug '08) Mar '17 also an unsub 12
News Hillary Lost. Should We Care? Mar '17 kuda 8
News Ohio, Michigan electors say they won't switch v... (Dec '16) Dec '16 American Man 4

Clinton Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Clinton Mortgages