Unbelievable

[Nick]

I assume neither of you were in court or heard the prosecution and defense cases.

We've only seen the short video footage.

The jury, who were in court and did hear both cases, found her not guilty.

As I keep saying, context is always important and many things are not black and white.

If that was a parent and a child it would have been a different outcome, and the horse in essence has a brain of a child so what's the difference? I can't see how it's not cruelty TBH. 

[Streetwalker]

I assume neither of you were in court or heard the prosecution and defense cases.

We've only seen the short video footage.

The jury, who were in court and did hear both cases, found her not guilty.

As I keep saying, context is always important and many things are not black and white.

Looking at the video she lost control at booted the horse . You dont need to be in court to see it wasn't right . The jury found her not guilty of animal cruelty which must have a higher bar than I thought, its nothing to do with context its to do with the horse not being injured when the vet later saw it .

[BeElBeeBub]

I assume neither of you were in court or heard the prosecution and defense cases.

We've only seen the short video footage.

The jury, who were in court and did hear both cases, found her not guilty. 

As I keep saying, context is always important and many things are not black and white. 

[Streetwalker]

How the hell can this woman be found not guilty of animal cruelty? The evidence is there to be seen.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-66605870

It does seem a clear cut case of woman boots horse . 

[Nick]

How the hell can this woman be found not guilty of animal cruelty? The evidence is there to be seen. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-66605870