# Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt Point-to-Point



## Judgemental (10 March 2015)

A new dimension of those opposed to hunting was demonstrated at the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt Point-to-Point on Sunday at Charlton Horethorne Somerset.

The link to the Western Daily Press 'take' on the situation clearly and graphically describes the issue involving huntsman Mr Mark Doggrell and a protestor some months ago in August 2014 out 'cub hunting'. Although I doubt very much if anything was taking place other than within the law of the 2004 Hunting Act.  The protestor apparently suffered very serious injuries, yet the matter has not found it's way into the courts.   

Had it done so, then all the facts would have been aired and a clear outcome would be sustained.

http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Angry-scenes-hunt-demo/story-26138701-detail/story.html

Instead a huge number of people feel aggrieved that the matter is unresolved judging by the petition that is in play and the fact over 100 people were prepared to travel to rural Somerset over the matter.

Undoubtedly this is going to generate on-going demonstrations for a variety of hunts - not just the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale.

Those aggrieved have shown they can muster support from all over the UK and left all those at the Point-to-Point in no doubt there is a problem.

Indeed I am told by people at the Point-to-Point that their whole day was, as a result, most unenjoyable bearing in mind the demonstrators were photographing just about everybody there and their vehicles which generated serious anxiety.

I would speculate this issue is going to keep coming to the surface at Point-To-Points generally until it is resolved.

On a slightly different tack, if repeal of the Hunting Act were to happen I suggest this type of demonstration will be become a problem.


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

maybe the CPS need to reconsider and publicise there findings and reasons for any outcome they may come to


----------



## Countryman (10 March 2015)

I have heard very different reports JM. Apparently the Point to Point was a great success, and yes - although hunt saboteurs from all over the UK attended, there were still less than 60 of them, demonstrating how low their numbers are.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

twiggy2 said:



			maybe the CPS need to reconsider and publicise there findings and reasons for any outcome they may come to
		
Click to expand...

An interesting and useful point.  When those who would defend the common man,  elect to follow through,  or not,  with the hopes of others,  a simple statement as to their reasoning may well be useful.  'Damned if you do or you don't' springs to mind though!  For all that,  'Justice' is the right of all.

Considering the lady who glories under the handle of Nid (strange that she hasn't been publicly identified;  ALL who contravene the Hunting Act,  are),  then any major injury is to be regretted.  Those who would attempt to in any way sabotage any legally carried out activity,  should they put themselves at risk  have only themselves to blame should they happen upon self inflicted wounds.  As others have said,  that a horse would be intentionally 'ridden over' a standing obstacle,  is ridiculous in the extreme.  The risks to horse and rider would be obvious,  and whilst those who carry out a trespassed,  self righteous and illegal activity,  despite from what I hear that the incident was an accident,  none the less,  when placing themselves in a position of danger,  have only themselves to blame when they are injured.

Just out of interest,  and considering the sab referred to as 'Nid',  is there any official account of her injuries,  or is the unfortunate person being once again used as a means of support by those without any form of moral conscience?

Alec.


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Countryman said:



			I have heard very different reports JM. Apparently the Point to Point was a great success, and yes - although hunt saboteurs from all over the UK attended, there were still less than 60 of them, demonstrating how low their numbers are.
		
Click to expand...

I think the numbers will grow and they wont all be hunt sabs, I am not a hunt sab but do feel strongly that from the evidence I have seen regarding the incident when Mark Doggrell ran the woman down should be investigated further-if this sort of action is what it takes to make the CPS accept this case then I think the momentum will grow on this one. Surely for those that support hunting this would be good too because if he is innocent of GBH then their case is made, if not then they have supported justice and may receive more public support. 
It does seem to be politics that will win the public voted for or against hunting, unfortunately both sides often seem to think they are above the law and decent behaviour, I don't like fox hunting but can let it go, there are lots of things I feel like that about in life, I don't particularly like foxes either TBH-they are a pain in the butt I let that go too.
I do honestly believe that those that try to exist outside of the law do them selves and those around them no favours and I do not understand why the hunt have not been more pro active in condemming the houndsman in this instance. at best he took no avoiding action at the time of the incident and made no effort to stop, at worst he intentionally ran someone down using his mount as a weapon.. either way it should be investigated he needs to be cleared or charged not the whole incident being swept under the carpet it does no-one any favours


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			An interesting and useful point.  When those who would defend the common man,  elect to follow through,  or not,  with the hopes of others,  a simple statement as to their reasoning may well be useful.  'Damned if you do or you don't' springs to mind though!  For all that,  'Justice' is the right of all.

Considering the lady who glories under the handle of Nid (strange that she hasn't been publicly identified;  ALL who contravene the Hunting Act,  are),  then any major injury is to be regretted.  Those who would attempt to in any way sabotage any legally carried out activity,  should they put themselves at risk  have only themselves to blame should they happen upon self inflicted wounds.  As others have said,  that a horse would be intentionally 'ridden over' a standing obstacle,  is ridiculous in the extreme.  The risks to horse and rider would be obvious,  and whilst those who carry out a trespassed,  self righteous and illegal activity,  despite from what I hear that the incident was an accident,  none the less,  when placing themselves in a position of danger,  have only themselves to blame when they are injured.

Just out of interest,  and considering the sab referred to as 'Nid',  is there any official account of her injuries,  or is the unfortunate person being once again used as a means of support by those without any form of moral conscience?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


your final one is an interesting point Alec, one I shall look into.
out of interest, have you seen the video of Nid and the horse 'colliding'?


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

twiggy2 said:



			&#8230;&#8230;.. from the evidence I have seen regarding the incident when Mark Doggrell ran the woman down &#8230;&#8230;..
		
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the actions of the rider were intentional?  Have you ever attempted to ride a horse at a fixed object,  and one which it which it can avoid?

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

twiggy2 said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..
out of interest, have you seen the video of Nid and the horse 'colliding'?
		
Click to expand...

Cross posting!  No,  I've said that I haven't seen the piece of film,  but I'd like to.  Could you post it on here?

Alec.


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Well Alec a link I cannot do as it is far exceeding my computer skills but pop the following into the search bar on youtube...

Blackmore & Sparkford Vale Huntsman Mark Doggrell runs over a Hunt Saboteur

it is not nice viewing


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			Are you suggesting that the actions of the rider were intentional?  Have you ever attempted to ride a horse at a fixed object,  and one which it which it can avoid?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I have never tried to ride a horse at a fixed object Alec no, however working with many difficult/spoiled horses over the years I have met lots that are quite happy to run through or over people-the horse does try to avoid the sab but the rider? I shall leave you to watch the video and see any evidence of him taking avoiding action because I can see non


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

twiggy2 said:



			&#8230;&#8230;.., however working with many difficult/spoiled horses over the years I have met lots that are quite happy to run through or over people-the horse does try to avoid the sab but the rider? &#8230;&#8230;..
		
Click to expand...

Hunt horses,  by their very definition,  tend not to be difficult or 'spoiled'.  As you say,  the horse and probably the rider too attempted to avoid the obstacle which was in their immediate path.  Had the person presented themselves in the middle of an 'Event' course and when the horse and rider were negotiating a blind corner,  what would our reaction be?

I've now managed to source the relevant footage,  thank you.  Watching the vid in slo-mo,  I would be staggered to hear that the injuries claimed were factual.  The horse didn't go 'over' the injured person,  but knocked them to one side.  The name of the person who was trespassing and attempting to interfere with a perfectly legal activity,  has been withheld,  though God knows why,  and we can only assume that the injuries which were actually inflicted,  were not as those which are claimed.  'Bigging it up' could be one interpretation.

Alec.


----------



## Aperchristmastree (10 March 2015)

Just watched the video.  Not good behaviour on the huntsman's part, pretty outrageous actually.  He didn't even look back to see if she was ok.  It doesn't matter how awful sabs can be, it doesn't matter that she was standing in a silly place, he should a)not be going so fast through a tiny space and b) act like a human being and help her.  Shocking.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

Apercrumbie said:



			&#8230;&#8230;.. and b) act like a human being and help her.  Shocking.
		
Click to expand...

The reports have it that the rider actually directed the attending ambulance service to the 'stricken' saboteur. 

Alec.


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			Hunt horses,  by their very definition,  tend not to be difficult or 'spoiled'.  As you say,  the horse and probably the rider too attempted to avoid the obstacle which was in their immediate path.  Had the person presented themselves in the middle of an 'Event' course and when the horse and rider were negotiating a blind corner,  what would our reaction be?

I've now managed to source the relevant footage,  thank you.  Watching the vid in slo-mo,  I would be staggered to hear that the injuries claimed were factual.  The horse didn't go 'over' the injured person,  but knocked them to one side.  The name of the person who was trespassing and attempting to interfere with a perfectly legal activity,  has been withheld,  though God knows why,  and we can only assume that the injuries which were actually inflicted,  were not as those which are claimed.  'Bigging it up' could be one interpretation.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I am surprised (disappointed) with/at you Alec, I said nothing about the rider 'taking' avoiding action as I do not believe he did but you post as if I inferred he did (I apologise if this is in error), I am also disappointed in your reference to a blind corner when there is no evidence that there is a corner let alone a blind one, there is also no proof that the hunt were hunting legally and others would in fact disagree with that, as for the extent of the injuries at this stage who knows? maybe they are as stated and it was the force of the impact that caused them.

It is the fact that things are clouded that for me means the CPS should take the case it, it could be good for everyone.

I have worked with many a bolshy/pushy/rude/walk/spoiled/difficult all over you hunt horse over the years have worked with many lovely ones too though, that they hunt does not mean they are nice horses, what is the definition of a Hunt horse?


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			The reports have it that the rider actually directed the attending ambulance service to the 'stricken' saboteur. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I read it was the hunt master who was not riding on the day not the huntsman in the clip, and that is how it should be a person who knows the lay of the land helping emergency services it is normal human behaviour nothing to be applauded for.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			&#8230;&#8230;...  As you say,  the horse and probably the rider too attempted to avoid the obstacle &#8230;&#8230;..

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I agreed with you,  and added that from what I saw,  the rider also attempted to avoid the obstacle in his path.  Riding 'AT' a human,  as I'm sure you will accept,  could all so easily result in serious injury to both the horse,  and the rider.



twiggy2 said:



			I am surprised (disappointed) with/at you Alec, I said nothing about the rider 'taking' avoiding action as I don not believe he did but you post as if I inferred he did (I apologise if this is in error), &#8230;&#8230;.., 

&#8230;&#8230;..there is also no proof that the hunt were hunting legally and others would in fact disagree with that, as for the extent of the injuries at this stage who knows? maybe they are as stated and it was the force of the impact that caused them.

It is the fact that things are clouded that for me means the CPS should take the case it, it could be good for everyone
		
Click to expand...

Para 1.  It remains my belief that despite the suddenness of finding a pedestrian in his path,  the rider attempted to avoid them.  Be as disappointed as you wish.

Para 2. With evidence of illegal hunting,  then you would have a point.  Without such evidence,   then the stated claim of those who ride to Hounds has to be accepted.  Courts don't deal with what 'May' have been in the mind of those who they prosecute,  but in the evidence which is placed before them

Par 3.  The CPS decided against prosecution.  I agree that if they offered an explanation,  so the matter would have been cleared up,  excepting of course,  that those who set out to illegally trespass and to disrupt legally held activities,  would offer red-herings in an attempt to claim favour.

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 March 2015)

twiggy2 said:



			I read it was the hunt master who was not riding on the day not the huntsman in the clip, and that is how it should be a person who knows the lay of the land helping emergency services it is normal human behaviour nothing to be applauded for.
		
Click to expand...

'nothing to be applauded for'?  Are you really being serious?  Had whoever assisted offered no assistance,  is that what you'd have preferred,  and to support your case?  

Alec.


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			'nothing to be applauded for'?  Are you really being serious?  Had whoever assisted offered no assistance,  is that what you'd have preferred,  and to support your case?  

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I am saying that in my mind it is just what you do, he did not risk life and limb, he directed emergency services to someone who needed them-it is normal behaviour not exceptional but normal decent human behaviour, something i would expect any normal decent human being to do.


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			'nothing to be applauded for'?  Are you really being serious?  Had whoever assisted offered no assistance,  is that what you'd have preferred,  and to support your case?  

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


I will have to continue looking later, I was reading reports and one came up stating that the non riding hunt master directed the air ambulance in, every report I have seen states that the mounted huntsman continued to ride-I will return to this after riding


----------



## twiggy2 (10 March 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			I agreed with you,  and added that from what I saw,  the rider also attempted to avoid the obstacle in his path.  Riding 'AT' a human,  as I'm sure you will accept,  could all so easily result in serious injury to both the horse,  and the rider.



Para 1.  It remains my belief that despite the suddenness of finding a pedestrian in his path,  the rider attempted to avoid them.  Be as disappointed as you wish.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I am not disappointed at you opinion Alec, who am I to judge, it was the way it was written and the inference that it was my opinion too


----------



## ester (10 March 2015)

I didn't see her in the video until after she was knocked over, and I wasn't on a horse travelling at speed (whom you would have heard coming). So I do see nothing but an accident. I would have liked to have seen the rider stop afterwards but we don't know that he wasn't going to a critical situation elsewhere and knew that the lady wasn't alone so would receive help. He presumably would also be unsure of the reception he would get if he did stop/dismount etc. 
If she was known by her name perhaps a letter apologising after the incident could have been sent.


----------



## Dunlin (10 March 2015)

I've already posted in the other thread running on this entitled "Hysterical" so I won't copy over what I wrote, all I will say is I have heard a lot of different stories about this now. Some say the hospital had a hard time getting rid of the woman and that she had no injuries at all, other stories state she almost died from her injuries and stopped breathing at the scene. Some say (I am starting to sound like Jeremy Clarkson introducing The Stig) that the hunt and followers obstructed the land ambulance from getting to the patient, some say the hunt helped direct the land ambulance and phoned an air ambulance due to location. It's all hearsay, all of it until/if there is an official hearing where evidence shall be called upon which will surely include a hospital report to state injuries received and witness statements from both the land and air ambulance which attended.


----------



## ester (10 March 2015)

From the video I was impressed that the videographer was able to announce from that distance (while calling the ambulance) that she was unconcious... They also implied they needed an air ambulance due to the seriousness of the event when in reality they are often sent to outdoor situations a bit off the beaten track.


----------



## Lizzie66 (10 March 2015)

Wasn't there on the day so can only speculate, however it is highly probable that if the huntsman was travelling quickly through gateways, gaps between vehicles, pedestrians etc. then he needed to be somewhere in a hurry. Hounds may have left the laid scent and he would be in breach of the law to allow them to continue once he became aware of it. He would also have known (or made sure) that followers behind would have stepped in to help. 
I would agree that efforts should have been made to after the fact to offer apologies to the lady concerned, however it might not have been that easy to locate her and the police may well have suggested that he stay away.
Videos taken from one angle do not give the whole picture (how many times do you see slo-mo video of sports events and still not be able to be 100%) or give any indication as to intent.
The CPS have reviewed the evidence and have obviously decided that there is insufficient evidence to proceed in prosecuting the huntsman with an offence. If they can't prove intent then it is an accident and if an accident then unless he had some level of duty of care to this person (which sounds unlikely) then he is not guilty of an offence. An air ambulance was called and either he or his representative helped I directing the emergency services to this person.


----------



## Tiddlypom (10 March 2015)

Apercrumbie said:



			Just watched the video.  Not good behaviour on the huntsman's part, pretty outrageous actually.  He didn't even look back to see if she was ok.  It doesn't matter how awful sabs can be, it doesn't matter that she was standing in a silly place, he should a)not be going so fast through a tiny space and b) act like a human being and help her.  Shocking.
		
Click to expand...

This. What a kn0b. 

Anyone with half a conscience would have immediately pulled up to see how the casualty was. Oh no, I'm forgetting, the hunt must come first....


----------



## Countryman (10 March 2015)

Tiddlypom said:



			This. What a kn0b. 

Anyone with half a conscience would have immediately pulled up to see how the casualty was. Oh no, I'm forgetting, the hunt must come first....
		
Click to expand...

It's easy to say, but if you had a pack of hounds that you needed to be with, perhaps with busy roads or railways nearby, you might feel differently, and let the many people nearby look after them, particularly if you a) knew many hunt protestors in the past had feigned injury and b) most pertinently, were concerned at the prospect of going back towards an angry group of people who may or may not have had iron bars, balaclavas and potentially violent intent.


----------



## Doormouse (10 March 2015)

Tiddlypom said:



			This. What a kn0b. 

Anyone with half a conscience would have immediately pulled up to see how the casualty was. Oh no, I'm forgetting, the hunt must come first....
		
Click to expand...

I have just watched the video clip again with a friend who pointed out that the horse actually jumps the puddle in the gateway. it is just possible that due to this action by the horse that the huntsman was unaware that he had collided with someone.

Before you all shout at me, just watch it again with this in mind.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (10 March 2015)

Countryman said:



			I have heard very different reports JM. Apparently the Point to Point was a great success, and yes - although hunt saboteurs from all over the UK attended, there were still less than 60 of them, demonstrating how low their numbers are.
		
Click to expand...

Find Sabinder on Facebook. Very objective views. I hear that this day was billed by the sabs as a great family day out, but several families turned tail when confronted by multiple flying obscenities from masked sabs. Nice.

If the CPS has decided not to proceed, there's not much that can be done. It's nothing to do with the police, CPS decide to prosecute or not, many reasons, but cost is an issue, as is successs criteria. If it has been deemed an accident, they simply won't proceed.


----------



## farmer chunk (10 March 2015)

If you look at video closely you can see lady next to person called nid push her arm back to push mid back


----------



## farmer chunk (10 March 2015)

If you watch video closely you can see the person next to nid push her back with her arm


----------



## Christmas Crumpet (11 March 2015)

I would also like to point out that noone has mentioned the fact that the sabs blow the horn trying to lure hounds away. No wonder the huntsman was in a rush if there were people actively trying to disrupt proceedings. 

The sabs were a) blowing a horn which they had no right to do b) were parked obstructing a gateway and c) the way I see it, Nid actually steps back/is pushed into the horse's path. This was clearly unintentional on her part but which had an unfortunate result. 

It was nothing but an unfortunate accident. Perhaps they need to take more responsibility for their own actions (i.e blowing the horn) and realise that if they hadn't done that and weren't blocking the gateway this wouldn't have happened. It was a children's meet for goodness sake.


----------



## LittleRooketRider (11 March 2015)

carolineb said:



			I would also like to point out that noone has mentioned the fact that the sabs blow the horn trying to lure hounds away. No wonder the huntsman was in a rush if there were people actively trying to disrupt proceedings. 

The sabs were a) blowing a horn which they had no right to do b) were parked obstructing a gateway and c) the way I see it, Nid actually steps back/is pushed into the horse's path. This was clearly unintentional on her part but which had an unfortunate result. 

It was nothing but an unfortunate accident. Perhaps they need to take more responsibility for their own actions (i.e blowing the horn) and realise that if they hadn't done that and weren't blocking the gateway this wouldn't have happened. It was a children's meet for goodness sake.
		
Click to expand...

They also fail to mention there use of 'pepper spray' on children and ponies, or a later incident at their 'mass sab' when they drove their truck into a pony, or their attempts to shine laser-lights in my mount's (and other's) eyes at another hunt!

Reading their blatant lies makes my stomach turn.


----------



## Tiddlypom (11 March 2015)

LittleRoodolphRider said:



			Reading their blatant lies makes my stomach turn.
		
Click to expand...

I strongly suspect that there are confabulations, half truths, outright lies and also truthful reports on both sides of the hunting divide.

I have re watched the video, and believe that the huntsman must have known that he had knocked the protester down. His riding was pretty reckless simply by passing at such a pace so close to pedestrians. One would hope that he really needed to ride so quickly in order to regain control of hounds, rather than whizzing past them like that for the sake of it.

I still think it appalling that he didn't at least pause to shout back a 'sorry', before continuing on his way.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (11 March 2015)

She clearly looks towards the approaching horse then steps back into its path. Why the heck does she do that?! Why was she in the path anyway? Had that been me, I would have moved away from the path to allow the horse room. 

The photographer at Cheltenham was boffed by the horse's bum: he was up against the rail that the horses broke. Should he too demand justice?


----------



## Alec Swan (13 March 2015)

cinnamontoast said:



			&#8230;&#8230;.. 

The photographer at Cheltenham was boffed by the horse's bum: he was up against the rail that the horses broke. Should he too demand justice?
		
Click to expand...

Quite,  and he wasn't immediately discharged from hospital either,  he had broken bones.  Come to think of it,  neither of the riders stopped to see if he was OK,  shall we castigate them also,  perhaps even demand that they face prosecution? 

It was an accident,  nothing more or less.  The allegedly injured lady,  by attending a meeting where she had no business and with the probable intent of disruption,  placed herself in the path of a travelling horse,  which despite the fact that the animal attempted to avoid her,  knocked her to the ground.  Are those who attend Events not responsible for themselves?  

Even had the CPS taken up the case,  I wonder how the charge sheet would have read. 

Alec.


----------



## Dunlin (13 March 2015)

Very good points Alec. I used to regularly attend Motorsport races and on every ticket there is a disclaimer saying "motorsports can be dangerous etc. etc. at your own risk blah blah blah". Well, horses can be dangerous. Trying to obstruct the hunt is 1 step further than dangerous, having witnessed what some sabs get up to I'd go as far as saying some of them have a death wish!

An even better point made over the poor photographer at Cheltenham, freak accident. It was not the jockeys fault, once a horse has decided it's going off somewhere there is very little a rider can do to stop it. Horses are spooky and flighty creatures by nature, even some hunt horses are, given the right/wrong situation. Blowing a hunting horn (badly) when you have a bunch of people stood around you and being stood in a gateway with your back to where the horses are is not the most sensible thing.


----------



## Judgemental (14 March 2015)

This thread is generating the most interesting factors for arm chair theorists and analytical views.

Nobody has mentioned that in the Video from YouTube, link copied below that there is an audible holler:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI8MMMg1x5s

The Masters of Foxhounds Association rules of engagement expressly forbid any holler.

Therefore was the holler mischief making by the saboteurs, or perish the thought the hunt was actually hunting a fox.

That said there is no sound of hounds giving tongue, therefore one has to assume it was the saboteurs, although the hounds may not have hit the line. It is my understanding, if a fox is viewed a whistle should be blown once to warn the huntsman that a fox has gone away and twice that it has gone back in the covert. 

Thus was the huntsman responding to the holler one way or the other. Of course I am sure either way hearing a holler he would be anxious and seriously responsible by immediately stopping hounds. I am sure the BV never knowingly contravene the Hunting Act 2004. 

That said even in those circumstances, I am surprised he did not take a pull, because the lady was obviously hit very hard. I have been hit by a horse at that speed and it's extremely serious and painful. In all similar situations of which I am aware, the horse and rider have always come to a halt in order to help the party on the ground.

Of course if a fox was in play, was the huntsman anxious because of all the saboteurs.

The second issue is my surprise that this matter has dragged (no pun intended) on for such a long time.

Plainly the lady was hurt and judging by the fact she had her back to the rider and was clearly taken by surprise, was this then a genuine accident as stated by the Chairman of the BV, Mr Rupert Nuttal.

In which case, surely both the hunt and the huntsman, as a servant and agent of the hunt are covered by Public Liability Insurance. 

Thus the procedure should be the hunt reports themselves and admits liability to their insurers, as with a car accidents. From that point the Insurance Underwriters take the conduct of the matter.

I would have thought a figure in low six figures should have ameliorated the lady.


----------



## LittleRooketRider (14 March 2015)

Very good points Judgemental..I think the issue is that the lady/sabs in question are trying to claim it was intentional/premeditated and won't be satisfied until he convicted of attempted murder or similar, if you look at their websites/fb pages they repeatedly claim this was a deliberate attempt on her life.


----------



## Alec Swan (14 March 2015)

LRR,  I'd be more than surprised were our legal system to be swayed by a handful of halfwits on Facebook.

Alec.


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 March 2015)

Very good post, Judgemental.

I wonder what the CPS will decide to do once they have reviewed the case (at the request of 'Nid').



cinnamontoast said:



			She clearly looks towards the approaching horse then steps back into its path. Why the heck does she do that?! Why was she in the path anyway? Had that been me, I would have moved away from the path to allow the horse room.
		
Click to expand...

I have been taken by surprise by a horse galloping past me at speed, where the Badminton winning rider suddenly pulled it to the wrong side of the finish flags at a ODE where I was part of the timekeeping team. I jumped the wrong way, and damn nearly got flattened.




			The photographer at Cheltenham was boffed by the horse's bum: he was up against the rail that the horses broke. Should he too demand justice?
		
Click to expand...




Alec Swan said:



			Quite,  and he wasn't immediately discharged from hospital either,  he had broken bones.  Come to think of it,  neither of the riders stopped to see if he was OK,  shall we castigate them also,  perhaps even demand that they face prosecution? 
.
		
Click to expand...

Ho ho. Hardly the same. Not least because the Cheltenham jockeys were desperately trying to straighten their mounts up. In the Mark Doggrell video clip, it is the horse who takes the evasive action, not the rider.


----------



## Christmas Crumpet (15 March 2015)

Ms Warren was campaigning with the Dorset Hunt Sabs group when she was struck.
She added: "We sounded a horn, hollered, and some hounds looked up and started to come our way.
"I think he [the hunt member] got angry at this. He came along a public road behind us at speed, he didn't issue a warning, he was completely silent, then he hit me and rode off.

I have just read this on a Facebook page. I am afraid that Nid has slightly shot herself in the foot with her admission that a) they holloaed b) blew the horn and c) that Doggrell came down the road. There is no way you cannot hear a horse galloping down a road. I imagine he didn't "issue a warning" as she says he didn't because he didn't see them standing in the way. It is their fault that he was going at such a speed because they had disrupted hounds and were causing confusion. If they hadn't done it then the accident wouldn't have happened. I suggest that Nid and her friends take responsibility for their actions which caused the accident and everyone just forgets about it. It was a very unfortunate situation but it could have been avoided had the sabs not been holloaing, blowing a horn, blocking a gateway with their vehicle and also standing in the gateway and stepping back into the huntsman's path.


----------



## Fellewell (15 March 2015)

Agree with the above post by carolineb except to say that it was not an unfortunate incident, it was a deliberately orchestrated incident.

A GALLOPING HORSE WITH A RIDER IS NEVER, EVER, SILENT.

The access was blocked by a vehicle and pedestrians in dark clothing who were trespassing. That staged scene was only going to go one way which is why they filmed it.

If the rider had been unseated and sustained serious injury the saboteurs would have considered it a victory. My sympathies are with Mr Doggrell who was surely in fear for his life given the countless proven instances of threatening behaviour by these people.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (15 March 2015)

Didn't he come off a tarmac road?


----------



## LittleRooketRider (15 March 2015)

From an interesting piece online.."on the tail of the hunting louts"...

  "according to witnesses, the horse also wore blinkers, which would have prevented it from seeing its rider&#8217;s target."

Really?? Even in their little video you can see there is no such thing..besides blinkers would not have prevented the hore's vision in regards to the positioning of 'Nid'

and another thing...

"The video clearly shows that she did not move from where she stood"

Yes..perhaps like a rabbit in the headlights, but with an oncoming horse why didn't they move?? That doesn't prove it was intentional on his part.


----------



## LittleRooketRider (15 March 2015)

cinnamontoast said:



			Didn't he come off a tarmac road?
		
Click to expand...

That would be so..or a "public road" as Ms warren/Nid calls it.


----------



## Judgemental (17 March 2015)

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the Saboteurs general conduct, all pedestrians under the law of England and Wales have right of way.

It does not matter whether or not the person is on a public road, highway, path, bridleway or indeed they are trespassing, they still have right of way overriding any vehicle, horse drawn carriage or mounted horse.

Therefore the person in the video should have come to a halt and asked the persons believed to be Saboteurs, to make way for his horse and or waited for them to make way of their own volition.


----------



## Lizzie66 (17 March 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the Saboteurs general conduct, all pedestrians under the law of England and Wales have right of way.

It does not matter whether or not the person is on a public road, highway, path, bridleway or indeed they are trespassing, they still have right of way overriding any vehicle, horse drawn carriage or mounted horse.
		
Click to expand...

True about a vehicle, horse drawn carriage and bicycle but can you point me to the rule regarding mounted horse as it doesn't mention this on any of the government websites that I have checked.


----------



## Alec Swan (17 March 2015)

Judgemental said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

It does not matter whether or not the person is on a public road, &#8230;&#8230;.. they still have right of way overriding any vehicle.

Therefore the person in the video should have come to a halt and asked the persons believed to be Saboteurs, to make way for his horse and or waited for them to make way of their own volition.
		
Click to expand...

Para 1.  Wrong.  The act of obstructing traffic,  going about their lawful business,  and on a Public Highway,  is an offence.  The offence is known as Jaywalking.  You surprise me J_m.

Para 2.  Are we to assume that you've never got out of Trot,  on a horse?  Stop the horse travelling at speed,  and within those few strides?  You surprise me,  again! 

Alec.


----------



## Juni141 (17 March 2015)

cinnamontoast said:



			She clearly looks towards the approaching horse then steps back into its path. Why the heck does she do that?! Why was she in the path anyway? Had that been me, I would have moved away from the path to allow the horse room. 

The photographer at Cheltenham was boffed by the horse's bum: he was up against the rail that the horses broke. Should he too demand justice?
		
Click to expand...

This is my take on the video. I have watched and rewatched and I am convinced it is an intentional act by the sabs. Reading some of the other extremes these groups, and in particular this one, will go to upset, disrupt, bully and intimidate hunting people it in no way surprises me either. 

It also raises the question of why there has been no concern from the sabs regarding the horse?! I know as soon a horse person falls off/gets knocked over/is injured by a horse they first thing they ask is how the horse is!! I thought they were supposed to be animal lovers....


----------



## Juni141 (17 March 2015)

Tiddlypom said:



			Ho ho. Hardly the same. Not least because the Cheltenham jockeys were desperately trying to straighten their mounts up. In the Mark Doggrell video clip, it is the horse who takes the evasive action, not the rider.
		
Click to expand...

Tiddlypom how on earth can you claim to know for a fact that it is the horse not the rider, or in fact both or neither, that takes evasive action?!! The horse is travelling away from the camera at speed, you would struggle to see any aids applied by the rider from behind at any pace. 

This is the problem with all these videos that are taken as gospel. Videos, like photos, can a) be tampered with and altered and b) have to be taken in context. Just look at that video from Judy Hewitt and the poor gamekeeper in Wales. Edited to fit her story, luckily the police and CPS saw right through this and she was prosecuted.


----------



## ester (17 March 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the Saboteurs general conduct, all pedestrians under the law of England and Wales have right of way.

It does not matter whether or not the person is on a public road, highway, path, bridleway or indeed they are trespassing, they still have right of way overriding any vehicle, horse drawn carriage or mounted horse.

Therefore the person in the video should have come to a halt and asked the persons believed to be Saboteurs, to make way for his horse and or waited for them to make way of their own volition.
		
Click to expand...

But from my view of the video they weren't in the way, there was plenty of space to go around them, they moved into his path.


----------



## Tiddlypom (17 March 2015)

Juni141 said:



			Tiddlypom how on earth can you claim to know for a fact that it is the horse not the rider, or in fact both or neither, that takes evasive action?!! The horse is travelling away from the camera at speed, you would struggle to see any aids applied by the rider from behind at any pace.
		
Click to expand...

I stand by what I posted. In my opinion, the horse jinks left as the rider goes to pass the pedestrians at speed.

He must have known that he had collided with at least one of them. However, whether the pedestrian stepped deliberately into his path, or whether she stepped back accidentally, I cannot say.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (17 March 2015)

LittleRoodolphRider said:



			That would be so..or a "public road" as Ms warren/Nid calls it.
		
Click to expand...

And when I've not been able to see a horse but can hear it on a road, it's pretty loud, no? Shod hooves on tarmac? 

Sabs know the dangers of being involved with hunts: when I had the accident, I was told it was tough, I knew the risks of handling big horses (friend of a friend, barrister who deals with equine accidents). I wonder what and Nid will be told.


----------



## TwinkleT (18 March 2015)

On the topic of the point to point, I was there and I think it's safe to say that the hunt supporters behaviour was equally poor, if not worse than the sabs. They were looking for a fight the whole day. I am not a supporter of either group and I would be embarrassed to be associated either of them. I would suggest that some hunt supporters need to get off there high horse and have a good look at their own behaviour if they are to gain any support for their cause from the general public.


----------



## Christmas Crumpet (18 March 2015)

TwinkleT said:



			On the topic of the point to point, I was there and I think it's safe to say that the hunt supporters behaviour was equally poor, if not worse than the sabs. They were looking for a fight the whole day. I am not a supporter of either group and I would be embarrassed to be associated either of them. I would suggest that some hunt supporters need to get off there high horse and have a good look at their own behaviour if they are to gain any support for their cause from the general public.
		
Click to expand...

I was there too and actually the sabs behaviour was far worse than the hunt supporters. No hunt supporter wanted a fight at the P2P (and there wasn't one). What they did want was a peaceful fun family day of racing - you don't EVER see hunt supporters turn up and try to disrupt the day's proceedings if the sabs have a function on. It is always the sabs trying to disrupt a day's hunting or a hunt ball or a P2P. 

My 3 year old daughter was terrified as we drove in to have people dressed in black with balaclavas on shouting at her through the window and banging on the side of the car. Not to mention the exceptionally drunk woman who jumped in front of our car and had to be dragged away. She was later arrested. Totally unnecessary at a family day out.


----------



## Juni141 (18 March 2015)

Tiddlypom said:



			I stand by what I posted. In my opinion, the horse jinks left as the rider goes to pass the pedestrians at speed.

He must have known that he had collided with at least one of them. However, whether the pedestrian stepped deliberately into his path, or whether she stepped back accidentally, I cannot say.
		
Click to expand...

Yes but you have absolutely NO way to verify if the horse jinxed of its own accord or because of the aids of the rider?!!? This is my point, everyone swears gospel on these hazy, badly shot and biasedly edited videos that have in no way been independently verified (this applies to anti and pro videos).

IMO, the only thing we know for gospel is that had the sabs not been trespassing on private land the accident would not have happened. In my eyes it is as simple as that, don't break the law then going run to the police when things don't go your way!!!


----------



## LittleRooketRider (18 March 2015)

Juni141 said:



			Yes but you have absolutely NO way to verify if the horse jinxed of its own accord or because of the aids of the rider?!!? This is my point, everyone swears gospel on these hazy, badly shot and biasedly edited videos that have in no way been independently verified (this applies to anti and pro videos).

IMO, the only thing we know for gospel is that had the sabs not been trespassing on private land the accident would not have happened. In my eyes it is as simple as that, don't break the law then going run to the police when things don't go your way!!!
		
Click to expand...

Very good point at the end.

It would be interesting to see a pro-hunting/ unedited version of the events...i have only seen the won the antis/sabs keep bandying about with heavy editing, slo mo and melodramatic captions.


----------



## Alec Swan (18 March 2015)

TwinkleT said:



			On the topic of the point to point, I was there and I think it's safe to say that the hunt supporters behaviour was equally poor, if not worse than the sabs. They were looking for a fight the whole day. I am not a supporter of either group and I would be embarrassed to be associated either of them. I would suggest that some hunt supporters need to get off there high horse and have a good look at their own behaviour if they are to gain any support for their cause from the general public.
		
Click to expand...

Tell me again,  you don't support either faction?  Really?  So you consider that those who Hunt,  should continue to accept the appalling behaviour of those who don't?  Really?  I'm sorry to have to advise you,  but that's not the way that the real world works.

Alec.


----------



## TwinkleT (18 March 2015)

Your statement right there is your biggest issue. "So you consider that those who Hunt, should accept the appalling behaviour of those who don't?" It's the assumption that so many hunt supporters have that if you don't support the hunt you're somehow a supporter of the sabs. There seems to be an assumption from some that if you don't hunt you are some kind of half wit who can't possibly understand and it's this attitude that prevents any kind of decent debate. Of course I don't support the sabs, their behavior is ridiculous and again completely undermines their argument. 

The point i'm trying very poorly to make is that currently I have no allegiance either way. However,  the behaviour I have seen from both sides has been equally bad at times and neither has given me a compelling reason to support them. The antis are often hysterical and the only real argument I have seen from hunt supporters on here is either you're a liar if you point out a failing or you are a dim witted townie who couldn't possibly understand the country ways. There are so many people like me who are neither for or against but your attitude towards them means you are unlikely to gain their support. The hunts will be responsible for their own downfall, they don't need any help from the sabs.


----------



## Lizzie66 (19 March 2015)

TwinkleT said:



			On the topic of the point to point, I was there and I think it's safe to say that the hunt supporters behaviour was equally poor, if not worse than the sabs. They were looking for a fight the whole day. I am not a supporter of either group and I would be embarrassed to be associated either of them. I would suggest that some hunt supporters need to get off there high horse and have a good look at their own behaviour if they are to gain any support for their cause from the general public.
		
Click to expand...

Can you give examples. The newspaper article certainly indicates to me that the people looking for a confrontation on the day were from the protestors. I would imagine that some people confronted with thugs looking for a fight might have reacted poorly and responded in kind, which, especially on a family day out, is not acceptable. However there is no guarantee that these people reacting badly were anything to do with the hunt.

I have used the term "thug" deliberately as these people can be seen to have gone dressed in a threatening way and trying to hinder the progress of lorries and cars and are not peacefully protesting but being deliberately intimidating.


----------



## Beausmate (20 March 2015)

Just watched the video a few times.  The woman looks at the horse and steps back into it's path.  Maybe she lost her balance, or thought for some mad reason the rider would stop.  It would have been nuts to try to run her over where she was stood - the horse would probably have gone down too.

I'd say it was an accident, caused by the stupidity and lack of awareness of the sab.  The huntsman could be considered to be riding somewhat recklessly, by travelling through a partially blocked gateway at speed, but to me it didn't look deliberate in any way and I can see why the CPS threw it out.


----------



## Mike007 (20 March 2015)

This is all rather sad. Ms Nid has been seriously injured,and will no doubt have the aches and pain from this for the rest of her life. That is sad . The huntsman will also ,I suspect ,regret the injury that occurred. HOWEVER! For a criminal prosecution ,there must be "Mens rea" loosely translated as guilty intent. Making a poor decision before or after the event does not necessarily count. The CPS clearly felt that they couldnt show Mens Rea and dropped the case. It doesnt make the actions of either party morally right ,it merely makes the outside the sphere of criminal prosecution.For what its worth ,I would advise ms Nid to consider a civil action against the organizers of the protest. Clearly there were health and safety issues which this organised protest failed to address.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (21 March 2015)

You think she should sue her fellow sabs?!


----------



## Mike007 (21 March 2015)

Absolutely. She was put in harms way without adequate guidance .Why else would she have stepped in front of three quarters of a ton of horse. Clearly she was not likely to heed advice from the hunting fraternity so it was incumbent on her own colleagues to ensure her safety.


----------



## Dunlin (23 March 2015)

I've said it before and I'll say it again, being a hunt sab is a dangerous game, trying to obstruct a hunt is a very dangerous game, being near someone that is sounding a hunting horn trying to call the hounds towards them is quite frankly asking for trouble. There are plenty of hunt monitors out there who quietly observe the hunt and if needed gather evidence, I have even had a pleasant conversation with some hunt monitors before, I can't say the same when it comes to sabs. 

If you don't want to get hurt don't put yourself in danger. When you do get hurt accept that it's part of your 'job' and to be honest your own stupidity. If I had sued all the riding schools I went to in the past everytime I had fallen off, got bitten or kicked I would be living in Monaco on my Yacht and following the hunt in my brand new Lambourghini (one of a fleet).


----------



## Judgemental (28 March 2015)

This is an increasingly interesting subject and I am intrigued as to why the subject person surrendered themselves to a police station of their own volition, where they were promptly arrested, as reported in The Western Daily Press. 

Looking further at the video there seems to be some additional uncomfortable issues and one wonders what the mastership are doing about the whole scenario.


----------



## LittleRooketRider (28 March 2015)

Judgemental said:



			This is an increasingly interesting subject and I am intrigued as to why the subject person surrendered themselves to a police station of their own volition, where they were promptly arrested, as reported in The Western Daily Press. 

Looking further at the video there seems to be some additional uncomfortable issues and one wonders what the mastership are doing about the whole scenario.
		
Click to expand...


I am of the understanding that he went to the police station to give a statement about the events that occurred, when somebody is accusing you of attempted murder it would seem pretty sensible to ensure that your story/record of events are presented promptly.

Could you clarify your second point re: the additional uncomfortable issues, I'm curious to know?


----------



## Judgemental (4 April 2015)

LittleRoodolphRider said:



			I am of the understanding that he went to the police station to give a statement about the events that occurred, when somebody is accusing you of attempted murder it would seem pretty sensible to ensure that your story/record of events are presented promptly.

Could you clarify your second point re: the additional uncomfortable issues, I'm curious to know?
		
Click to expand...

It is very simple, the whole scenario brings all parties into disrepute. 

One only has to look further at the video and the serious allegations that are made.


----------



## Tiddlypom (9 July 2015)

Update today on the H&H news page.

_Mr Doggrell is now facing charged of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm.

He is to appear before magistrates, but a date has not yet been set.

After careful consideration of all the evidence in this case, including additional new evidence, I have decided that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and that it is in the public interest to charge Mark Doggrell with recklessly causing grievous bodily harm, said Rachael Scott of the CPS._

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/huntsman-charged-police-hunt-saboteur-501454


----------



## Judgemental (10 July 2015)

Tiddlypom said:



			Update today on the H&H news page.

_Mr Doggrell is now facing charged of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm.

He is to appear before magistrates, but a date has not yet been set.

After careful consideration of all the evidence in this case, including additional new evidence, I have decided that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and that it is in the public interest to charge Mark Doggrell with recklessly causing grievous bodily harm, said Rachael Scott of the CPS._

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/huntsman-charged-police-hunt-saboteur-501454

Click to expand...

Coming as it does at the this incredibly sensitive time, I am appalled.

I am appalled for two reasons. 

1. Doggrell should have been suspended by the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale at the outset when they knew the matter was ongoing.

2. In the interests of hunting the masters of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale should have known about the governments plans to 'help' hunting and the potential of a debate. As a result they should have taken steps to ameliorate the situation and plainly stated Doggrells alleged conduct was wholly unacceptable.

Like so many people who hunt in Dorset they are out of touch with the wider world.

No doubt ever member of parliament will be made aware of this development and will doubtless, conclude why there are so many problems and wonder if any changes are prudent.

If the vote fails next Wednesday, I for one will lay the blame squarely at the door of this disgraceful situation.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 July 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Coming as it does at the this incredibly sensitive time, I am appalled.

I am appalled for two reasons. 

1. Doggrell should have been suspended by the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale at the outset when they knew the matter was ongoing.

2. In the interests of hunting the masters of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale should have known about the governments plans to 'help' hunting and the potential of a debate. As a result they should have taken steps to ameliorate the situation and plainly stated Doggrells alleged conduct was wholly unacceptable.

.. .
		
Click to expand...

J_M,  I'm equally appalled at your response.  So the B&S Vale,  should throw him to the wolves?  Would you have them use him as a sacrificial offering and disown him?  If the Courts find him innocent,  and there's clear evidence that the unfortunate creature who was injured placed herself in the path of danger,  she was trespassing and had no business where she was,  or conducting an operation which had no legal support,  and what at best was a sorry accident,  with either or both the horse and rider making every attempt to avoid the obstacle that was in their path,  and YOU would have him abandoned?

Judgemental,  there are times when your arguments astound me.  There's no evidence that the rider affected any intentional injury upon the victim,  and clear evidence that both or either he and his horse made every reasonable attempt to avoid a collision,  and you would hang him out to dry?  Really?

Lets find him guilty and preempt the decision of a Court,  shall we?  FFS!

Alec.


----------



## ExmoorHunter (10 July 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			J_M,  I'm equally appalled at your response.  So the B&S Vale,  should throw him to the wolves?  Would you have them use him as a sacrificial offering and disown him?  If the Courts find him innocent,  and there's clear evidence that the unfortunate creature who was injured placed herself in the path of danger,  she was trespassing and had no business where she was,  or conducting an operation which had no legal support,  and what at best was a sorry accident,  with either or both the horse and rider making every attempt to avoid the obstacle that was in their path,  and YOU would have him abandoned?

Judgemental,  there are times when your arguments astound me.  There's no evidence that the rider affected any intentional injury upon the victim,  and clear evidence that both or either he and his horse made every reasonable attempt to avoid a collision,  and you would hang him out to dry?  Really?

Lets find him guilty and preempt the decision of a Court,  shall we?  FFS!

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

No mention either of the vicious attack by the antis on Mike Lane. Primarily I believe because they were masked up and cannot be identified. Not exactly a level playing field then is it.


----------



## Doormouse (10 July 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Coming as it does at the this incredibly sensitive time, I am appalled.

I am appalled for two reasons. 

1. Doggrell should have been suspended by the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale at the outset when they knew the matter was ongoing.

2. In the interests of hunting the masters of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale should have known about the governments plans to 'help' hunting and the potential of a debate. As a result they should have taken steps to ameliorate the situation and plainly stated Doggrells alleged conduct was wholly unacceptable.

Like so many people who hunt in Dorset they are out of touch with the wider world.

No doubt ever member of parliament will be made aware of this development and will doubtless, conclude why there are so many problems and wonder if any changes are prudent.

If the vote fails next Wednesday, I for one will lay the blame squarely at the door of this disgraceful situation.
		
Click to expand...

 I was talking to my father about this morning and said exactly the same. I sadly agree completely with you.


----------



## Doormouse (10 July 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			J_M,  I'm equally appalled at your response.  So the B&S Vale,  should throw him to the wolves?  Would you have them use him as a sacrificial offering and disown him?  If the Courts find him innocent,  and there's clear evidence that the unfortunate creature who was injured placed herself in the path of danger,  she was trespassing and had no business where she was,  or conducting an operation which had no legal support,  and what at best was a sorry accident,  with either or both the horse and rider making every attempt to avoid the obstacle that was in their path,  and YOU would have him abandoned?

Judgemental,  there are times when your arguments astound me.  There's no evidence that the rider affected any intentional injury upon the victim,  and clear evidence that both or either he and his horse made every reasonable attempt to avoid a collision,  and you would hang him out to dry?  Really?

Lets find him guilty and preempt the decision of a Court,  shall we?  FFS!

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Very rarely would I find myself agreeing with Judgemental and disagreeing with you Alec but I'm afraid in this case I do.

I have hunted with the BV for 26 years, I grew up with most of the involved parties and although I don't feel he should have been immediately sacked, when they realised the strength of feeling about this they should have asked him to stand down for the rest of the season. I really do believe that had they done this the antis would not have pursued their crusade against him  and the court case would not be happening.

I think the whole thing has been badly handled.


----------



## Judgemental (10 July 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			J_M,  I'm equally appalled at your response.  So the B&S Vale,  should throw him to the wolves?  Would you have them use him as a sacrificial offering and disown him?  If the Courts find him innocent,  and there's clear evidence that the unfortunate creature who was injured placed herself in the path of danger,  she was trespassing and had no business where she was,  or conducting an operation which had no legal support,  and what at best was a sorry accident,  with either or both the horse and rider making every attempt to avoid the obstacle that was in their path,  and YOU would have him abandoned?

Judgemental,  there are times when your arguments astound me.  There's no evidence that the rider affected any intentional injury upon the victim,  and clear evidence that both or either he and his horse made every reasonable attempt to avoid a collision,  and you would hang him out to dry?  Really?

Lets find him guilty and preempt the decision of a Court,  shall we?  FFS!

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Alec I can understand your position from East Anglia, however in the West Country there are a very large number of hunting folk who are very disappointing that this matter has gone as far as it has. This matter should have been ameliorated from the outset by insurers agreeing damages with the injured lady and that would have been an end of the matter. All hunts have public liability insurance.


----------



## Lizzie66 (12 July 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Coming as it does at the this incredibly sensitive time, I am appalled.

I am appalled for two reasons. 

1. Doggrell should have been suspended by the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale at the outset when they knew the matter was ongoing..
		
Click to expand...

This is an oxymoron, they couldn't suspend at the outset  as well wait to see whether it was ongoing. It was dropped early on and has only recently been taken up again. Equally B&SV may well be more aware of what actually happened and feel that it is the right thing to do to support him.



Judgemental said:



			2. In the interests of hunting the masters of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale should have known about the governments plans to 'help' hunting and the potential of a debate. As a result they should have taken steps to ameliorate the situation and plainly stated Doggrells alleged conduct was wholly unacceptable..
		
Click to expand...

At the time no one knew who the next government would be so they had no reason to believe the government would help. Also are you seriously suggesting that on the possibility that a future government might help that a man who is currently innocent of any crime is thrown out for the greater good ?




Judgemental said:



			No doubt ever member of parliament will be made aware of this development and will doubtless, conclude why there are so many problems and wonder if any changes are prudent.

If the vote fails next Wednesday, I for one will lay the blame squarely at the door of this disgraceful situation.
		
Click to expand...

I doubt whether this will impact on people's vote one way or another and if it does then its shame on them. There are numerous instances where sabs have committed some horrendous acts including the death of Trevor Morse, the assault on Mike Lane and numerous continued verbal and physical harassment on an ongoing basis of hunts, their staff and their followers. Until the law puts an end to this level of harassment then it is unfortunate but inevitable that people from both sides will get hurt.

The hunt do not put saboteurs in harms way they do this themselves.


----------



## Judgemental (8 August 2015)

Absolutely shocking that hunting has been brought into such disrepute. Now that the matter has been sent to the Crown Court, it will be interesting to see what a jury makes of the charge. How the masters of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale have allowed this to happen is beyound comprehension. As far as I am aware this the first time any matter involving hunting has ever come before a Crown Court and a Jury trial. 

From Western Daily Press: August 04, 2015

Mark Doggrell pleads 'not guilty' to GBH of hunt sab 'Nid'

Hunt saboteur Nicola Rawson had to be airlifted to hospital after being hit by a horse

A huntsman with a Somerset hunt has pleaded 'not guilty' to a charge of GBH against a hunt saboteur who was knocked down by his horse last year.

Mark Doggrell, from the Blackmoor and Sparkford Vale hunt, appeared before magistrates in Yeovil on Tuesday charged with causing grievous bodily harm to Nicola Rawson.

Ms Rawson, known as 'Nid' among the animal rights campaign, was left with seven broken ribs and a collapsed lung when she was hit by a horse while out monitoring the BSV hunt last August.

Mr Doggrell, 45, pleaded 'not guilty' and the case was sent for trial at Taunton Crown Court on September 1.


----------



## Alec Swan (8 August 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Absolutely shocking that hunting has been brought into such disrepute. &#8230;&#8230;.. .
		
Click to expand...

Will your response be the same should Doggerell be found not guilty?

Alec.


----------



## Judgemental (1 September 2015)

There is embarrassing and then there is ......

Huntsman Mark Doggrell to appear in court tomorrow over hunt saboteur GBH charge
By Western Daily Press  |  Posted: September 01, 2015

Huntsman Mark Doggrell to appear in court tomorrow over hunt saboteur GBH charge 


Huntsman Mark Doggrell to appear in court tomorrow over hunt saboteur GBH charge.

Huntsman Mark Doggrell is due to appear before Taunton Crown Court on Wednesday charged with causing grievous bodily harm to a hunt saboteur, who was knocked down by his horse.

Mr Doggrell, aged 45, huntsman with the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt, pleaded not guilty to the charge when he appeared before South Somerset Magistrates at Yeovil last month. and the case was sent for trial at the Crown Court.

The injured saboteur, Nicola Rawson, known as 'Nid' among animal rights campaigners, was left with seven broken ribs and a collapsed lung when she was hit by a horse while out monitoring the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt in August 2014.



Read more: http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/...tory-27716805-detail/story.html#ixzz3kWCZCJo3 
Follow us: @WesternDaily on Twitter | WesternDaily on Facebook


----------



## Judgemental (29 November 2015)

I suppose this disgraceful matter is going to rear up again next week, with the National Press in full cry.  

On the other hand, perhaps somebody with intelligence, has managed to settle matters out of court.


----------



## Judgemental (20 September 2016)

Of course this is a absolute disgrace and just goes to show that no matter how long ago the incident, the authorities will catch up with one. Let this be a lesson to folk who ride anywhere.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/71...n-Peter-Doggrell-horse-trampled-Nicola-Rawson

"From the Daily Express

Protester hospitalised &#8216;after irritated huntsman rode horse into her&#8217;

A &#8220;RECKLESS&#8221; huntsman rode his horse into a female hunt saboteur, leaving her seriously injured on the ground, a jury was told yesterday.

By JOHN CHAPMAN
PUBLISHED: 00:01, Tue, Sep 20, 2016
Peter Doggrell (left) and moment from videoSC
Nicola Rawson, 43, was hospitalised after bering trampled by a horse ridden by Peter Doggrell (left)
Protester Nicola Rawson, 43, sustained seven broken ribs and a collapsed lung after she was struck and trampled by the horse ridden by Peter Doggrell.

Mr Doggrell, who was leading a &#8220;trail hunt&#8221; &#8211; in which hounds follow a scent laid in advance &#8211; denies causing grievous bodily harm (GBH).

A group of hunt saboteurs had sprayed citronella along country lanes near the village of Charlton Horethorne in Somerset to break up the scent for hounds to follow.

They also blocked roadways. A dashboard-mounted camera captured the incident on August 28, 2014.

RELATED ARTICLES
Sir Ranulph pleads with Theresa May: &#8216;Don&#8217;t bring back fox hunting'
Demands for vicar to be sacked after footage shows him on a hunt
Shortly before 6pm, the court heard, a Land Rover belonging to the five saboteurs parked at a gateway to a field.

Doggrell did not stop and that in itself indicates he had no interest in the safety of the person struck
Giles Nelson
NHS worker Ms Rawson and her friend Martin Porritt got out of the car to block the field entrance.

Within seconds, it is claimed, Mr Doggrell ploughed into the side of her, leaving her hospitalised for two weeks.

Mr Doggrell rode off after the incident but handed himself in at Yeovil police station two days later.

Dashcam footage of incidentSC
Nicola Rawson, 43, sustained seven broken ribs and a collapsed lung after she was hit
He was arrested on suspicion of causing GBH but released due to insufficient evidence. But after a video of the incident was posted online, a petition was started to bring charges.

At Taunton Crown Court, Mr Giles Nelson, prosecuting, said there had been a standoff throughout the day and mutual animosity had been building.

He said: &#8220;In short, there was an escalation of tension. &#8220;It&#8217;s not suggested by the prosecution that this defendant was directly involved in any violent or threatening conduct prior to the incident.

&#8220;It&#8217;s suggested that he was aware of the presence of the saboteur group. There was no need for him to ride as hard as he did. Also, the background of the day is relevant, no doubt irritated by earlier events. He took it upon himself to frighten the protesters; rode as hard and close as he did. It was a reckless act.

Peter Doggrell GETTY
Peter Doggrell said he was &#8220;a careful rider&#8221; and was cantering at the time
&#8220;Doggrell did not stop and that in itself indicates he had no interest in the safety of the person struck, just as he had no interest in their safety as he approached.&#8221;

The prosecution maintains the protestors were in sight and Mr Doggrell, of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt, had time to react, but chose not to.

In a police interview, Mr Doggrell said he had 10-15 seconds of the Land Rover being in view before striking the protester, who he claims only appeared in his line of sight when it was too late.

He initially answered &#8220;no comment&#8221; during interview, but provided a written statement after seeing video footage.

Hunting hounds GETTY
Saboteurs sprayed citronella along country lanes to break up the scent for the hounds to follow
He said the two people in the field &#8220;appeared before him&#8221; and his horse shied.

He said the horse only made a &#8220;glancing contact&#8221; with Miss Rawson, but &#8220;not enough to hurt [her]&#8221;.

He said he did not intend to make contact with anyone and was told 20 minutes later that the protester had been badly hurt.

He said he was &#8220;a careful rider&#8221; and was cantering at the time.

The trial continues".


----------



## Countryman (20 September 2016)

JM, as a trial is under way I suggest we leave it to the court for now. I'm sure there will be plenty of opportunity for comment, both on here and in the press, when the verdict is reached, whatever that is.


----------



## Judgemental (20 September 2016)

Error


----------



## Sherston (23 September 2016)

I think that we can all be very pleased that justice has prevailed, after 2.5 days in front of a jury, who would have seen far more than just the 1 minute video recording they took very little time in concluding their not guilty verdict. Just goes to prove how video evidence does not portray all of the facts.


----------



## ExmoorHunter (23 September 2016)

Sherston said:



			I think that we can all be very pleased that justice has prevailed, after 2.5 days in front of a jury, who would have seen far more than just the 1 minute video recording they took very little time in concluding their not guilty verdict. Just goes to prove how video evidence does not portray all of the facts.
		
Click to expand...

The jury will have seen the unedited video not the version which is being plastered all over social media.


----------



## Countryman (23 September 2016)

ExmoorHunter said:



			The jury will have seen the unedited video not the version which is being plastered all over social media.
		
Click to expand...

This is very true, and may well have made all the difference.


----------



## ExmoorHunter (23 September 2016)

Countryman said:



			This is very true, and may well have made all the difference.
		
Click to expand...

Yes it definitely did! It's worth following Jamie Foster on Twitter where is it made clear the video shown to the court was unedited. Funny though that Dorset Hunt Sabs don't want to release it.  https://twitter.com/1jamiefoster?lang=en-gb


----------



## JanetGeorge (23 September 2016)

Even better - the CPS's own expert witness (and she ain't cheap) ended up giving evidence for the defence. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oteur-purpose-CPS-ignores-expert-witness.html


----------



## Fiagai (28 September 2016)

Watching the video released and having read various accounts presented, I would suggest that "Nid" and her co-antis carry a significant  duty of care and responsibility for their actions on the day in question. 

As related by Carolinb in this thread 

"Ms Warren was campaigning with the Dorset Hunt Sabs group when she was struck.

A FB account detailed how "We sounded a horn, hollered, and some hounds looked up and started to come our way.

"I think he [the hunt member] got angry at this. He came along a public road behind us at speed, he didn't issue a warning, he was completely silent, then he hit me and rode off."

It has been further detailed that the access to the field was blocked by a vehicle and pedestrians in dark clothing. (And thereby resulting in the antis putting themselves directly in the path of the huntsman)

It is evident that not only did the relevant antis actively disrupt the hounds by hollowing etc, they then deliberatly blocked the huntsmans access to the field in question  preventing the huntsman being able to see - a very obvious attempt to cause trouble with the orderly progress of the hunt.

Unless the antis were deaf it is highly unlikely that they did not hear the progress of the huntsman along the road (as detailed by the antis) and thereby the hunstmans activity could not have been a surprise to these self same individuals.

Placing themselves in such evident danger in my opinion places significant responsibility on  the various antis for the collision of "Nid" and the hunstmans horse.

Unfortunately this type of anti activity appears frequently to be part and parcel of anti groups arsenal of anti social behaviour and is plainly not new. However calling wolf as it were has evidently now backfired and so slap it up to them - to quote a dear departed grand uncle on a similar issue. 

The fact that various antis are screaming unfair process again shows the distance to which antis will go to discredit absolutly anyone and everyone who disagrees with them or goes against their bizarre and narrow end of of the telescope view of the universe.

Now that the huntsman has been cleared of deliberately injuring the hunt saboteur I do hope this incident can be added to the litany of behaviours and incidents engaged in by antis groups and be used positivly in a movement towards the drafting of a legal process to criminalise all such anti activities.


----------



## ester (28 September 2016)

Even barefoot I can't travel along a public road silently and certainly not a speed! That was such a ridiculous statement to make!


----------

