Jump to content

Hunt master charged


ShootingEgg
 Share

Recommended Posts

You have to be realistic. The hunt set out for a day's sport. The sabs don masks, carry bodycams, shout abuse and set out to cause trouble. They are quite adept at twisting situations to the point where they become the victim. I think that they are nothing but cowardly scum, but they are far more organised.

Hunts need to up their game, take advice as to what can or cannot be done, get cameras, make sure they have witnesses of the right kind. It won't be the last time a sportsman ends up in court, because they had been pushed too far.

Quote

 

But they are doing more than trespass, they are committing Aggravated Trespass which is a criminal offence and the police should act and arrest them.

It's all in the link below.

 

You are correct, but getting proof is not what the hunt are good at. The sabs are.

Edited by Gordon R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Gordon R said:

Hunts need to up their game, take advice as to what can or cannot be done, get cameras, make sure they have witnesses of the right kind. It won't be the last time a sportsman ends up in court, because they had been pushed too far.

In a way, I agree ......... but .........

1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

The hunt set out for a day's sport.

and if you have to do these things and take these measures to participate in a legal sport, then the enjoyment would be gone - and the sabs have effectively won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, panoma1 said:

The law in the UK seems to be soft on the perpetrator and hard on any attempt by the victim to protect their property and/or themselves and others!

+1 - has been that way for a long long time now.  Part of the 'snowflakeisation' we have gradually been subjected to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

and if you have to do these things and take these measures to participate in a legal sport, then the enjoyment would be gone - and the sabs have effectively won.

Correct. In short, the hunt want sport, the sabs will do anything to prevent people enjoying a legitimate activity. It stinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

You have to be realistic. The hunt set out for a day's sport. The sabs don masks, carry bodycams, shout abuse and set out to cause trouble. They are quite adept at twisting situations to the point where they become the victim. I think that they are nothing but cowardly scum, but they are far more organised.

Hunts need to up their game, take advice as to what can or cannot be done, get cameras, make sure they have witnesses of the right kind. It won't be the last time a sportsman ends up in court, because they had been pushed too far.

You are correct, but getting proof is not what the hunt are good at. The sabs are.

Some years ago a farmer I knew (now deceased) was set on by three anti blood sports thugs while he was pigeon shooting on his own land, he was hospitalised for two weeks, the perpetrators were never caught, on talking to him some months latter he said at one point it entered his head to shoot one of them as he feared for his life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Swinton said:

Should get a couple of years .bet he will not do it again .diserves what he gets 

He doesn't deserve it he was provoked , she deserved what she got.

28 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

The law in the UK seems to be soft on the perpetrator and hard on any attempt by the victim to protect their property and/or themselves and others!

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

old'un - He would seem to have been within his rights to defend himself. It would have got twisted to read that a gun crazed farmer shot innocent ramblers, who had lost their way.

Edited by Gordon R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ordnance said:

He is guilty, he should face the consequences. 

Who needs antis when we have the likes of you ☹

18 hours ago, ordnance said:

He is guilty, he should face the consequences. 

Who needs antis when we have the likes of you ☹

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Act of terroism: the calculated use of or threat of violence against civilians in order to obtain goals that are political, religious or ideological in nature; is done through intimidation, coercion or instilling fear. Sabs and their activities on the whole definitely fall within the terrorism act. They should be chucked in the equivalent of Guantanamo bay and not let out! The law doesn't matter to these people. The local antagonist Cathy Scott of the West Mid hunt sabs is a big fan of breaking the law and this season drafted in help from some rent a thugs from stockport specifically to intimidate people and draw them into fights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Benthejockey said:

Act of terroism: the calculated use of or threat of violence against civilians in order to obtain goals that are political, religious or ideological in nature; is done through intimidation, coercion or instilling fear. Sabs and their activities on the whole definitely fall within the terrorism act. They should be chucked in the equivalent of Guantanamo bay and not let out! The law doesn't matter to these people. The local antagonist Cathy Scott of the West Mid hunt sabs is a big fan of breaking the law and this season drafted in help from some rent a thugs from stockport specifically to intimidate people and draw them into fights.

I concur 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wymberley - Agreed. 

 

I'm at a bit of a loss as to where this comes from 

Quote

Who needs antis when we have the likes of you ☹

He broke the law, whatever the provocation. If anyone supports the rule of law, does it make them an "anti"? Bizarre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FOXHUNTER1 said:

He doesn't deserve it he was provoked , she deserved what she got.

+1

So if you are provoked that makes it OK to assault someone. That would be a interesting defence in assault cases, she provoked me so i hit her a slap she deserved it. :hmm:

Edited by ordnance
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ordnance said:

So if you are provoked that makes it OK to assault someone. That would be a interesting defence in assault cases, she provoked me so i hit her a slap she deserved it. 

18 months of harassment by these idiots no wonder he reacted . The police should take these morons to court and lock them up ...they are rural terrorists.

Edited by FOXHUNTER1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FOXHUNTER1 said:

18 months of harassment by these idiots no wonder he reacted . The police should take these morons to court and lock them up ...

OK.  The wife provoked me for 18 months so i assaulted her with a stick causing actual bodily harm, not my fault your honour actually it was her fault .:hmm:   What the police should have done regarding the harassment accusations is another debate. 

Edited by ordnance
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ordnance said:

So if you are provoked that makes it OK to assault someone. That would be a interesting defence in assault cases, she provoked me so i hit her a slap she deserved it. :hmm:

No, but it's not ok to subject someone going about their lawful business to months of harassment either!......And the police do nothing!

I would bet if you suffered months of harassment you would break at some point and react! I believe I would!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, panoma1 said:

No, but it's not ok to subject someone going about their lawful business to months of harassment either!......And the police do nothing!

I would bet if you suffered months of harassment you would break at some point and react! I believe I would!

Exactly.

The police are a waste of time and do nothing......

She took the risk so should accept the consequences...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

And the police do nothing!

I would bet if you suffered months of harassment you would break at some point and react! I believe I would!

Possibly, and if i did then i would have to be be willing to face the consequences of my actions. 

2 minutes ago, FOXHUNTER1 said:

Exactly.

The police are a waste of time and do nothing......

She took the risk so should accept the consequences...

The jury had a different view, the case was about did he assault her not the police actions or inaction's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ordnance said:

Possibly, and if i did then i would have to be be willing to face the consequences of my actions. 

The jury had a different view, the case was about did he assault her not the police actions or inaction's. 

The jury was probably made up of people like you  ...if it was made up of people like me he would be found not guilty ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ordnance said:

Possibly, and if i did then i would have to be be willing to face the consequences of my actions. 

The jury had a different view, the case was about did he assault her not the police actions or inaction's. 

First of all we have the possibility of a magistrates court dishing out a 2 year sentence and now we even have a jury!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, old'un said:

In that case why don’t the police use the law of civil disorder against these people?

 

Because that would mean they have to do something, it's a complete waste of police time. They know what the sabs are going to do, they harass and goad until they get the reaction they want.

Don't agree with hitting the women, and i think it looks worse being a women. But i still don't see how these people are allowed to turn up masked and intimidate people to the point the police need to be there.

I'm always surprised a horse hasn't kicked out accidentally or not and smashed a sab? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...