Racing supremo hits back
The Federal Court was told yesterday some of the footage aired on the ABC was obtained by an organisation run by Elio Celotto, who is the campaign director of the Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses. During heated questioning by the ABC’s barrister Sandy Dawson, SC, Mr V’landys told the court he gave Mr Celotto no “credence” and questioned why he hadn’t contacted authorities about the alleged animal welfare offences.
The hearing continues.
This is the crux of the argument about the ABC's motives.
If you are genuinely concerned about animal welfare, and you are in possession of evidence that animal cruelty is happening, then you are obliged to present that evidence to authorities ASAP.
If you do not present that evidence in a timely manner, then more animals suffer as a result of your delay in sharing of information.
In the ABC's case, it has been obvious from the outset that the team on this assignment took a conscious decision to withhold evidence of animal cruelty just so they could showcase their story on the week before the Everest.
That is probably not directly associated with Mr V'Landys defamation case, but it is true in the moral sense.
The ABC should be ashamed of themselves. An apology to the public and the reporter undergoing counselling by people who genuinely love horses (not the political parasites pretending to be concerned) should be the outcome.