Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhetts_mama  But why come on and bring up a 4 year old post? The latest post that she offered up as an example is from 2007 and was an update on how the dog was doing with the new family. If yorkie was still posting things about the breeder, then yes, she should have the right to defend herself. But it just seems like a moot point to be dragging it back in to the spotlight now.
Sorry, I don't mean to be argumentative about this. It just doesn't make sense to me to rehash this publicly now. Does she have the right to have her feelings hurt because of what was posted? Of course. But calling it defamation when an opinion is expressed is just as hurtful (In MY opinion, of course  ) |
Maybe we don't know the whole story but it appears that they both live in Missouri, maybe they know the same people and maybe what was said about this breeder of 30 years, has caused her unnecessary fear (of what's being said and talked about behind her back) as well as, shame and humiliation.
As for Defamation, would you liked to be labeled something, solely based on someone's unproven opinion? The vet's opinion was that the seizures could have been caused by the inbreeding (but it also could have been caused by a dozen other things too).
It's terrible that this happened to all involved (especially Scooter) but I hope he's doing well where he is now.