Driving through remote areas, we may have come across an unusual sight, an old pair of boots hanging from a fence post.
This countryside tradition has long puzzled many people, leaving them wondering about its significance. However, there are several meaningful reasons why comboys and farmers choose to display them in this manner.
They hang boots as a symbol of hard work
For ranchers, they are more than just footwear. They are tools that protect their feet during long days of labor. When a rancher hangs footwear on a fence post, it symbolizes the hard work they have done.
They show signs of wear and tear that reflect the experiences of the person who wore them. By hanging their boots on a fence post, farmers express their individuality.
This action allows farmers to leave a personal mark on their land, showcasing their identity and pride in their work.
Farmers honor the past by hanging boots on fence
Hanging boots on a fence post is also a way to honor the past. Many ranchers hang the boots of loved ones who have passed away. It is a tribute to their memory and the contributions they made to the ranch.
Defending the wooden fences
This sign can also serve a practical purpose, helping to protect the wooden fences from weathering and deterioration.
The boots can be used to cover and reinforce the tops of fence posts, shielding them from the elements and prolonging the lifespan of the fencing.
Furthermore, in areas with sparse landmarks, they could provide a useful point of reference for directions and navigation.
Angelina Jolie’s former security guard comes out with shocking allegations against her in Brad Pitt case
According to the documents, Webb was the “head of Jolie’s security detail for two decades, and he remained in that role for approximately four years after the couple divorced.”
Webb stated that Jolie “required him and his contractors to sign NDAs relating to various personal and professional details of her, and her family’s, life.”
After the couple filed for divorce, they had a major custody battle over their six children. According to the documents, Webb claimed he “received multiple calls from Jolie’s representative, who told Mr. Webb to remind his staff that they had entered into NDAs with Jolie and that if they testified in a custody proceeding, Jolie would sue them.”
Webb said that he had conveyed the message to his contractors, and both of them confirmed that they would testify if they were to be subpoenaed.
The documents further claimed that “one of them told Webb that ‘he would testify about statements he overheard that Ms. Jolie made to the children, encouraging them to avoid spending time with Mr. Pitt during custody visits.’”
The documents also stated that the “the two security contractors both testified” despite being threated with being sued and shortly after, Mr. Webb’s company was fired by Jolie.
Webb himself does not claim to have heard Jolie’s directive instructing the children not to interact with Pitt during custody visits. He now also works for Pitt.
Jolie’s attorney, Paul Murphy has since then addressed the media over this matter. He said in a statement, “Mr. Pitt’s continued attempt to equate common NDAs for security personnel and housekeepers covering confidential information employees learn at work, with him demanding an expanded NDA to ensure the continued coverup of his deplorable actions remains shameful.” “This case is not about NDAs in general, but about power and control. All Angelina has ever wanted was separation and health, with positive relationships between all members of their family, including Mr. Pitt. She looks forward to the day when he is finally able to let her go,” the statement further read.
The latest filing comes after over a month after Jolie’s lawyer filed documents claiming that Pitt had been physically abusive toward her even before the alleged infamous plane incident of 2016. That incident, according to documents, was the final straw in asking for a divorce.
The motion that Jolie’s legal team filed in early April, most revolved around the dispute over their shares of ownership in their French winery estate, Château Miraval.
Her legal team filed a motion asking the court to compel Pitt and his legal team to provide “responses” and “documents” that explained why the actor “suddenly conditioned his purchase of Jolie’s share of Miraval on her agreeing to a greatly expanded NDA now covering Pitt’s personal misconduct, whether related to Miraval or not.”
Jolie firmly claims that this move to demand NDAs was Pitt’s attempt to “cover up” the alleged abuse against Jolie and their children.
Pitt was never charged with a crime after authorities investigated the 2016 plane incident.
In contrast to what Jolie’s legal team is saying, Pitt’s lawyers allege that it was Jolie and her team who requested a “broader” NDA.
Leave a Reply