AUGUSTA - A New Sharon woman facing accusations of animal cruelty and assaulting a police officer with a stun gun lost custody of more than 30 animals seized by the state today, in a civil proceeding held at the Kennebec County Superior Court.

Carol Murphy, 65, of 248 Lane Road in New Sharon, was been charged with assault on an officer, a Class C felony; refusing to submit to arrest or detention, a Class D misdemeanor; criminal use of an electronic weapon, a Class D misdemeanor, and three counts of cruelty to animals, all Class D misdemeanors. She was arraigned on the charges on Dec. 18, pleading not guilty.

The charges stem from an incident on Oct. 14 when, according to the state, a Maine State Police trooper responded to the home with an arrest warrant for unpaid fines, after police received a complaint from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that Murphy had pets in her home. Possession of animals would be in violation of a court order Murphy incurred in 2005, following the 2004 conviction.

In the course of the arrest, the trooper said that he was hit in the face with a stun gun by Murphy, who was subdued and placed under arrest. She was transported to Franklin County Detention Center and the state police contacted Maine Department of Agriculture’s Animal Welfare Program to remove the animals from the home the next morning.

Christine Fraser, a veterinarian with the AWP, testified that she and other personnel went to the residence on the Lane Road. There they discovered more than 30 animals ranging from dogs and cats to birds to a miniature donkey and pot-bellied pig. Several farm animals, such as ducks, chickens and alpacas, were also found on the property.

According to the AWP, animals were discovered in crates and cages, often without food and water. Many were below-average in weight and clinically dehydrated. One dog, termed ‘Dog3′ in Fraser’s notes, registered as a one on the nine-point Laflamme Scale, classifying it as “emaciated.”

“I could reach a hand across her pelvic bone,” Fraser testified last month, adding that the dog would have been incapable of standing by itself had the situation continued much longer.

The animals had been infested with fleas, ear mites and many had ear infections. In many cases, the space allotted to each animal was inadequate, Fraser said. She had noted that the pot-bellied pig, a 300-pound animal, was placed in a crate which pressed against its snout and tail. Two animals, a bird and a chinchilla, later died in state custody from what Fraser believed were conditions inherited from the Lane Road home.

This was not the first custody hearing Murphy had attended. Murphy and the state of Maine have had a series of legal confrontations on her ability to possess animals, going back to a 2004 conviction for cruelty to animals.

Today, at the hearing’s conclusion in Augusta, Justice Michaela Murphy began by ruling in favor of the state, who had moved to quash subpoenas filed by Carol Murphy in regards to the custody hearing. Carol Murphy had subpoenaed Fraser, Franklin County District Attorney Norman Croteau, Animal Welfare Project Director Norma Worley and state Department of Agriculture Commissioner Seth Bradstreet III.

The justice sided with Assistant District Attorney Andrew Robinson, who argued that the materials and testimony sought by Carol Murphy were not relevant to the custody hearing. According to the subpoena documents, Murphy had requested information pertaining to “illegal searches” of her property in 2004, as well as the seizure of animals and several personal items, including jewelry and computer equipment.

After ruling with the state’s motion to quash, the court moved through the remains of the custody hearing. Murphy declined to testify, after briefly discussing her options with attorney George Hess. While not representing her at the custody hearing, Hess attended to observe the proceedings as he has been appointed to represent her on the pending criminal charges.

Carol Murphy argued that the court had no jurisdiction to rule on the custody of the animals.

“I really feel this court is unconstitutional,” she told Justice Michaela Murphy.

“I understand that,” the justice replied. “Would you like to testify?”

“What is the point?” Murphy said. She went on to say that she was being tried in a “kangaroo court” and that she intended to sue everyone involved.

Although not testifying, Murphy did make several arguments against the legality of the custody hearing. She argued that the state had no authority to seize the animals as the 2004 conviction for cruelty to animals was “void.” Murphy cited “50 or so criminal acts, including 11 illegal searches” of her property in 2004 as the reason for the voiding of the conviction.

In closing statements, Robinson argued that Fraser’s testimony had indicated that the poor air quality and unhygienic living conditions within Murphy’s home, as well as inadequate food and water, had created an environment that qualified as cruel treatment for the animals at 248 Lane Road. Murphy argued that the court had been unfair in not allowing her to access the animals for use as evidence, and that the animals had been fed multiple times each day. Any deterioration in conditions, Murphy claimed, occurred during the time between her arrest and the arrival of the AWP.

“I do not know what the court wants to hear,” Murphy said. “It certainly doesn’t want the truth.”

Justice Michaela Murphy awarded custody to the state, stating that the preponderance of the evidence indicated that the animals had been cruelly treated in regards to “lack of proper nutrition, lack of proper hydration, poor air quality and in terms of the unhygienic conditions of their cages.”

The animals, already in the state’s possession, will now be placed with institutions and shelters, and eventually with homes. Justice Michaela Murphy also ordered the state to prepare a bill for all expenses incurred by the state. These expenses, for food, shelter, medical care and transportation of the animals, will be assessed to Carol Murphy through a lien on her property.

Murphy is expected to be back in court on Jan. 22, 2010, facing a contempt of court allegation in regards to her alleged possession of animals despite court orders to the contrary.