/

State agency removes animals from New Sharon woman’s home

5 mins read
Carol Murphy
Carol Murphy (Franklin County Detention Center photo)

NEW SHARON – Animal Welfare Program and Maine State Police personnel executed a search warrant at a Lane Road residence last week, seizing four animals from a local woman currently facing a contempt charge for housing animals.

Carol Murphy, 71 of New Sharon, last appeared in court on June 12, after she was picked up on an arrest warrant on June 9 in Somerset County. The warrant had been issued by Justice William Stokes after Murphy failed to appear on Dec. 22, 2014 for jury selection. Murphy faces a plenary contempt charge that stems from her alleged violation of court orders issued in 2005 and 2010 that forbid her possession of animals at her Lane Road residence. That contempt trial is expected to proceed in September.

On July 2, an agent of the Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry’s Animal Welfare Program, MSP troopers and Franklin County Sheriff’s Office personnel arrived at Murphy’s residence on the Lane Road with a search warrant. Court documents associated with the warrant indicate that reports from neighbors and law enforcement officers had led the state to suspect that animals were once again living in Murphy’s residence.

Nearly a decade ago, Murphy was first banned from possessing animals for the rest of her life after she was convicted of animal cruelty. More than 50 animals suffering from severe neglect had been discovered on her property.

In 2010, she was again convicted of animal cruelty charges after the state seized more than 40 animals found in varying degrees of poor health at her home. She was also convicted of felony assault on an officer, refusing to submit to arrest or detention, and criminal use of an electronic weapon, after Murphy used a Taser on a trooper trying to serve a warrant in 2009 for unpaid court fines.

Murphy was sentenced to four years in prison, issued another order forbidding the possession of animals for the rest of her life and was held in contempt of court for statements she made during the jury trial.

Currently, Murphy is awaiting a trial on a plenary contempt charge, defined as a “failure to comply with a lawful judgement, order, writ subpoena, process or formal instruction of the court,” relating to Murphy’s alleged possession of animals. In October 2014, the state took custody of dogs, chinchillas, rabbits, a pot-bellied pig and a cat from Murphy’s residence. Neighbors and a television news crew had recorded evidence that Murphy was once again keeping animals in the home, at which point the District Attorney’s Office acquired a search warrant that allowed the state’s animal welfare personnel and law enforcement to enter her home and remove the animals on Oct. 1.

On July 2, according to an inventory submitted in court documents, the state removed four animals: two kittens, one adult German shepherd dog and a pot-bellied pig. Several bags of pet food, treats and other products associated with pet care were also seized.

According to the request for a search warrant filed with Farmington District Court, the state’s animal welfare program intended to both enforce the court orders that forbid the purchase of animals, as well as collect evidence for the ongoing plenary contempt proceeding.

“Seizure of all animals kept at Carol Murphy’s property is necessary to enforce this court’s order and is evidence of her contempt of court,” the affidavit and request for search warrant reads.

Unlike a summary contempt proceeding, which generally deals with an individual’s conduct in the courtroom and carries a maximum sentence of 30 days in jail, plenary contempt sentences are restricted by the underlying criminal conviction. If convicted of contempt, Murphy could be sentenced up to 364 days in jail since the order came as part of the Class D misdemeanor animal cruelty conviction.

Murphy’s next scheduled court appearance is Aug. 28, for a status conference.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

10 Comments

  1. What is wrong with this woman, does she think she is exempt from the law?????? If only animals could talk…..

  2. Can they sentence this lady to the FCAS? Dogs need to be walked and cages emptied. I have volunteered there in the past and remember scrubbing a stack of dirty litter boxes once.

  3. Seriously? Poor Lady? More like poor animals! I don’t think the PD is going to do this for the fun of it, they are there to protect what needs to be protected. Clearly it is not “her” in this matter but the poor poor animals!

  4. GSmith she did serve her four years in prison. But it doesn’t appear that she learned her lesson. Do I feel sorry yes in a way however I feel sorry for the animals more. So the question that I have is how do you stop someone who is banned from owning any animals from continued getting them?

  5. WOW glen!!! I hope you do not have any animals…. It seems like you are on her wave – length!!!

  6. Not only is she a danger to herself, but more importantly to the animals she abuses and lets not forget the state trooper she used the stun gun on. She needs to be locked up to protect all

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.