ROCKBRIDGE COUNTY, Va. – The Natural Bridge Zoo appeared in court on Wednesday, as both the zoo and state are appealing a judge’s ruling that only a little over half of about 100 animals seized from the zoo during a raid by the state in December was justified.
Attorneys brought a number of concerns to a Rockbridge County judge hoping to resolve issues before their jury trial. The zoo’s new defense team asked a judge for more access to documents and seized animals, and expressed other concerns.
The defense alleges the state wasn’t justified in its search and seizure at the zoo last December. Court documents show two undercover informants sparked the search and the defense called into question one’s credibility.
“It should have been disclosed, we believe that that individual was being paid by an animal activist organization, PETA, to work undercover and to surreptitiously film,” Defense attorney Erin Harrigan said. “He was also the primary caretaker for some of the animals that they allege in the affidavit were receiving inadequate care.”
Prosecutor Michelle Welch argued that the informant is credible given the evidence was caught on camera.
“Here they’re making PETA the boogeyman,” Welch said. “What does the connection to an activist group would make that video unreliable?”
Meanwhile, Judge Christopher Russell questioned why Rockbridge County authorities were not informed of the raid. The warrant for the search was approved by a Powhatan County judge.
“That the government wouldn’t trust the authorities in Rockbridge to handle the request to conduct this search and even with the possible protections built in,” Russell said. “I find that a little bit troubling.”
Welch argued that the zoo’s owners, the Mogensens, have a connection to law enforcement, and she alleged, despite precautions, that they were tipped off.
“Some investigations have to be confidential, and they have to be organized in a way that the perpetrators of the abuse are not tipped off,” Welch said. “Here they were tipped off. They moved the elephant. So there was good reason as from the attorney general’s office point of view that we keep this as confidential as we could.”
Russell ordered a “bill of particulars” or a clear description of why each animal was seized to be given to the defense. However, he denied the defense’s motion for access to animals given that it could be irrelevant now that time has passed since the seizure.
The jury trial is expected to start on Feb. 26 and last four days.