The Case Against Tracy Murphy Was Dismissed

Today, the case against Tracy Murphy was dismissed. I’ll have much more to say about this, but here is the motion I filed earlier this week.

It is rare to see a trial where everyone loses. However, given the experience of the last two years, that is the likely outcome if the case of Tracy Murphy goes to trial. It is for that reason that Ms. Murphy, through counsel, moves this court to dismiss the charges against her in the interest of justice.

There are many reasons a dismissal is the right result in this case. Ms. Murphy’s role in running a “shelter of last resort” has served a crucial role in the local community – including supporting law enforcement. Ms. Murphy’s fundamental liberties were violated when she was interrogated, raided, and shackled by her arms and legs, all despite the fact that she did her best to follow the exact letter of the law. And Ms. Murphy’s efforts to assist two stray cows who wandered onto her property were motivated by compassion, not criminal intent. Compassion, in the state of New York and in these United States of America, is not a crime.

But the most fundamental reason this case should be dismissed is that it has undermined the community’s faith in justice. Ms. Murphy has faced not just arrest but protests outside of her home, smear campaigns against her business, and threats on her life; her many supporters in the community are understandably disheartened by what they have seen. Farmers on the other side, in the wake of this criminal case, fear not just a legal but cultural attack on their way of life; a bad outcome in the trial may open the floodgates to greater conflict. In short, the criminal case against Tracy Murphy has worsened the deep grievances felt by people on all sides.

A trial will rip these wounds open wider; only discretion and dialogue can reverse this destructive path and restore all sides’ faith that justice will be served. For this reason, Ms. Murphy requests that the charges be dismissed in the interest of justice.   

I.               Ms. Murphy serves an important community role, including providing support for the local authorities.

Asha’s Farm Sanctuary (Asha) was founded in 2013 by Ms. Murphy, who was formerly an executive at HSBC, one of the largest financial services institutions in the world. While Ms. Murphy lived a comfortable life in the corporate world, she felt a calling to help her local community, where she has lived her entire life since being born in Niagara Falls, New York in 1962. She heard about cases of animal cruelty in the local media, but learned at a conference at Farm Sanctuary in Watkins Glen, New York that resources to support stray, injured, and abused animals are in short supply. Without “shelters of last resort” to take these animals, animal control departments across the state cannot fulfill their mission and enforce the law. When animals are seized in a cruelty case, for example, there is often nowhere for them to go. And yet that is precisely the situation that communities across this nation face.

Ms. Murphy wanted to help. And, from Asha’s opening, which came at great financial self-sacrifice, it was an important shelter of last resort. When chickens were viciously stabbed by a man who was embroiled in a domestic dispute, Ms. Murphy offered to nurse the surviving birds back to life. When a local property owner was found to be starving dozens of cows and pigs, who were emaciated and stuck in filthy pens – in some cases, neck-deep in their own feces – the authorities reached out to Asha to give two mistreated pigs a new lease on life. And when a blind calf with no commercial value was given up by a farm – an impossible situation for any normal shelter to handle – Asha stepped in to ensure that the baby would receive proper care. That little blind calf, Darsha, remains a resident of Asha to this day, though she is now over 2,000 pounds. Without “shelters of last resort” like Asha, the community cannot give animals like Darsha the lives they deserve, or uphold its commitment to animal welfare.  

Ms. Murphy’s actions to help Little Willow and Ismael, the two cows who wandered onto her property in this case, must be understood in this light. A stray cow on a road is not just in danger of being hit by a car but is also a hazard for human drivers. And, on a hot summer day, with no obvious access to water, strays are often in need of care. So Ms. Murphy did what she always does for her community: she tried to help. And, for most of the last decade, Ms. Murphy’s work has been not just supported by the authorities, but often done at their direct request. 

II.             Ms. Murphy’s constitutional freedoms and rights were violated in this case.

What happened next, however, was a sudden change in Asha’s relationship with law enforcement. Due to false rumors and miscommunication, what should have been an ordinary stray animal case escalated into a national culture war. Ms. Murphy’s requests for proof of ownership were transformed into an attack on Niagara County’s way of life. Loud voices in Ms. Murphy’s defense, in turn, lashed out at ranchers on social media. Through it all, what was lost was a steady commitment to our nation’s constitutional process and rights.

Dozens of people began gathering outside of Ms. Murphy’s home to protest. Some trespassed on her property, including one man who drove a motorbike onto her lawn while screaming obscenities. Ms. Murphy’s business was undermined by the smear campaigns; on multiple occasions, contractors suddenly and inexplicably canceled their services for Asha, leaving her nonprofit teetering on the brink of financial collapse. Most importantly, despite her retention of an attorney and her entreaties for the authorities to speak directly to him, officers repeatedly interrogated and pressured her, including one visit in the middle of the night. This violated Ms. Murphy’s right to privacy, and to have counsel represent her in one of the most difficult moments in her life.

Through all of this, however, Tracy had faith in the legal process. She reported the cows to the authorities immediately upon taking them in and followed the instructions of her attorney Matt Albert, a former Erie County prosecutor. Mr. Albert advised Ms. Murphy that she should refuse to release the cows without valid proof of ownership, and also that she had a valid lien on the cows. “Never in a million years” should she return the cows, he said, without following the appropriate legal process, including a resolution of her lien rights. This was particularly true since Tracy had grown attached to the cows, like pets. In contrast, the alleged owner planned to send them to slaughter.

And yet, without any warning to her attorney, and only one week after her first contact with the alleged owner of the cows, Tracy was arrested, shackled, and jailed. Millions of people, who were mostly relying on false or exaggerated allegations on social media, watched and jeered as her mug shot was posted on social media and she was paraded – still in arm and leg shackles – into court.

III.           Ms. Murphy motive was not criminal. It was compassion.

The most fundamental misinformation was relating to Ms. Murphy’s motive. Contrary to statements on social media that Ms. Murphy was motivated by hate” and “greed,” Ms. Murphy was always motivated by something far more innocent: compassion.

Ms. Murphy, like millions of Americans, has been an animal lover her entire life. And that love motivated her actions in this case. She saw two young cows wandering onto her property near a busy road, and her love for animals called her to give them food, water, and shelter. She named them Ismael and Little Willow, and she quickly became attached to their personalities. Little Willow was excited and rambunctious; Ismael was needy and more reserved. But they both quickly became part of the Asha family, in the way that stray dogs or cats become a part of American families every day.

Tracy’s actions in the weeks after July 16, when the two cows arrived, were taken to ensure these new members of the Asha family would remain safe, not to deprive anyone of their property. She had invested her sweat, tears, and financial resources into caring for the cows for 10 days before the alleged owner arrived to claim them. She was not sure who this man was, or what to do when he failed to provide proof of ownership. But, on advice of counsel, Ms. Murphy believed the legal process would end with a positive outcome for all those involved, including the two cows. After all, Little Willow and Ismael had become like her pets, and no one should kill and eat a family’s pet.

But that positive outcome never came. Instead, Tracy was arrested, and Little Willow and Ismael were seized and killed. And so today she stands before this court, charged with a crime, with many cheering for her to be punished. On the other side, millions of Americans, from Hollywood celebrities to national animal rights leaders, have protested her mistreatment in this case.

IV.          The continued prosecution of this case will undermine the community’s faith in justice.

There is a better path forward. Among the greatest traditions in American history is the strength to find common ground. Through a Revolution, a Civil War, and two World Wars, America has always found a way to unify. A dismissal in this case will serve that purpose. Ms. Murphy has suffered great harm; perhaps those who have complained about her actions have, too. But through it all, she has faith in the justice of those in her community and in our legal system. When she has conversations outside of the courtroom, including with farmers, she learns about how her sanctuary can better serve the community; countless community members who meet animals like Darsha learn from Ms. Murphy’s experience, too.

That dialogue, and not the recrimination of the courtroom, is the path to healing in this case. And it is precisely cases like this one, where justice is served by discretion, that led New York to wisely grant its courts the power to dismiss.

For those reasons – and for the benefit of the community – Ms. Murphy, through counsel, requests that this case be dismissed in the interest of justice, pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 170.40.