Report From Court: A.L.F. Activist Receives 21 Months

Posted by Peter Young | 0 comments

Report from the sentencing of Alex Hall, who received a 21-month sentence in the A.L.F. liberation of 650 mink in South Jordan, Utah

Over one year after his indictment for a 2008 mink liberation, a federal judge sentenced Alex Hall to 21 months in prison this week. The sentence was 3 months less than that of his co-defendant William Viehl, yet still more than three times the recommended sentence of six months.

Here is the report from Hall’s sentencing:

Both activists and fur farmers were in attendance for the final courtroom chapter in the “AETA 2” case of Alex Hall and William Viehl, arrested for the August 2008 liberation of 650 mink from the McMullin Fur Farm in South Jordan, Uah. They are the first prison sentences under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.

Prosecutor Huber first addressed the court. At William Viehl’s (Hall’s codefendant) sentencing, Huber showed the court an outrageously deceptive slideshow displaying images from A.L.F. arsons and excerpts from communiques for actions Viehl was not accused of. The presentation this time was more subdued, referring to Viehl’s sentence by asking the judge to “make a similar analysis today” (Viehl received 24 months).

Next, Lindsay McMullin, owner of the raided fur farm, spoke. Previously, this man who kills 3,000 mink annually expressed Viehl should be charged with “animal cruelty” for releasing 650 of the animals from his farm. He expressed similarly bizarre sentiments at Hall’s sentencing, stating: “I wish you would have been there that day (when they captured mink after the release)… the destruction you did to (the mink) was incredible.”

After thanking law enforcement and “the judicial system”, McMullin made this statement which telegraphed the long-term impact of mink releases on farmers and the industry:

“The entire industry has and still affected by this action…. We still get emails from other farmers who are intimidated by these illegal actions.”

Hall’s attorney spoke next, highlighting that Alex has no history of violence, and no criminal history… “but he does have compassion for animals.”

Then it was time for Judge Benson to hand down his sentence. Given the judge’s statements at Viehl’s sentencing, Hall’s sentencing could go one of several ways. Benson stated in Viehl’s case he intended to sentence him to three years, arriving at two only after Viehl showed remorse (note: an expression of remorse in a courtroom under threat of a severe sentence should not be taken as genuine). Thus, it would seem that the judge had obligated himself to sentence anyone who did not show extreme remorse to three years, and anyone who showed equal remorse to two. A sentence less than two was unlikely, given that Hall and Viehl were comparable in every category relevant to sentencing.

The judge began by stating he was inclined to give Hall the same sentence as Viehl (24 months). Instead, announced a sentence of 21 months. While this was still over three times the sentencing guidelines, it came as a surprise to most in the courtroom.

A few of the judge’s quotes:

“There are two main features of this sentence… to set a judgement for the criminal conduct of other people… This is a simple case: deterrence needs to be emphasized.”

“We all have different views… we almost never agree… nly when people get so far off that they directly interfere with people is it a problem.”

“To terrorize them, children, and belongings… that is wrong to ever happen.”

“Thank goodness we have legal processes to change things… voting, debates…” (went on to list numerous things that don’t achieve animal liberation)

“When we feel strongly about something, we don’t terrorize other people.”

“A message needs to be sent to people who believe so strongly in animals that it’s ok to vandalize and commit other acts… it just can’t happen in a civilized society.”

“You just can’t violate clearly stated laws”