Animal rights activists found guilty of theft of lambs from Sandringham Estate
They argued the King “would have consented to the lambs’ rescue”
Last updated 24th Sep 2026
Three animal rights activists have been found guilty of the theft of three lambs from the King’s Sandringham Estate.
Rosa Sharkey and Sarah Foy, both aged 26, and Rose Patterson, 37, said in a prepared statement given to police that they believed Charles “would have consented to the lambs’ rescue”.
They argued they had not acted dishonestly, but they were found guilty of theft following a trial at Norwich Crown Court.
The jury took three hours and 48 minutes to deliberate before reaching their unanimous verdicts on Thursday.
The judge, Anthony Bate, said as the three defendants listened from the back row of seats in the well of the court: “I have in mind a community order and some unpaid work.”
They were instructed to speak to a worker from the probation service and could be sentenced later on Thursday afternoon.
There were hugs with supporters in the public gallery as the defendants left the courtroom.
The trio wore pink Animal Rising T-shirts as they took the sheep from a field at Appleton Farm in Norfolk on May 24 2023.
The animals were taken to a sanctuary in a van by a fourth person, who was not on trial and was named in court by Patterson only as “Ben”.
The following day the three women went to Windsor Castle to try to tell police there what they had done.
They went to Windsor police station after armed officers outside the royal residence did not engage with them.
Sharkey, of Brighton, Foy, of Alfreton, Derbyshire, and Patterson, who said she lives in London, had pleaded not guilty to the theft of the sheep.
The judge had told jurors that if they were sure a defendant acted dishonestly “only then would the indicted charge of theft be proved against them”.
“That’s the disputed issue for you to resolve,” he said.
Dingle Clark, prosecuting, said in his closing speech it was an “obvious nonsense that the owner would have consented” to the lambs being taken.
He said: “The prosecution say this was plainly dishonest.
“The reason why it was dishonest is they were taking something which didn’t belong to them.
“They had to put a door over a fence and they did it… to publicise their views.”