Jurors start deliberations in Sandringham Estate sheep theft trial
Three Animal Rising activists say they believed King Charles would have agreed to them taking the lambs
Last updated 24th Sep 2026
Jurors have been sent out to start their deliberations in the trial of three animal rights activists who are accused of the theft of three lambs from the King’s Sandringham Estate.
Rosa Sharkey and Sarah Foy, both aged 26, and Rose Patterson, 37, wore pink Animal Rising T-shirts as they took the sheep from Appleton Farm in Norfolk on May 24 2023.
They travelled to Windsor Castle the following day to try to tell police there what they had done, eventually going to a police station after armed officers outside the royal residence did not engage with them.
They said in a written statement given to police that the King “would have consented to the lambs’ rescue” and they had concerns for the animals’ welfare.
Sharkey, of Brighton, Foy, of Alfreton, Derbyshire, and Patterson, who said she lives in London, deny the theft of the sheep and are on trial at Norwich Crown Court.
Sharkey said in evidence that a van driver, who was not on trial, took the three sheep to a sanctuary.
Judge Anthony Bate said in his directions to 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.
Defence barrister Sarah-Jane Ewart, for Sharkey, said in her closing speech on Thursday: “The three women sat behind me took three sheep.
“Those sheep, there’s no dispute, belonged to the King.
“There’s no suggestion they planned to give them back … but they didn’t do it dishonestly and so the law says that’s not theft.”
She said Sharkey was someone who “cares deeply” about the climate and animal rights, and “just wanted to rescue animals and spark conversation with someone powerful, the King”.
Ms Ewart said that “someone isn’t dishonest if they believe the owner would consent to the appropriation of the property if they knew of it and its circumstances”.
“They genuinely believed King Charles would be open to this,” said Ms Ewart.
The barrister told jurors: “If you think she (Sharkey) might have believed King Charles would have agreed about the lamb rescue, your job is to acquit them.”
Patterson, who represented herself, said in her closing speech that she had been inside a slaughterhouse and had “heard the animals screams”.
She said she believed the King would have consented to them taking the lambs from the field, adding: “He wouldn’t want his lambs sent to a slaughterhouse that’s violating the law.”
She said they “rescued” the lambs as “there’s a world we’re trying to build”, adding to jurors: “It’s over to you to decide whether this was a theft or a rescue.”
Foy, who also represented herself, said in her closing speech that they took the lambs because “otherwise they would have been killed”.
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.”
The judge, Anthony Bate, told jurors they were under no pressure of time as he sent them out to start their deliberations on Thursday morning.