Mogensens’ Trial Set For February
There will be at least three separate trials for the criminal charges filed against the five defendants connected with the Natural Bridge Zoo.
That was one of the decisions that came out of a pre-trial hearing last week, where Rockbridge County Circuit Court Judge Christopher Russell ruled that the cases against Dr. Ashley Spencer and Mark Easley – a former veterinarian with Blue Ridge Animal Clinic and the former elephant trainer for the zoo, respectively – be severed from the cases against Karl, Debbie and Gretchen Mogensen.
No dates have been set for Spencer or Easley’s trials, but the Mogensens will be tried over 10 days between Feb. 8 and Feb. 22, 2027. All parties will be back in court on Aug. 3 for hearings on additional motions.
The motion to join the trials was filed by Senior Assistant Attorney General Michelle Welch in March, citing the fact that the evidence against all of the defendants was found as the result of the same investigation and the fact that there were several witnesses – many of whom would be traveling from outside of the area or even out of state – that would be providing testimony in regards to more than one of the defendants.
Cameron Warren, Spencer’s attorney, offered several arguments for giving his client a separate trial.
He said that he had received 1.2 terabytes of data (roughly the equivalent of 120,000 high-resolution photos) in discovery from the attorney general’s office. Of that 1.2 terabytes, he said, the case against his client revolves primarily around “one, maybe two documents” which Spencer is alleged to have forged. Specifically, she is charged with two counts of allegedly forging a Certificate of Veterinary Inspection for transportation of Asha, the elephant, from the zoo, and two counts of conspiring to forge the document.
The majority of the evidence that would be presented against the Mogensens, Warren argued, would not be relevant to his client, which would result in his objecting to each piece of evidence as it is presented. He also raised concerns of the jury (all five defendants are requesting jury trials) being unfairly biased against his client if she is seated next to the Mogensens as the jury hears testimony regarding the treatment of the animals at the zoo. The Mogensens are facing a combined total of 52 counts of animal cruelty.
Sam Thomas, Easley’s attorney, requested a separate trial for his client on similar grounds, commenting that the case against his client is related to the treatment of an elephant and he’s “getting records on Burmese pythons” in discovery.
He also noted that, with the number of defendants and attorneys involved in this case – all of the defendants except Karl Mogensen have multiple attorneys representing them on these matters – it would be difficult for everyone to be seated at the defense table. In fact, during the hearing, three of the defendants – Easley, Spencer and Karl Mogensen – and their attorneys sat in the gallery, not at the defense table.
“Logistically, I don’t see how it’s possible,” Thomas said.
Russell agreed with the concerns regarding the limited space in the courtroom and with Warren and Thomas’ arguments regarding the small portion of the total amount of evidence that is relevant to their respective clients and granted their motions for separate trials. Welch requested that charges of conspiracy to forge a public document filed against Gretchen and Debbie Mogensen also be separated, but Russell did not rule on that request.
- Russell also ruled on several other motions, including issuing a gag order and denying a motion that he recuse himself from the case.
The motion for recusal, filed by Gretchen Mogensen’s attorney Chris Kowalczuk, cited Russell’s familiarity with the case as the presiding judge over the civil case regarding which of the 100 animals seized from the zoo in December of 2023 had been mistreated and should be turned over to the state. He was also the presiding judge over cases against Gretchen Mogensen for failure to obey a court order, one of which resulted in Russell ordering Mogensen serve 100 days in jail if she failed to reveal the location of the two giraffe calves that had been taken from the zoo.
Those previous rulings, along with all of the evidence and arguments Russell heard during the proceedings, would make it difficult for him to be unbiased and impartial in presiding over the trial, Kowalczuk argued.
Russell disagreed with Kowalczuk, noting that in rural courts like Rockbridge County it is not uncommon for a judge to rule on several different matters involving the same defendant.
Russell stated that he was “well-trained and experienced” with keeping any prior knowledge of a case from interfering with his impartiality, and denied the motion. He added that his decision to not recuse himself should not be “construed as being eager to preside of these matters.”
Following Russell’s ruling, the attorneys for each of the Mogensens withdrew their opposition to Welch’s motion to combine the trials.
Kowalczuk also requested the gag order be put in place, citing a report from WDBJ7 last Monday about the recently located giraffe calves in which the outlet reported that “the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia shared that information exclusively with WDBJ7.”
Welch agreed to the gag order as long as it applied to all parties and not just to one side. The gag order prohibits all parties involved in the case from speaking publicly about the case outside of court proceedings.
