Cow graffiti suspects ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution

The father-son duo who marked their neighbor’s cattle with bleach have been ordered to pay just under $10,000 in restitution – around a tenth of the amount requested by the prosecution.

Judge Mike McGrady determined the figure following a restitution hearing last week, after which Patrick Sean Carroll was also given a sentence of suspended jail time and a $750 fine.

His father, Tucker Carroll, will be sentenced at a later date.

Both parties entered plea agreements in which father Tucker entered an Alford plea (in which the de-fendant maintains they are innocent while still pleading guilty) and son Patrick Sean pled guilty.

In return, the original felony charges against them were dropped and both were instead to be sentenced on a misdemeanor count of property destruction and defacement, carrying a maximum penalty of six months of incarceration, a $750 fine or both.

The Case

During the restitution hearing, witnesses provided an overview of the incident that led to criminal charg-es.

Undersheriff Alex Jessen testified that the victim called the Crook County Sheriff’s Office last June about “a number of cows that were bleached by his neighbor”. The marks were random and varied, and in-cluded drawings of penises.

The cattle were inspected on July 3 by a group of experts including a veterinarian and a brand inspector, said Jessen. The total number of marked cattle was 189 heifers and six bulls.

According to Jessen, Tucker said in an initial interview that the incident was provoked by cattle repeated-ly wandering onto his property.

“Enough was enough, they needed to make a statement with these cattle before they pushed them back across the fence,” he described.

Jessen’s conversation with Sean followed a similar theme, involving, “A lot of fence issues between the two properties”.

This, as established by defense attorney Seth Schumaker, was due to water gaps being washed out dur-ing heavy storms, allowing cattle to wander in both directions. The cattle, he said, were “eating [the Car-rolls’] grass and drinking their water.”

As pointed out by County Attorney Joe Baron, prosecution, however, Wyoming is a fence-out state, meaning that a landowner is responsible for preventing cattle from wandering onto their property.

Jessen stated that the markings were still visible when the cattle were pregnancy checked in September, but were found to have gone by the end of October when they were moved to a different pasture. On November 2, this was confirmed by Jessen and the brand inspector.

Restitution Reasoning

The prosecution requested $99,600 in restitution.

Part of this total was the cost of pasturing the cattle for longer than expected (estimated at $25 per head per month for a total of $19,000).

Baron explained that, on July 3, the victim was faced with a “unique situation” in which nobody knew how long it would take for the bleached hair to grow out, or whether it ever would. The livestock inspec-tor, who was previously a veterinarian for 20 years, did not know the answer, he said, and he was prob-ably, “The most experienced person in the room.”

The markings were not what one would normally see in a sale barn, Baron established. While bleach is used to signify such things as whether a cow is bred, this is done using established marks.

“Markings are common – graffiti is not,” stated the victim.

The restitution request also included the cost of having the marked cattle rounded up, sorted and moved, and each of them photographed as evidence.

Additionally, the restitution request included the amount lost in revenue due to selling the bred heifers later in the season than planned.

According to the victim, the market was on “a pretty steady decline” from the summer into the winter months. He estimated that he would have received $2500 to $3000 per animal in the summer, but got $2135 when they were sold in November, which was a loss of around $400 to $500 for each.

The victim said he decided to delay in selling the livestock after having separated them out and moved them away from view to avoid “silly questions”. He ordinarily sells bred heifers in September once they are pregnancy checked, he said, but believed they were not marketable because the markings were un-like those normally used and signified “who knows what”.

He also said he believed that few people would want to own the marked cattle. “There’s pride in owning cattle,” he said, explaining that it’s no different to not wanting to buy an expensive pickup because it’s covered in scratches.

The victim said he received inquiries from people who had heard about the incident and “figured they’d be cheaper” and that he believed it affected all the cattle on the ranch.

Price Debate

Schumaker called four witnesses to the stand, each of them involved in the cattle sale industry. Each tes-tified that they did not believe the markings would affect the value of the animals at sale.

It would have an impact if the markings were not explained, said Baxter Anders of Belle Fourche, but it would be his job to make sure potential buyers were aware how they got there.

“It would have been my job to protect the value of those cattle for the producer,” he said, stating that he would not have allowed them to sell for a lower price.

Though all four witnesses agreed with Baron’s statement that there was nothing “normal” about the markings, none felt that they would prevent the sale of the cattle if properly marketed.

Ultimately, Judge McGrady agreed with this reasoning.

His decision on the amount of restitution that the Carrolls would need to pay rested on the fact that the victim never attempted to sell the bred heifers while the markings were visible.

Due to this, there is no evidence available that the victim would have received a lower price for them, he said, and nothing to justify the claim of $400 per head.

Judge McGrady determined that the restitution should include the cost of pasturing the animals for an extra month ($4725), plus the cost of having them sorted and photographed ($5160).

He ordered a total restitution amount of $9885, which will be split between the father and son.

Patrick Sean Carroll was sentenced to 30 days of jail time, suspended pending successful completion of six months of supervised probation, and a $750 fine.

Tucker Carroll’s case was assigned to Judge Matthew F.G. Castano and is set for a sentencing hearing on January 2.