Bay Area/ North SF Bay Area

Sonoma County Activist Zoe Rosenberg Sentenced to 90 Days for Felony Conspiracy and Misdemeanors at Petaluma Poultry

AI Assisted Icon
Published on December 04, 2025
Sonoma County Activist Zoe Rosenberg Sentenced to 90 Days for Felony Conspiracy and Misdemeanors at Petaluma PoultrySource: Google Street View

Zoe Rosenberg, an activist with Direct Action Everywhere (DxE), has been sentenced to 90 days in jail after a Sonoma County jury found her guilty of felony conspiracy and several misdemeanors related to an incident at Petaluma Poultry. District Attorney Carla Rodriguez expressed stern views on the matter, stating, "breaking into a heavily regulated, biosecure food processing facility that supplies food to consumers in this county and across the country is dangerous and illegal," as detailed by the Sonoma County District Attorney's Office.

The sentence follows Rosenberg's involvement in the planned intrusion of the facility, where she and other DxE members removed chickens and attempted to interfere with the facility's operations, resulting in a temporary halt to the processing line and over $100,000 in losses for the company. Despite claims of animal cruelty, the prosecution argued their evidence was unsubstantial, which included only two photographs that did not display the conditions Rosenberg described. According to the Hoodline, Rosenberg defended her actions as part of an "open rescue," intended to save animals from alleged abuse.

The court has imposed a two-year term of formal probation on Rosenberg, with 60 days of her jail sentence potentially served through alternative means, such as electronic home confinement. In addition to the jail time, a restitution hearing will be scheduled to determine the amount owed to Petaluma Poultry. Rosenberg and DxE have had a history of similar actions at other farms, resulting in prior criminal convictions as well.

In her statement, reflecting a conviction in the righteousness of her cause, Rosenberg told Hoodline, "I know that animals are suffering. They're suffering on a massive scale, every second of every day, and honestly I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I didn't do something to try to help these animals." These sentiments, however, did not sway the jury, whose quick verdict suggested that legal boundaries, not personal beliefs, governed the case's outcome.