'The Animal People' -- Film Review

"Without struggle, there is not progress."

--Josh Harper,
The Animal People

Released in late 2019 after more than ten years in production, this film documents the actions of animal rights activists from Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) against Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS), a massive international corporation that conducted animal experiments, and the public and political backlash afterward. This is, by far, my favorite animal rights/vegan/plant-based film I've ever seen. (After watching and dutifully taking notes for this post, I went back to watch it again soon after just "for fun," though it certainly isn't a joyful subject matter.) It's the most powerful, empowering, terrifying documentary I've ever watched; it made me want to both get out on the street and start protesting alongside them as well as cower in my room and delete my search history so the government doesn't start surveilling me.

SHAC Origins

The Animal People is primarily told through the words of six SHAC activists -- Kevin Kjonaas, Lauren Gazzola, Josh Harper, Jake Conroy, Andy Stepanian, and Darius Fullmer -- and investigative journalist Will Potter. What we now know as SHAC started in 1999 when Kevin joined his university's animal rights group and began protesting against individuals who perpetrated violence against animals. The primary target was a University of Minnesota scientist named Marilyn Carroll, whose work at the time consisted of getting monkeys addicted to crack. These protests were held both on-campus and at Carroll's house. However, in April of that year, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) broke into her lab, destroyed things, tagged walls, and rescued more than 100 animals. This made national news, and though Kevin was out of town when this occurred, the FBI searched his home for evidence of collusion.

Expectation vs. Reality

The editors of this film did a great job showing the divergence between what HLS claimed to do to the public and what they actually did behind closed doors. First, we see an HLS promotion video, in which they call themselves a "contract research organization" and that they "take the care of [their] animals very seriously. And [their] high ethical standards are core to [their] corporate philosophy." Behind the shiny veneer, though, we see the monster beneath. Huntingdon's business was to take money from other companies and perform product tests on animals in order to get these products -- ranging from things like toothpaste and laundry detergent to rat poison and pesticides -- to market. In a brief UK undercover video, we see lab workers shaking, punching, tossing, and yelling mostly at dogs, but also monkeys. After this investigation broke, an undercover investigator in the US was told by her supervisor, "Don't get caught doing anything like that."

SHAC Actions

SHAC's work in America started in earnest soon after. They began going after tertiary targets: shareholders, banks, and financiers associated with HLS. Huntingdon's "share price nosedived," but they were ultimately saved by a $33 million bailout by Stephens, Inc. Less than two months after 9/11, SHAC conducted an action at the home of Warren Stephens, the CEO of Stephens, Inc. With the public terrified of another terrorism threat, the police were quick to try to shut SHAC down, despite the fact that they were there legally. But the protestors fought back, with many activists being arrested as the situation escalated towards violence. SHAC organizer Josh Harper was personally targeted by the police, being shot in the face with a rubber bullet, dragged into a parking lot, and beaten. He was then charged with $11 million in damages. One of the final straws for Warren Stephens was when the ALF -- which I should note has absolutely no relation to SHAC -- acquired his credit card number and purchased $100,000 worth of products, like washing machines, and also threw red paint at and smashed the windows of his New York City apartment. After that, Stephens, Inc. sold its Huntingdon stock.

HLS was saved again, this time by March Ltd., an insurance provider. SHAC again went to the CEO, Rob Harper's, house to protest, a right that is protected under the US Constitution. It is now that the film shows us the harsh reality that this is how social change happens, and as a society, we are constantly attempting to whitewash history. But threats of violence, sabotage, and property destruction are the actions that have created change in the past. One of the examples used in the film is of the Boston Tea Party, in which protestors conducted "economic sabotage" by dumping boxes of tea into the harbor to protest taxes. As Kevin says, "That's not terrorism; that's America." Marsh Ltd. soon cut ties with Huntingdon, but the UK government quickly stepped in to insure them. It seemed no one would let HLS die.

Operation Trailmix

In 2002, SHAC organizers began working out of a New Jersey home, posting any updates regarding HLS and SHAC actions on their website. And the FBI began following them to collect evidence, known as Operation Trailmix. The SHAC crew would notice people in cars sitting outside for hours, following them wherever they went, and even digging through their garbage for information. Investigative journalist Will Potter recounted that "there were more wiretaps used against people associated with this movement than any other counterterrorism investigation in US history." And they certainly were considered terrorists by the government and media. Oklahoma senator James Inhofe even said, "This level of violence and propensity for harm has led the FBI to include SHAC as the most serious domestic terrorist threat today."

The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act was then created, making the economic disruption of animal industries illegal. Will Potter was brought in as the token voice of opposition where he said that "any threat to cause a loss of profit to a corporation is now considered an act of terrorism," but "that isn't terrorism; that's effective activism."

A War of Definition

As the FBI was gathering evidence to build a case against SHAC, one of the main distinctions made by the activists was the difference between property destruction and violence. Darioush Dagdar, a SHAC campaign target from Princeton, NJ, had his tires slashed, house spray-painted, and his wife was reportedly on the brink of a nervous breakdown and divorce. He claimed, "If this is not terrorism, I don't know what is." The activists' response to this argument was that property damage is a form of sabotage, much like the Boston Tea Party, while violence is intentionally causing physical harm to other people.

The Trial

The trial began in February 2006, spearheaded by the prosecution team of Charles McKenna and Chris Christie. But from the very start, it was clear that SHAC was fighting an uphill battle. The prosecution's evidence was largely based on testimony and evidence from other SHAC actions with which the defendants had no personal connection. There were two main pieces of testimony used in the film. First, Sally Dillenback, a target of a SHAC home protest, who claimed that her son was so terrified that he hid behind a couch holding a kitchen knife because "the animal people" were coming for him. Second, Brian Cass, the CEO of HLS, who was assaulted outside his home in the UK. On the surface that sounds terrible for the defense, but none of the defendants were present at either of these actions; they were being tried for things they never did. But in the end, every defendant was found guilty on all charges. How?

At trial, Judge Thompson granted the prosecution's request to prohibit the defense from discussing HLS's business because that may "prejudice the jury." However, the prosecution was allowed to talk about it, making claims like HLS conducted "life-saving research" and was "saving children's lives," without proof of evidence. As we know, Huntingdon did not perform animal experiments for those reasons, but to test products created by other companies in order to get them to market. To someone that is unaware of this industry, it may seem like a reasonable request for the prosecution to make. But that's like a woman being put on trial for killing her husband without sharing the fact that she killed him because he had been abusing her for years. Without knowing the full story, of course you'd think she's guilty.

In the video below, you can see an example of the type of animal treatment the SHAC defendants were not allowed to share.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPIHFQoH29k

Aftermath

The defendants immediately filed an appeal. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that their actions were protected by the First Amendment, but chose to uphold all the convictions because they claimed the defendants were part of a conspiracy to commit animal rights terrorism. Darius Fullmer was sentenced to one year in federal prison, Andy Stepanian to three years, Josh Harper to three years, Jake Conroy to four years, Lauren Gazzola to 4.5 years, and Kevin Kjonaas to six years. The most heartbreaking moment of the film was seeing the pain of Kevin leaving his beagle, Willie, before going to prison; Willie passed away two years into Kevin's sentence. As a dog mom, I can't imagine anything much more torturous than being forced to leave my dog, her thinking until she died that I abandoned her, and not being able to be with her in her final moments. Just thinking about it brings tears to my eyes.

Where Are They Now?

Unfortunately, HLS still exists today, though Brain Cass merged it with several other companies and rebranded under the name Envigo. In addition, they have actually expanded to 50 locations in 14 countries. After seeing all that the activists had to go through, and witnessing just a small amount of the suffering the animals endure, it almost seems hopeless to try to create change. However, as Martin Luther King said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

It seems the SHAC defendants are still animal rights activists, though their methods have changed. Just in the past few years, Kevin was featured on the popular primetime news show Tucker Carlson Tonight, along with a beagle rescued with the Beagle Freedom Project. I've talked about BFP several times before because I admire the work they do, so it was great to see them be featured in this film and on television. Tucker Carlson commended their work to rescue dogs, saying it is "the Lord's work." Hearing someone, particularly someone with a more conservative ideology, praise Kevin sounds strange after sitting through the last 90 minutes of the documentary; it just goes to show that animal rights does not align with only one political party: we all love animals. BFP also helped to pass the Beagle Freedom Bill, requiring that dogs and cats used in these experiments must be given up for adoption after (as opposed to killing them, as is the common practice).

Post-Credits

While I don't want to give Joaquin Phoenix too much credit for his role as executive producer on this film, because the entire team is clearly incredible and so dedicated to have devoted more than a decade of their lives to this project, I believe that he has cemented himself in history as one of the few celebrities that has wielded their immense power as an influencer to positively impact the world. And I'm so happy to be alive to witness this momentous shift in humanity's perception of animals.

There were so many other things I wanted to discuss, but this movie is jam-packed with information, making it impossible for me to share my thoughts on all of it. However, this is a film that everyone should watch because its message is beautiful and important. You don't have to be involved in veganism or animal rights or activism or law to understand it. Because this isn't a film about veganism; this is a film about injustice.

be conscious, be kind, be vegan