Between roughly 1266 and 1750, European courts — both ecclesiastical (church) and secular (civil) — conducted formal trials of animals. These proceedings followed genuine legal procedure: animals were formally charged, given the opportunity for defense (sometimes by appointed attorneys), and sentenced. The logic was theological: if God's creation was disrupting the divine order, the legal system could restore it. Historians have documented over 200 such trials.
Crime: Eating a child
Verdict: Executed by hanging in the public square. The piglets were initially included in the charge but acquitted due to their young age and the presumed corrupting influence of their mother.
Pigs were the most commonly tried animal in medieval Europe, accounting for roughly 90% of all animal trials.
Crime: 'The heinous and unnatural crime of laying an egg'
Verdict: Convicted and burned at the stake along with the egg, on the grounds that such eggs could be used by sorcerers to hatch cockatrices (mythical serpents). The egg was considered the greater threat.
The court ruled that while animals could not be morally guilty, the Devil could work through them, making execution necessary for public safety.
Crime: Damaging crops by burrowing
Verdict: Given formal notice to leave within a specified time. The moles were provided legal counsel and offered 'safe conduct' to emigrate to another region provided they left peacefully. No record exists of the moles complying.
This case is notable for the procedural care given to an animal defendant's rights, including the appointment of a defense attorney.
Crime: Destroying the vineyards
Verdict: After lengthy proceedings spanning 41 years (the case was reopened in 1587), the weevils were offered an alternative plot of land as a settlement. The final verdict is unknown as the final pages of the court record were found to be 'eaten,' presumably by weevils.
This is considered the longest animal trial in recorded history.
Crime: Killing an infant
Verdict: The sow was dressed in human clothes, had its snout mutilated to match the infant's injuries, and was publicly hanged. A local fresco commemorating the event existed for centuries.
The dressing of the animal in human clothing before execution was intended to underscore the animal's human-like criminality.
Medieval law understood animals differently than modern law does. The ecclesiastical courts held that animals acting against God's natural order required correction through the legal-spiritual system. Secular courts, meanwhile, applied the same principle of public safety that applied to humans — if a pig killed a child, public safety required the pig's removal. Legal historian E.P. Evans, who documented 200 of these trials in his 1906 book The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals, argued these trials reflected a genuine legal philosophy, not primitive superstition.