PROTECT THE WILD — IS HOLDING A PLACARD AN ARRESTABLE OFFENCE/ NO IT ISNT. SHOWS THE POWER OF A FEW

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Arrested for holding a placard: An interview with Saule and Jack from Camp Beagle TOM ANDERSON MAR 18 ∙ GUEST POST READ IN APP On 24 February, animal defenders Saule and Jack were arrested at Camp Beagle, a protest camp against the MBR Acres beagle breeding facility in Huntingdon. They weren’t charged, but were given police bail conditions not to return to the protests. MBR - or MarshallBioResources - supplies 2000 beagles a year to the animal testing industry, including to Labcorp (formerly known as Huntingdon Life Sciences). The company is licensed to harvest blood and body parts from the dogs for sale. Protect the Wild and Lawyers for Animals caught up with Saule and Jack to speak to them about their arrest. Jack at the protest outside MBR Acres on 4 February. Judicial review On 4 February, the House of Lords rubber-stamped an amendment to the Public Order Act 2023 that classified animal testing sites like MBR Acres as ‘Key National Infrastructure’, paving the way for the criminalisation of protest. The fateful vote in the Lords came despite the best efforts of campaigners from Camp Beagle, Animal Aid, Naturewatch Foundation, Protect the Wild, and others. The definition of animal testing sites as ‘Key National Infrastructure’ followed several meetings between government ministers and corporate executives in the ‘Life Sciences’ industry, including representatives of MBR Acres. Lawyers for Animals, alongside co-claimant Maria Iriart from Camp Beagle, have brought a judicial review against the decision. The claim argues that extending these powers to cover animal testing goes beyond what parliament intended when it passed the 2023 Public Order Act. The arrest of Jack and Saule less than three weeks after the expansion of Public Order powers shows that this government, like governments before them, are bowing to pressure from the animal testing industry to restrict public protests. The repression at Camp Beagle comes despite Labour promising in its December 2025 Animal Welfare Strategy that it would phase out animal testing. Campaigners at Camp Beagle have pointed out that, between October and December 2025, the government “granted 111 licences authorising the use of 1,542,870 animals, including three licences to test on 5,450 beagles”. It seems like Labour’s actions aren’t in line with its supposed strategy. Saule and Jack at the protest outside MBR Acres. The MBR beagles deserve “loving homes” Saule and Jack are both long term protesters against MBR Acres (MBR). We asked them what it is that inspires them to keep going. Jack told us: “we want to see it shut down. We want to see the beagles freed and in loving homes like they deserve. They don’t deserve to be in cages skidding around in their own faeces and urine. 510 dogs to a cage, no enrichment, no walks, no treats. It’s just a disgusting place, and it needs to be shut down”. The dogs held at MBR are kept in dire conditions, left unattended for as long as 23 hours a day and never taken out into the fresh air. Talking about the conditions for the dogs that he had seen in undercover footage taken inside MBR, Jack said: “They’re just desperate for any attention like any dog would be. You know what I mean? They’re just trapped in cages with no enrichment. It’s clear that those dogs just, just don’t want to be there. They want to get out. They want to be free.” Saule said that she had seen the undercover footage from inside MBR as well. She said that the dogs are kept in “rows and rows of concrete pens. Faeces everywhere, hundreds of dogs, and the noise is just deafening. It’s so loud and they’re all just jumping at the cages. It’s really horrible.” ‘An embarrassment for Cambridgeshire Police’ Jack and Saule were protesting at the gates of MBR Acres on 24 February, as they had done many times before, holding up placards as the workers drove into the facility. The site security called the police, as they often do. When officers arrived they did nothing to stop the demonstrators, indicating that they didn’t see any evidence that the protest was unlawful. Several other campaigners joined the protest too. Police stand by as Jack protests a car entering MBR Acres. Officers did not give a warning to protesters on 24 February. Later that day, police entered Camp Beagle saying that they had been told “to make some arrest attempts”. Saule was arrested close to the camp, and Jack was taken from his van. Officers seemed unsure what the arrests were for, warning Saule that she was being arrested for breaching Section 17 of the Public Order Act, which relates to the treatment of journalists by police officers. Presumably this was a mistake as she isn’t a journalist and didn’t even have a camera at the demonstration. In fact, Section 17 governs police actions and doesn’t even contain a power of arrest. Jack was arrested on suspicion of Obstruction of the Highway, coupled with allegedly Interfering with Key National Infrastructure. Police arrest Saule for the wrong offence (presumably). Jack described the shambolic policing: “They’d clearly not briefed these officers who turned up. They’ve obviously just been told to go there. They’ve not been briefed on what they’re actually arresting us for. They’ve just said, arrest them for this. And they couldn’t even get that right, you know, they couldn’t even get the section right for Saule. I mean it was like it was their first day of policing. It was really very embarrassing for Cambridgeshire Police.” When Jack got into the back of the police van, he noticed that it was stained with blood. Saule described her feelings on being handcuffed and put in the back of the van: “I was just so angry, you know, that I was the one being criminalised. And there’s people going in to MBR Acres and bleeding these dogs.” Things didn’t improve when the two campaigners got to the police station. The cops were ‘pally’ (aka fishing for information), but pretty clueless about what the pair had been arrested for. It seemed like the officers on the ground had received orders ‘from on high’. According to Jack: “They made a bit of small talk, had a bit of a banter. I think they were just maybe following orders, just doing the job. But, you know, where have we heard that before? I think it leads to very dangerous outcomes when you’re just blindly following orders and not questioning why you’re actually doing this to people like us.” Saule and Jack were interviewed by a Police Constable, not a Detective. He watched the CCTV footage of the protest for the first time during the interview itself. After turning off the tapes he reportedly admitted: “I’m not actually sure what they’ve arrested you for there. I can’t see a point there where you’ve actually done anything wrong.” Animal testing sites aren’t ‘Key National Infrastructure’ This whole debacle occurred because the government amended the Public Order Act to classify animal testing sites as ‘Key National Infrastructure’. We asked Saule and Jack what they thought of the proposition that MBR Acres was key infrastructure. Saule replied: “It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. They labeled it as Key National Infrastructure on the basis of pandemic preparedness, but then what actually increases the risk of a pandemic happening is things like factory farming and the wildlife trade. And who’s funding that? The government.” Jack argued that ‘Key National Infrastructure’ should refer to “motorways, airports, things that are essential for the running of the country“, whereas “Life Sciences, animal testing. If that didn’t exist, the country wouldn’t grind to a halt, the economy wouldn’t collapse. It doesn’t seem like it’s an essential thing in any sort of way“. Meanwhile, a victory for direct action When we carried out our interview with Jack and Saule, news had just come in that five of the people who carried out a daring rescue of 18 beagles from MBR Acres in December 2022 had been found not guilty of burglary by a jury at Peterborough Crown Court. The verdict marked the last of four trials resulting from the 2022 action, and the second acquittal for beagle rescuers at MBR. Other defendants have sadly been found guilty and, in some cases, given suspended prison sentences of up to 18 months. Saule said that the verdicts show that: “the public is on our side. I think also the comments on the videos of our arrests were really supportive too, the general consensus is that this is wrong. This shouldn’t be happening. There’s a lot of support and we just have to focus on that. The answer isn’t to give up. If anything its to keep going, keep fighting.” An image from Animal Rising’s rescue operation on 30 December 2022 Saule and Jack were arrested while other people on the protest weren’t. They told us that they felt they could have been targeted because they are active at the protests and in spreading news of the campaign on social media, which may have resulted in MBR security pressuring the police for their arrest. On a wider level, Jack said that he thought Cambridgeshire Police must be under a lot of pressure from MBR and now also the government to make use of the new Public Order powers. Jack told us that, despite the arrests, repression wouldn’t stop them from continuing campaigning. He said: “The police have tried to crush this movement a number of times in the past. If you look at the [Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, or] SHAC campaign, for example. But no amount of legislation or police repression will stop this movement. We’re rooted in compassion and empathy for all sentient life, we’re not motivated by money. These corporations, are just motivated purely by greed and money, but we have something so much more. We’ll never give up. We’ll never stop fighting for the animals, ever.” Animal testing: an industry protected by state repression The moves to criminalise protest outside MBR Acres and other animal testing facilities is part of a long history of state repression aimed at shielding the animal testing industry from public dissent. The SHAC Campaign was a militant direct action campaign set up in 1999 aimed at closing down Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS - which was taken over by Labcorp in 2015), one of the world’s largest animal testing facilities and one of MBR’s customers. After a long campaign by SHAC nearly brought HLS to its knees, the UK government stepped in and facilitated the bailout of the company by the Bank of England. Repression against the movement was intense, with police following a strategy of “leadership decapitation” against the SHAC campaign. Thirteen people were eventually sentenced to almost 70 years in prison between them for conspiracy to blackmail HLS, in one of the biggest political crackdowns in recent UK history. Associated campaigns were also targeted with new legislation introduced by Tony Blair’s Labour government. These included people organising against Sequani, another company involved in animal testing. Sean Kirtley of the Sequani 6 was convicted and imprisoned in 2008 for ‘Conspiracy to interfere with the contractual relations of an animal research facility’ under section 145 of Labour’s Serious Organised Crime and Police Act’ (SOCPA 145). Kirtley, whose alleged conspiracy was the organisation of a protest campaign, later successfully appealed his conviction. To read more about the repression of the SHAC campaign check out this report from 2014 by research group Corporate Watch. Civil injunctions have also been a way for companies involved in animal testing to restrict protests outside their premises. Private companies are technically responsible for obtaining injunctions in the civil courts. However, in reality, police forces often provide information about campaigners to corporate lawyers to back up injunction claims. Injunctions have been used for decades to protect cruel testing by the likes of HLS (now Labcorp), Oxford University and many more. Many historic injunctions have restricted activities by ‘persons unknown‘, effectively binding any member of the public who protests outside the facilities. MBR Acres applied for an injunction after Camp Beagle was established in 2021. However, John Curtin of Camp Beagle fought against their case in the High Court and was successful in stripping away the most repressive aspects of the planned injunction. The court imposed a restriction on obstruction and trespass by named people, instead of the much wider order sought by MBR. The battle for freedom to protest continues outside the gates of MBR. Campaigners have recently released videos of private security guards attempting to ‘serve’ the injunction on protesters outside the gates of the facility. Literally throwing the documents in people’s faces. Stand with Camp Beagle According to Protect the Wild’s Rob Pownall: “It is deeply concerning that two peaceful activists were arrested simply for holding a sign. If even the police appear unsure what offence has been committed, it raises serious questions about how these new protest powers are being used. Peaceful protest is a fundamental democratic right, and laws that create confusion or arbitrary enforcement risk undermining that right.” At Protect the Wild, we stand with Camp Beagle in saying that the Labour government’s moves to restrict protest against the ‘Life Sciences’ industry on the one hand and promises to phase out animal testing on the other make no sense. Watch this space for news about Lawyers For Animals and Camp Beagle’s judicial review of the classification of animal testing sites as ‘Key National Infrastructure’. Sign Camp Beagle’s petition to ‘End testing on dogs and other animals for the development of products for human use’. Visit the camp. Check out some of the whistleblower footage from inside MBR Acres. Read about Animal Rising’s ‘Free the MBR Beagles’ campaign. Thanks to Saule, Jack, Camp Beagle and Animal Rising for the pictures used in this piece. A guest post by Tom Anderson Journalist for Protect the Wild Subscribe to Tom SHARE LIKE COMMENT RESTACK © 2026 Protect the Wild Protect the Wild, 71-75 Shelton Street Covent Garden, London, W2CH 9JQ Unsubscribe Start writing