Crime Farmers who had sex with animals 'hundreds of times' to remain behind bars - Matthew Brubaker, 31, Terry Wallace, 41, and Marc Measnikoff, 34 remain jailed for their over 1400 crimes


Farmers who had sex with their animals hundreds of times have been ordered to remain behind bars.

Matthew Brubaker, 31, Terry Wallace, 41, and Marc Measnikoff, 34, were all sentenced to 20 to 41 years in state prison with additional probation.

0_PAY-munson-animal-sex5-MeasnikoffJPG.jpg


They were charged with having sexual relations with at leas nine female horses, a cow, a goat, and dogs.


Sickened cops were called to a remote property in Pennsylvania last year, and were left horrified by what they found.


The trio pleaded guilty to charges of corruption of minors, 730 counts of sexual intercourse with animals and 730 counts of cruelty to animals.

They recently made appeal and argued their sentencing was too harsh for having sex with the farm animals.

However, their sentences were upheld by the Pennsylvania Superior Court panel.

0_PAY-munson-animal-sex6-BrubakerJPG.jpg



A teenage boy, who also lived on the property, was reportedly forced to assist the men by restraining the animals while they engaged in their acts.


The Clearfield County SPCA was at the property to care for the animals during the raid.

They were all rescued.


Previous reports claimed there was over 1,000 sex acts carried out during the appalling farm orgies.

0_PAY-munson-animal-sex7-wallaceJPG.jpg


District attorney Bill Shaw said at the time that the charges were into the abuse of animals.

He told them: “This is an unpleasant topic, but the facts are that we received a report of folks having sexual intercourse with animals, farm animals.”


Mr Shaw told the news station at the time: “I’ve been doing this for over 20 years and this is probably the worse situation of this type of case that I’ve come across.”
 
Why is it these articles always say "had sex with" and not "raped"? Choice quotes from the author like "having sexual relations" and "counts of sexual intercourse" make me 🤔🤔 about their opinions. Are journalists just instructed to talk about animal abuse like this? Why?

I think it's because the ins and outs (oh, sorry, that came out so wrong) of the legal language about rape involve things like "consent" that animals cannot either give or refuse within the definition, so it's left as a sexual assault which is easier to prove (all you got to prove is that genitals were touched in an illegal way). They don't say it because, super-technically, it didn't happen.
 
I think it's because the ins and outs (oh, sorry, that came out so wrong) of the legal language about rape involve things like "consent" that animals cannot either give or refuse within the definition, so it's left as a sexual assault which is easier to prove (all you got to prove is that genitals were touched in an illegal way). They don't say it because, super-technically, it didn't happen.
Is this also why we see articles like "Teacher 'had sex' with underaged student"? How is it not rape in general under law if consent cannot be given?
 
I was going to check what state this was in, but then saw UK. ... Disgusting, punishable, death penalty-worthy, but you have to give them credit, they took their chances here rather than the standard britbong slag and marriage to them.
 
Different species are just social constructs. The idea of what is considered "human" and what is concidered "dog" is based on stereotypical ideas on what humans and dogs are, in the end species are nothing but made up categories. We might have agreed that hairless looking, two legs, two arms and hands having bipedal apes are called humans, but that's just what it is; a social agreement.

Who says a dog cannot have these features too? "Humans" in fact have short hair all over their bodies, which can be considered a fur, which is something dogs have. And some dog breeds like chinese crested dog have short hair and more long visible fur in their heads just like us too. Dogs sometimes too walk on two limbs, and humans are able to walk on four limbs, (which once again we have socially agreed to refer to as "legs" and "arms") are social creatures and omnivores, just like the animals that we stereotypically consider "dogs". The idea that "humans" and "dogs" are completely separate things is unscientific, and in lot of indigenous cultures the boundaries between species are blurred. Shapeshifting myths are prevalent across different cultures; in different cultures different animals are considered human's ancestors, it has been believed animals can possess human spirit and so on. This idea of strictly separated species is very colonial, it is based on specieist western cishetero supremancy.
 
Is this also why we see articles like "Teacher 'had sex' with underaged student"? How is it not rape in general under law if consent cannot be given?


It's not a case of "did it or did it not give consent?"

Consent simply doesn't EXIST as a legal thing for animals.

Because once you legally allow animals to not consent to sex, then you could charge everyone who had a pet with "kidnapping" because the pet didn't consent to being owned, or murder if you kill and eat a cow because it didn't consent to being butchered.

Animals are not afforded the right to consent, they can't say "Yes" or "no", hence, you can't rape them or murder them, but you can sexually assault them and commit animal cruelty by killing one painfully for jollies... those crimes don't require a finding of consent.
 
Last edited:
This idea of strictly separated species is very colonial, it is based on specieist western cishetero supremancy.

I had to rate your entire post horrifying purely on the fact that it sounded so very real. We're living in a decade where if that had been posted anywhere else, I might've taken it as something someone was actually pushing.
 
I think the consent argument is extremely weak as they are animals that cannot and do not consent to anything we do with their lives. Just say it is disgusting and unnecessary. No further justification needed here to jail these deviants up.
Right. We kill them for meat without their consent but that's nature. It's happened that way for billions of years with countless species. Fucking other species has generally been considered deviant and unnatural behavior, even by researchers observing such activity in non-human species.
 
Back