UnchainedTV is calling for new California legislation to require LIVE cameras in slaughterhouses and factory farms, as the ongoing Chicken Rescue Trial of Zoe Rosenberg reveals wildly divergent assessments of the treatment of animals in California’s system of industrialized animal agriculture.

Los Angeles, California, October 18th, 2025 – The ongoing and much publicized trial of activist Zoe Rosenberg has sparked a national discussion on transparency in animal agriculture. With coverage broadcast daily on UnchainedTV, the proceedings reveal a sharp divide between defense witnesses who allege systemic and “criminal animal cruelty” and the company that firmly denies it.

Cameras in Slaughterhouses to Ensure Transparency

As defense witnesses testifying under oath allege evidence of birds flailing while hung upside down and bright cherry red from being scalded alive, UnchainedTV founder Jane Velez-Mitchell called for live cameras in California slaughterhouses and factory farms, arguing such oversight could separate fact from allegation. And, says Velez-Mitchell, those video feeds should be available online 24/7/365 to all consumers and citizens with no blind spots in the facilities. As this case is happening in California, now the world’s 5th largest economy, this would require putting forth a bill in the California legislature.

A Clash of Testimonies and Transparency

The case stems from a June 2023 rescue of four chickens from Perdue’s Petaluma Poultry. Rosenberg, a member of the animal rights group Direct Action Everywhere (DxE) entered the slaughterhouse and removed four chickens she described as sick and suffering. Prosecutors charged Rosenberg with felony conspiracy and several misdemeanors including trespass. She faces half a decade behind bars if convicted on all counts. Vet tech Carla Cabral, a defense witness and a DxE member herself, examined the 4 rescued chickens and testified they were caked in feces, listless and unable to stand. Cabral added that one had an injured toe and another had signs of bacterial infection.

The company, however, disputes the testimony. Perdue’s Petaluma Poultry says it maintains the highest animal welfare standards. On its website, the company says, “We embrace our responsibility to ensure animals are treated with dignity and respect. In fact, animal welfare is an important part of our company value of stewardship.”  Specifically, the company emphasizes “no cages or crates,” outdoor access, and humane treatment, underscoring that they reject any allegations of cruelty or neglect.

However, members of Direct Action Everywhere (DxE), of which defendant Zoe Rosenberg is a member, say those animal welfare claims are hollow, pointing out that – despite the company’s claims of “no crates” – it was from a crate that Zoe Rosenberg removed the chickens she rescued, an act DxE videotaped and broadcast to the world, a video which reveals the birds being taken from a crate packed with chickens. Similarly, the images of contented chickens on the company’s website are in sharp contrast with video that Direct Action Everywhere has distributed to the public which shows chickens seemingly unable to right themselves, unable to reach water and chickens who appear injured.

This case has become a microcosm of a larger cultural conflict. One side frames animal rescue as moral duty; the other defends  property rights and industrialized animal production. As Velez-Mitchell observed during UnchainedTV’s coverage, “It’s a culture war over compassion, transparency, and who controls the narrative.”

Cameras as a Solution, Not a Weapon

Advocates believe modern technology offers a bridge between these competing realities.  On the stand, defendant Rosenberg said she was motivated to rescue the chickens after seeing video allegedly taken inside the slaughterhouse by undercover investigator Raven Deerbrook. That video was played for the jury and Rosenberg said it shows chickens on a conveyor belt where their throats are supposed to be automatically slit. Several of the chickens appear to still be alive, still flapping their wings as they head to what Rosenberg said was the scalding tank. Rosenberg said it was her belief, based on this video, that chickens were being scalded alive, which led her to act. After that video was played during Rosenberg’s testimony, a Petaluma Poultry spokesperson issued a statement calling Rosenberg’s actions a “…breach of private property with intent to steal – a criminal act that was deliberate, strategic and bordering on corporate espionage or agro-terrorism.” The company is invited on UnchainedTV to respond further.

Based on Zoe Rosenberg’s testimony regarding her motivation, it’s clear that, at the heart of this case, is the attempt to document on video what actually happens behind the closed doors of industrialized animal agriculture. “If industries object to undercover cameras,” said Velez-Mitchell, “then let’s install official ones—live cameras in slaughterhouses and factory farms—so everyone can see the truth in real time.” Surveillance cameras have become ubiquitous and low cost. Many businesses have surveillance cameras throughout their stores and businesses. Given that there are animal cruelty laws on the books and given that DxE says they repeatedly tried to get law enforcement to investigate their allegations of criminal animal cruelty without success, the obvious way to settle the matter would be for cameras to be required by law: LIVE, continuous and broadcast to the public for anyone to see.

Slaughterhouse CCTV Cameras: Already the Rule in Several Nations

Globally, this approach is gaining traction. England, Scotland, Spain, and Israel already require CCTV in all slaughterhouses. In Israel, every feed is reportedly transmitted live to the Ministry of Agriculture, which monitors compliance and can, hypothetically, intervene when cruelty occurs. “But, just videotaping is not going to resolve the issue,” says Velez-Mitchell, noting that government officials have historically ignored allegations of animal cruelty. “The video must be LIVE and broadcast to the public so that everyone can see for themselves and not rely on anyone else’s characterizations or interpretations. That’s the only way it would actually work fairly. Transparency is the key.”

Cameras could ensure compliance with existing animal welfare laws, support fair enforcement, and eliminate reliance on whistleblowers facing prosecution for exposing conditions. As one UnchainedTV panelist noted, “If they don’t like people sneaking in to install cameras, the solution is simple—make cameras mandatory.”

Seeing Is Believing

Beyond the courtroom, the Rosenberg case exposes deeper questions about accountability in the food system. Defense witnesses allege that animal suffering persists behind closed doors, while the company insists its practices are humane and regulated. This tension underscores why UnchainedTV’s proposal for live cameras in slaughterhouses and factory farms resonates: it’s not about taking sides, but about ensuring that truth is visible.

If transparency is the hallmark of modern ethics, then animal agriculture should not remain an exception. Cameras are not the enemy—they are a neutral witness. Just as they’ve transformed policing and workplace safety, they could transform food production. As UnchainedTV’s Velez-Mitchell concluded, “If the industry has nothing to hide, then cameras should not threaten it.”

By adopting international best practices, California and, ultimately, the entire United States can turn conflict into clarity. The debate ignited by Zoe Rosenberg’s trial may well become the catalyst for reform, ensuring accountability —not just in courtrooms, but in every barn and on every slaughter line.