Sycamore Gap tree verdict

Galaxy

That teacher will absolutely hurt another woman when released I have no doubt about it.

He said to police not to be nice to him as he knew he was a monster, so I think you’re right.The judge said he was a very dangerous man.

Allira you could be onto something, a long community service sentence planting lots and lots of trees!😄

"Most of those baying for the blood of the 2 men are just peeved as they no longer have a spot to take yet another ridiculous selfy for their pathetic social -media page"

I've never been to Sycamore Gap but I can appreciate how extraordinary and beautiful a place it was. I can also appreciate how much it meant to the many people who have become engaged there, spent special moments there and scattered their loved one's ashes in that peaceful spot.

For many people it was much more than a selfie photo opportunity. If you love nature it is very important to you.

I hope they are not dismissed as idiots but treated as grown men who went out with the intent to destroy something important. People were angry when the Colston statue was felled - why should they not be when a tree, especially a rare or important tree is felled?

Public opinion does seem to be a factor in sentencing and maybe that isn’t always a bad thing. During child protections conferences, Convictions for criminal damage were seen as relevant offences along with those of violence/substance possession/drink driving etc . My understanding was the relevance linked to either aggressive, out of control behaviour or deliberate damage to something important o the victim.

I’m not a supporter of prison sentences, I’ve always believed we imprison too many people who don’t pose a threat to others. This is such an unusual case, with denial of responsibility in the face of clear evidence, no remorse or honesty from either defendant so I’m not surprised hmp on the cards

I have always thought public opinion was a factor in all criminal cases

Franski

Wonder why they did it..?

I heard a tree surgeon (who clearly loves trees and tries to save them) speak on the radio about the "rush" of adrenaline when you (have to) fell a big tree... he talked about once having to fell a plane tree. He was very honest... He thought they did it for the "kicks".

Years ago (many years ago) I knew a Canadian research student who was researching a way to mechanically plant tree saplings. He had spent 100s of hours in the forests of Canada with logging teams and although he was a fount of knowledge on all things nature and a strong campaigner (even then) for the environment- he once described the thrill of taking down a big tree.
I have never forgotten his description.

I'm sure the tree surgeon is right and this pair of vandals wanted to experience the thrill of the felling. They probably (I guess) egged each other on.

I wish they would give custodial sentences for the deliberate destruction of trees. Near the coast there are cases of developers ignoring preservation orders and destroying trees because they impede the view for very expensive properties. They are given heavy fines, but they simply add that to the cost of the development. It is the disregard for the law that is important and needs to be severely punished.

If you look at the sentencing guidelines, there is every chance these two will go to jail:

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/criminal-damage-other-than-by-fire-value-exceeding-5000-racially-or-religiously-aggravated-criminal-damage/

Culpability demonstrated by one or more of the following

A – High culpability

• High degree of planning or premeditation
• Revenge attack
• Intention to cause very serious damage to property
• Intention to create a high risk of injury to persons

Harm

The level of harm is assessed by weighing up all the factors of the case.

Category 1

• Serious distress caused
• Serious consequential economic or social impact of offence
• High value of damage

The starting point for A1 is a one year six months prison sentence with a range from six months to four years. There is no scope for a high level community order.

The difference between A1 and B1 (which does give scope for a community order) is whether there was intention to cause very serious damage to property or recklessness as to whether very serious damage caused to property.

They went to the site with the intention of cutting down the tree. It was premeditated. There is no doubt in my mind that this is category A.

A2 would give scope for a high level communtiy order but that would require the harm of the offence to be placed somewhere between:

Category 1

• Serious distress caused
* Serious consequential economic or social impact of offence
* High value of damage

Category 2

• Harm that falls between categories 1 and 3

* Category 3

No or minimal distress caused
Low value damage

The value of the damage has been estimated at £450,000 although the defence argued it was much less than that.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly38wr66dro

While the value of the damage is debatable we can’t underestimate the social impact of the crime.

In addition, damage caused to heritage and/or cultural assets is an aggravating factor in sentencing. Mitigating factors include assistance to the prosecution - which their tissue of lies and blameshifting didn’t do.

Anniebach

I have always thought public opinion was a factor in all criminal cases

Absolutely not. The vast majority of criminal cases go through the court system and sentencing without most members of the public even knowing about them, apart from those directly involved in the case itself. It's usually only the more high profile cases which attract the attention of the general public.

news.sky.com/story/sycamore-gap-what-we-know-about-two-men-who-cut-down-famous-treeGraham was facing eviction after Cumberland Council had rejected his application to live in his caravan at Millbeck Stables in April 2023.

He ran his business from the caravan and neighbours objected to the "large commercial vehicles", which would drive in and out of the rural site.

In planning documents, the parish council objected to his application, saying that neighbours and planning officials had "felt threatened by the dominant and oppressive behaviour displayed by the proposer".

Planning documents also showed that council tax had not been paid on the caravan.

Graham, who had lived on the site since he bought it in 2016, had told planning officials then he would use the caravan as a "tea/bait room" but had instead lived in it without authorisation.and-their-possible-motive-13364492

a paragraph;

You are right easybee about developers.
"Oh dear that was a miscommunication - sorry"
- too late.
Fines factored into the build. Small sapling planted and left to die in poor earth/not watered.

These idiots actually drove some distance to film their actions at night. They intended to do it because this beautiful tree was an iconic image and they thought they would cause an outcry. It was a bit of fun for them. Well they have to be made an example of what happens when you destroy something loved and appreciated and for that reason only. Community service for a year working at planting trees and a few days in prison preferably in isolation so they can reflect on what they have done.

I think this has been overblown.

I'm not sure they thought it would necessarily be such a "big thing".
I'm sure they loved it afterwards though!

I think they wrte just driven by the excitement of felling it.

I looked for the sycamore tree whenever we travelled home along the military road. The gap is still there of course,but there is no tree. I think perhaps that you have to live in the area to really appreciate its significance. It was a major tourist draw and our community will be a little poorer without it.

This isn't my photo, it's by Steve Clements.

Grantanow

I think this has been overblown.

I don't.

Neither do I

What a lovely photo by Steve Clements, MiniMoon... is he local?

NotSpaghetti I'm afraid I don't know. His photos find their way onto my Fb page quite regularly though.

As to why they did it, I doubt even they know - so thick are they.

A policewoman friend did once tell me that she often got to hear the three stock replies that suspects routinely come up with when they admit what they did and why they did it.

"I was bored" or "I did it for a laugh" or - the worst one - "I don't know".

Ye Gods!

Grantanow

I think this has been overblown.

Why?

The Sycamore Gap tree or Robin Hood tree was a 150-year-old sycamore tree next to Hadrian's Wall near Crag Lough in Northumberland, Eng.

if not stopped they's be hacking at Hadrians wall next!

windmill1

As to why they did it, I doubt even they know - so thick are they.

A policewoman friend did once tell me that she often got to hear the three stock replies that suspects routinely come up with when they admit what they did and why they did it.

"I was bored" or "I did it for a laugh" or - the worst one - "I don't know".

Ye Gods!

Disaffected, angry about the caravan, wanting to hurt/spoil, maybe prove something to each other, get anonymous attention through notoriety - and thinking they would get away with it.

For me any sentence would include hard reparative work, the trouble is prisons don't offer this and would community schemes currently available fit the bill?

lemsip reminds us that prison can be a deterrent and I suspect in this case, we need it

ViceVersa

Anniebach

I have always thought public opinion was a factor in all criminal cases

Absolutely not. The vast majority of criminal cases go through the court system and sentencing without most members of the public even knowing about them, apart from those directly involved in the case itself. It's usually only the more high profile cases which attract the attention of the general public.

Absolutely not again!

Cases have sometimes been thrown out of court because they have been discussed on social media to the detriment or otherwise of the accused which makes it prejudicial to a fair trial.

I'm not saying that mistakes are not made on occasion and evidence withheld, but the CJS in the UK is a fair one on the whole, at least in more recent years.