I think there should be some sort of National Service set up for offenders, as opposed to sending them to prison. There must be a way of getting these people to serve a useful purpose, when they are not a serious danger to the public.
Yeah I agree, there's no need for these people to go to prison, a lot of people calling for a harsh sentence on this have a cognitive dissonance where they normally would agree that prison "does no good" etc. Prison should be for keeping dangers to society away from the public.
They should be given a community order where they plant thousands of trees, and chuck a tag on them so they can't go out at night. I would still give them an incredibly onerous sentence, but not one behind bars.
I agree that a 10 year community service order where they spend 50 hours a week digging ditches, clearing ponds and planting trees would be more effective than a custodial sentence especially if they were paid minimum wage and their bank accounts monitored
Apparently there are 1.3bn trees in the UK. The time, money, resource etc. spent finding the guys who cut this one down is immense, given that almost none of that would have occurred for 99.9% of the other trees here.
I get why it turns into a big deal, but given that I had £30k worth of equipment nicked recently and the only bit of police work that occurred was a search for a van that was spotted in the area, that turned out to be a fucking police van, I am a little annoyed at how police resource is spent!
The tree in Enfield has a possible Spurs connection according to the latest Private Eye. Mitchell & Butlers, the owners of Toby Carvery, have as their largest shareholder Joe Lewis. His family trust owns 70% of Enic, who own 86% of Spurs. Enfield Council have recently allowed green belt land to be built on by Spurs right near Whitewebbs House, site of the tree felling. Toby may also be selling the lease on Whitewebbs to the club. Spurs dismissed any suggestion that felling this tree would help them stick a road in between the new women's ground and Whitewebbs.
The papers would have been printed anyway, no matter what the news. Perhaps we should be looking at not producing newspapers any more, when news can be found online.
I used to regularly buy a newspaper and had subscriptions to lots of magazines. I now get my news from the tv and online and can read many magazines on the Readly App, which for £12.99 a month, gives me access to scores of magazines and some 'newspapers'.
Not exactly true. As far as I am aware newsprint is more or less 100% recyled.
Almost all paper used in the UK is made from sustainable sources, that is trees that are grown and harvested specifically to make pulp. Think of it like wheat, only with a twenty year cycle rather than annually. Eucalyptus trees can reach maturity in less than ten years, so are used a lot in paper making.
The stupidity and lack of care for the natural world by some low life idiots continues. Protected nesting sites in Norfolk have been vandalised putting the survival of endangered species at risk.
I’m not even sure a deterrent is needed in this case. Are scores of people going to come out of the woodwork with chainsaws if they see a lenient sentence given? Somehow I doubt it.
I’m not even sure a deterrent is needed in this case. Are scores of people going to come out of the woodwork with chainsaws if they see a lenient sentence given? Somehow I doubt it.
I'm not too sure. There's loads round my way who like to indulge in chopping trees down. Some have even started business up and charge for it
I’m not even sure a deterrent is needed in this case. Are scores of people going to come out of the woodwork with chainsaws if they see a lenient sentence given? Somehow I doubt it.
But there are a lot of copycats and people driven by the desire for internet clicks, even if anonymously, out there who might think "I could do something outragous and sit back and watch the outrage".
That is basically what I believe these guys expected and they were right only they didn't think they would get csught.
A harsh FAFO sentence MIGHT deter others even if you can't account for stupid.
Not exactly true. As far as I am aware newsprint is more or less 100% recyled.
Almost all paper used in the UK is made from sustainable sources, that is trees that are grown and harvested specifically to make pulp. Think of it like wheat, only with a twenty year cycle rather than annually. Eucalyptus trees can reach maturity in less than ten years, so are used a lot in paper making.
That sort of rationale and logic will get you banned from forums whose lifeblood is hysterical juvenile indignation and prejudice, to say nothing of populist tabloid "journalism"
I’m not even sure a deterrent is needed in this case. Are scores of people going to come out of the woodwork with chainsaws if they see a lenient sentence given? Somehow I doubt it.
But there are a lot of copycats and people driven by the desire for internet clicks, even if anonymously, out there who might think "I could do something outragous and sit back and watch the outrage".
That is basically what I believe these guys expected and they were right only they didn't think they would get csught.
A harsh FAFO sentence MIGHT deter others even if you can't account for stupid.
you can imagine someone vandalising a much loved monument, statue or building just for the publicity, ie someone decapatating Nelsons column or writing a huge swear on Buckingham Palace lawn with acid, or videoing people shagging on a beloved football grounds centre circle- far fetched I know but......
I’m not even sure a deterrent is needed in this case. Are scores of people going to come out of the woodwork with chainsaws if they see a lenient sentence given? Somehow I doubt it.
But there are a lot of copycats and people driven by the desire for internet clicks, even if anonymously, out there who might think "I could do something outragous and sit back and watch the outrage".
That is basically what I believe these guys expected and they were right only they didn't think they would get csught.
A harsh FAFO sentence MIGHT deter others even if you can't account for stupid.
The saturation coverage and attendant vilification of these two halfwits is precisely why prosecuting them in a high profile trial was precisely the right thing to do. Being seen as an embarrassing thicko is one of the few things which might constrain the behaviour of others. If some level of social media fame/notoriety was the motivation for their stunt, I'm surprised they didn't claim intellectual impairment in mitigation, cos they're far too old to be intoxicated by all that bollocks, aren't they? They'll look rightly stupid in their orange overalls on their community payback sentences. A small but very long lasting attachment of earnings order would help them remember what worthless individuals they really are.
Pair guilty of felling world famous Sycamore Gap tree. Daniel Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32, both from Cumbria, were each convicted of two counts of criminal damage unanimously by jurors at Newcastle Crown Court. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg584y95vwt
You can always rely on the British public to be dramatic.
"Upon seeing footage of the tree being felled, which had been filmed on Graham's phone, one woman said she felt like she had "just watched a murder".
I wonder if they would have got off more lightly if they just said "sorry, we had had a few sherberts, we had the saws in the van and we promise we won't do it again"
Pair guilty of felling world famous Sycamore Gap tree. Daniel Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32, both from Cumbria, were each convicted of two counts of criminal damage unanimously by jurors at Newcastle Crown Court. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg584y95vwt
You can always rely on the British public to be dramatic.
"Upon seeing footage of the tree being felled, which had been filmed on Graham's phone, one woman said she felt like she had "just watched a murder".
Agree that murder is pushing it, but it was a 150 year old famous tree that was cut down for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
I don't get the craving for publicity. Nothing new in it, but seems exemplified in the age of social media. What did these morons hope to get out of it? An irrational hatred of big trees perhaps? I mean they can't profit from a crime they've been convicted of committing, and must have known they'd be caught and found guilty, so what was the motive as it wasn't impulsive? Did they sit there one night and think "What can we do to prove to the world that we're complete arseholes?"" in which case, mission accomplished.
Whatever their life stories, I don't imagine a block buster movie coming out of three minutes of wood chopping after dark, and it's not even as if they were making some ill conceived gesture of defiance against government actions on protecting the environment or net zero policies.
I don't get the craving for publicity. Nothing new in it, but seems exemplified in the age of social media. What did these morons hope to get out of it? An irrational hatred of big trees perhaps? I mean they can't profit from a crime they've been convicted of committing, and must have known they'd be caught and found guilty, so what was the motive as it wasn't impulsive? Did they sit there one night and think "What can we do to prove to the world that we're complete arseholes?"" in which case, mission accomplished.
Whatever their life stories, I don't imagine a block buster movie coming out of three minutes of wood chopping after dark, and it's not even as if they were making some ill conceived gesture of defiance against government actions on protecting the environment or net zero policies.
I wonder if they would have got off more lightly if they just said "sorry, we had had a few sherberts, we had the saws in the van and we promise we won't do it again"
Yes, they would as remorse and pre-meditation are mitigating factors in criminal danage cases.
But as they have, as yet shown no remorse (the pre-sentance reports have yet to come) and they clearly planned to do it, ie it wasn't someone coming home drunk from the pub throwing a bin thru a window, that will all go against them.
Comments
They should be given a community order where they plant thousands of trees, and chuck a tag on them so they can't go out at night. I would still give them an incredibly onerous sentence, but not one behind bars.
I get why it turns into a big deal, but given that I had £30k worth of equipment nicked recently and the only bit of police work that occurred was a search for a van that was spotted in the area, that turned out to be a fucking police van, I am a little annoyed at how police resource is spent!
I used to regularly buy a newspaper and had subscriptions to lots of magazines. I now get my news from the tv and online and can read many magazines on the Readly App, which for £12.99 a month, gives me access to scores of magazines and some 'newspapers'.
And then even more stupid to not plead guilty when there was so much evidence against them.
Are they murderers or rapists? No but they deserve a punishment for being stupid and as a deterent to others.
Almost all paper used in the UK is made from sustainable sources, that is trees that are grown and harvested specifically to make pulp. Think of it like wheat, only with a twenty year cycle rather than annually. Eucalyptus trees can reach maturity in less than ten years, so are used a lot in paper making.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgp2gm8373o?at_ptr_name=facebook_page&at_medium=social&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_origin=BBC_Norfolk&at_campaign_type=owned&at_format=image&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_type=web_link&at_link_id=628EAB8C-2B4B-11F0-AAD9-BBE502678845&fbclid=IwY2xjawKMFO1leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETBhUjNwNGpnOG9nU3F2eHFUAR5H20absVBbNjUpD0zc38R0qp1UToc4U_HKOb1CLa1kUcb8bFPcesuAcw5xoA_aem_-lS0vLWWlNS-u8ZiPZHIIQ
That is basically what I believe these guys expected and they were right only they didn't think they would get csught.
A harsh FAFO sentence MIGHT deter others even if you can't account for stupid.
Being seen as an embarrassing thicko is one of the few things which might constrain the behaviour of others.
If some level of social media fame/notoriety was the motivation for their stunt, I'm surprised they didn't claim intellectual impairment in mitigation, cos they're far too old to be intoxicated by all that bollocks, aren't they?
They'll look rightly stupid in their orange overalls on their community payback sentences. A small but very long lasting attachment of earnings order would help them remember what worthless individuals they really are.
"Upon seeing footage of the tree being felled, which had been filmed on Graham's phone, one woman said she felt like she had "just watched a murder".
Whatever their life stories, I don't imagine a block buster movie coming out of three minutes of wood chopping after dark, and it's not even as if they were making some ill conceived gesture of defiance against government actions on protecting the environment or net zero policies.
Completely baffling and nonsensical.
But as they have, as yet shown no remorse (the pre-sentance reports have yet to come) and they clearly planned to do it, ie it wasn't someone coming home drunk from the pub throwing a bin thru a window, that will all go against them.
One also has previous convictions.
2 and 3 years are my guess