Submitted 3 weeks ago by Mex@feddit.uk to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvg93k0950pt
What depressed me most about the loss of the sycamore is nobody would ever face consequences for it. I figured it would be impossible to prove.
But I’ll be damned the morons recorded themselves doing it. What the actual fuck. How do people this dim exist?
Looks like only two of them are facing consequences; the other one seems to be getting off scot-free.
Scott-free? Yes, that’s what Hadrian’s wall was for…
From an earlier report:
Wright said Carruthers sent Graham a Facebook post from a man called Kevin Hartness saying: “Some weak people that walk this earth … disgusting behaviour.”
Two minutes later Graham replied to Carruthers with a voice note saying: “That Kevin Hartness comment. Weak … fucking weak? Does he realise how heavy shit is?”
Carruthers replied with his own voice note saying: “I’d like to see Kevin Hartness launch an operation like we did last night … I don’t think he’s got the minerals.”
This is the sort of crime that putting people in public stocks should be brought back for.
Imagine these two pieces of shit locked in a pillory, at the site of the felled tree, while thousands of people queue up to tell them what seawards they are.
1000074338 Why am I not surprised that he looks like this
Whatever sentence they get will be a slap on the wrist. For some reason white dudes destroying ancient history is never punished very harshly.
so… why? why did they cut it down?
Looks like they just did it for a laugh
From voice messages between them in the days after the felling, having something they did become a news item may have had some allure.
Though why they’d want that so badly, and why they’d opt for destroying an ancient sycamore & damaging part of Hadrian’s wall to obtain such attention is another matter.
Land wasn’t theirs, they didn’t live near it nor on land which people cross to visit the tree. They didn’t take the wood. Nothing has emerged to suggest they did it on behalf of someone else.
The pair went out on a stormy winter night, making a special trip to fell the tree, and leaving shortly after. Despite the darkness & lashing rain, one made a very grainy video recording of the other felling the tree with a chainsaw.
So far, they are pleading not guilty, so it’ll be interesting to see whether they raise a defence or merely introduce doubts about the reliability of the evidence brought against them.
Idk, I feel it could have been an induction ritual for some group they hope(d) to join, or flagging up their willingness to conduct sabotage operations for hire, but more likely an unfortunate dissociation from reality caused by viewing the world and their own lives through the distorting lens of social media.
Attending the hearing yesterday, one had his face & hair entirely concealed as he passed press photographers waiting outside, which doesn’t fit with a craving for fame. The only footage presented by the news of the other man was taken at a court appearance for an unrelated matter a few weeks ago - it isn’t clear whether he somehow escaped their attention yesterday, or simply hadn’t attended.
It’s starting to sound plausible that not even they know why they did it.
Testosterone?
Mr Graham, from Carlisle, and Mr Carruthers, of Wigton, Cumbria, have each denied two counts of criminal damage.
Why am I not surprised. 'ang 'em!!!
'ang 'em!!!
Might be better to have them plant more trees along Hadrian’s Wall, if people enjoy said trees. Turn the affair into a net positive for people who will be eventually walking along the wall in the future.
destroyed
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sycamore_Gap_tree
The stump has thrown up seedlings and is still alive, albeit severely coppiced, but is expected to take more than 150 years to recover.
May or may not wind up quite as photogenic, but with apologies to Mark Twain, the reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated.
The landmark is still destroyed. A stump isn’t the same. What made the tree special was because it was pretty.
Yeah, but I mean, it’s probably far from being the only pretty tree in the country.
It sounds like it became a thing due to being in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves.
www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-66994729
While a popular spot for walkers and photographers due to its unusual setting, it became famous after featuring in the 1991 film Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves starring Kevin Costner. Afterwards it gained the nickname the Robin Hood Tree - although in reality it was some 170 miles (273 km) from Sherwood Forest.
It looks like there’s a new Robin Hood movie coming out (The Death of Robin Hood), and IMDB says that the filming is in the UK and Northern Ireland (well…should probably be Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but whatever). Maybe they can find themselves another nice tree in the UK for filming.
…maybe use an oak or yew or something even more long-lived and historically-accurate too, as the sycamore is an import…
www.mikepalmer.co.uk/…/greatbritain.htm
Jones (1944) found that the first definite record of sycamore in England is that of Lyte in 1578, but suggests that it is probable that it was introduced to Scotland at a slightly earlier date. Some workers have argued that the Romans could have introduced it, but no conclusive evidence can be found (Bleay 1987). Sycamore remained rare around houses and in hedges though by the 17th and 18th centuries nursery records show stocking and sale of young sycamores (Bleay 1987). However, it was not extensively planted until the late 18th century (Jones 1944).
That first record of introduction is centuries after King Richard the Lionheart was running around; Robin Hood was supposed to be a contemporary figure.
Don’t think I’ve felt this sad about a tree. Had been there hundreds of years before these blokes were born, it’s good they’re on trial at least.
Who do these clowns think they are, Mitchells & Butlers?
drspod@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
They’re also experienced tree fellers. Couldn’t make it up.
Mac@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
Have you ever dealt with the court of law? You always plead guilty. Always.
There are very, very few scenarios where you dont.
MouldyCat@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
you mean you always plead not guilty, don’t you?
echodot@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
I was a juror on a trial and the guy involved clearly with several chicken nuggets short of a happy meal, like these two there was mountains of evidence against him including body cam footage from a police officer and he still pleaded not guilty.
By the way his defence essentially amounted to, there were other people in the area who also had criminal records, so maybe they did it.