WOW

[Mark J]

3 hours ago, AHPP said:

 

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

 

Place your bets.

 

Tricky one. 

I can see them getting 36 months. They could have probably got a suspended sentence if they'd pleaded guilty. 

I reckon a few months planting saplings in The Cheviots would be better than throwing them in jail, they're not bright enough to be a threat to general society. They should also have to sign up to Baldrick's School of Cunning Plans. 

[Bolt]

50 minutes ago, sime42 said:

The judge coined a catchy strapline to the story for sure;-

 

"A moronic mission of mindless vandalism".

 

 

Sounds like a succinct summary of my career.

[kram]

I would suggest 2 years suspended with a fine and large number of hours community service.

 

The interesting thing is Grahams has been in custody since December for his own protection after being attacked?

[dan blocker]

They’ve also been further remanded for “their own protection”. I’m  just putting 3 years custody out there? For their own protection🤔

[Mark Bolam]

I would shoot the pair of c’s, but in the eyes of the law they have only been found guilty of criminal damage.

 

There is no specific law about felling what was, in my my opinion, one of the UK’s most significant trees.

 

Sentencing is in July.

 

The horrible lying bastards will probably get fined a few hundred quid.

 

I really hope I’m wrong mind.

[Joe Newton]

9 minutes ago, Mark Bolam said:

I would shoot the pair of c’s, but in the eyes of the law they have only been found guilty of criminal damage.

 

There is no specific law about felling what was, in my my opinion, one of the UK’s most significant trees.

 

Sentencing is in July.

 

The horrible lying bastards will probably get fined a few hundred quid.

 

I really hope I’m wrong mind.

What more are they guilty of other than criminal damage?

 

We've got convicted rapists being freed after less than 3 years.

 

Luckily since they're both white heterosexual males in the UK they'll probably get the death sentence. 

[Mark Bolam]

That’s kind of my point Joe.

 

Criminal damage on its own isn’t a big deal.

Albeit with over £600 k’s worth of damage.

 

They can’t invent a special new law to prosecute them under just because they killed an amazing tree.

 

Letter of the, fine in the hundreds and bound over.

 

@AHPP?

 

For what it’s worth if I ever meet either of them they will end up with even less teeth than they already haven’t, and there’s plenty like me in Northumberland feel the same.

 

My Dad showed me that tree 45 years ago, a little while before Robin Hood.

[monkeybusiness]

They’ll get at least 4 years I reckon - this has been a massive case and they are taking about televising the sentencing hearing.
Whatever they get will go to appeal no doubt, and everyone will have forgotten all about it next year. 

Personally I think they deserve jail time, but there is no way in the world that this is worse than kiddy fiddling or killing someone (though I suspect they will receive harsher sentences than others who have got off far more leniently for worse). 

[kram]

@Mark Bolam One of the UK's most significant trees? It was a relatively young sycamore. The only thing special about it was the location and peoples memories of it.

 

Somone should grind out the stump and plant a nice oak in its place. 

 

3 hours ago, dan blocker said:

They’ve also been further remanded for “their own protection”. I’m  just putting 3 years custody out there? For their own protection🤔

Only Daniel Grahams, as he told on the other one. Not for protection from angry tree huggers.

[AHPP]

Read with mother.

 

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

 

Culpability - It's A or B, probably A. The level of planning is either way. No revenge and no risk to persons but definitely intention to seriously damage the tree. The wall damage being intentional or reckless will barely play. It's about the tree. The wall financial value was so low as to make it an add-on only. I don't think there's anything from C to nudge an A down to a B. Call it A (high culpability).

 

Harm is category 1.

 

A1:

Starting point - 1 year 6 months’ custody

Category range - 6 months – 4 years’ custody

Maximum: 10 years’ custody (basic offence)

 

Then start nudging it up for things like do they have a load of form, were they on bail for something else when they did this, was it because they hate foreign trees etc. Let's assume neutral for this since we don't know anything (or I don't anyway).

Then continue nudging it up for other listed aggravating factors. Three of the list of ten definitely play. Nudging the starting point up 30% gets us to 23 months so far.

 

Then nudge it down for bleeding heart liberal stuff. Are they sorry etc. They'll have a sob story of some kind but I can't see much washing. 5% off if they're lucky. 22 months.

 

Then some technical/procedural stuff like did they cough early or did they put the prosecution to the trouble of a full trial? Full trial so no credit.

 

Adjust for totality. Nothing complicated here. Very isolated offences. Maybe a bit extra for the wall. Maybe not.

 

So on the guidlines and with the information I know (not much - I don't read much news) 22-24 months. I'd say they court will want to give a particularly harsh sentence to give the public blood but that's why there are sentencing guidelines. 24 months is pretty much in the middle of the range. Easy for a judge to go with that so as to limit accusations of undue harshness/leniency. Let's not rule out an angry judge giving them a walloping one and saying, "**************** you. Appeal it on your own time. I'm off to lunch. You're off to prison." though.

 

There's probably some stuff about how much time you spend in an actual prison before being let out early or whatever. I don't know anything about that. If I had to guess, 24 month sentences, 12 months inside and then let them out once the point has been made. But I really am guessing there.

 

Sentencing and mitigation is a whole sub field of legal work btw, like stump grinding. There are briefs who specialise in being good losers.

 

General point: The courts punish offences against property disproportionately sternly compared to offences against the person. Someone up the page pointed out rapists can get comparatively derisory sentences. Yep.

Edited May 9 by AHPP