Sycamore Gap tree at Hadrian's Wall 'felled overnight'

These two just sound like top tier scumbags. The evidence against them seems fairly solid as well, I'd love to know how the police ended up looking in their direction.
Damage to a unesco world heritage site should see a nice lengthy sentence as a minimum before you even think about the tree.
 
It's funny how a company cutting down that oak in London will be treated entirely different to this, clearly these two just needed to start up a company and whine that the tree was a 'danger'.
 
StriderX said:
It's funny how a company cutting down that oak in London will be treated entirely different to this, clearly these two just needed to start up a company and whine that the tree was a 'danger'.
Click to expand...
Was thinking that, apparently the tree in London is a civil matter according to the Met
 
arknor said:
let me check the local crime section of my local news to see how lenient the recent sentences are.

www.chroniclelive.co.uk

Teen who committed outraging decency in incident with horse sentenced

The 17-year-old boy was convicted of outraging public decency following a trial last month
www.chroniclelive.co.uk www.chroniclelive.co.uk
Stick your arm up a horse, 12 months conditional discharge

probably should be on the sex offenders register and re-educated or something
Click to expand...

At work at the mo so can't spend too long perusing this but someone with binos claims you are up to animal business and that's enough for the conviction? The Police didn't even bring him in and swab the kid - "He also admitted that it could have been mud"
 
Mr Jack said:
Never actually looked at records of medieval crime, have you?
Click to expand...

They didn't get people randomly destroying "public property". It would have all been owned by the crown, so it would have been treason and most would be scared to touch it.

If they did, there wouldn't be any left standing now. This is a new thing which has started in the past few decades.

Like just stop oil painting monuments, art and buildings etc in central London...dead.
 
Last edited:
Nasher said:
They didn't get people randomly destroying "public property". It would have all been owned by the crown, so it would have been treason and most would be scared to touch it.
Click to expand...

This is news precisely because it is so rare. People aren't going around randomly destroying stuff like this all the time. And people have always vandalised public property, of course they have. The idea that there was less crime in medieval times is such ahistorical nonsense that it beggars belief.
 
Minusorange said:
There was an entire race of Vandals - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals
Click to expand...

Firstly, that's not medieval times.

Second, they were a long way from Britain.

Third I suppose, they were called "Vandals" but they weren't much different from other European kingdoms of the time. They didn't destroy for the sake of it (like we see now), they were looting as many ancient buildings were partly constructed with bronze.
 
Last edited:
Nasher said:
They didn't get people randomly destroying "public property". It would have all been owned by the crown, so it would have been treason and most would be scared to touch it.

If they did, there wouldn't be any left standing now. This is a new thing which has started in the past few decades.

Like just stop oil painting monuments, art and buildings etc in central London...dead.
Click to expand...
Poachers existed so clearly the threat of being hanged wasn't enough for some.

I still find it amusing as well as irritating that so much furore occurred over this tree when this country is a barren wasteland at our hands.
 
StriderX said:
Poachers existed so clearly the threat of being hanged wasn't enough for some.

I still find it amusing as well as irritating that so much furore occurred over this tree when this country is a barren wasteland at our hands.
Click to expand...
I think you highlighted something there, a lot of 'crime' in those days was in order to eat.

This is just deliberate destruction aimed at upsetting other people.

However it should have highlighted another point, we have no trees in those areas because they were all felled centuries ago and it isn't natural.
 
Judge has said he is trying to get to the root of the problem before he passes sentence....

Apparently special branch spent many hours investigating.
 
Mr Jack said:
This is news precisely because it is so rare. People aren't going around randomly destroying stuff like this all the time. And people have always vandalised public property, of course they have. The idea that there was less crime in medieval times is such ahistorical nonsense that it beggars belief.
Click to expand...

A tree back in the day was definitely not public property and forests belonged to the local lord. People definitely had corporal punishment applied for even removing fallen branches without leave. Fallen limbs on all sides.
 
Mr Jack said:
Deterrence isn't effective, nor is it particularly morally justifiable: by definition you're treating one person badly in an attempt to influence the behaviour of another.

In practice, what makes an effective deterrent isn't perceived severity of punishment but perceived likelihood of being caught.
Click to expand...

Deterrence is most effective, provided that the punishment is severe enough. And I don't agree that it's morally objectional, provided that people are forewarned.

It's like some of the gated estates in London. There is zero crime inside the zones, because anyone committing a crime is highly likely to lose their right to live there.

Do the same. If people cause severe damage to the local area then remove their right to live in the county.
 
SpellowHouse said:
Deterrence is most effective, provided that the punishment is severe enough. And I don't agree that it's morally objectional, provided that people are forewarned.

It's like some of the gated estates in London. There is zero crime inside the zones, because anyone committing a crime is highly likely to lose their right to live there.

Do the same. If people cause severe damage to the local area then remove their right to live in the county.
Click to expand...

Not entirely useful here as those 2 are from a different county.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom