4 yrs for cutting down tree, no jail time for rape

But statue can be questioned and should be if it doesn’t reflect society’s vakues

Yes I agree!

You’re flogging a dead horse @Tiswa.

But you have read the sentencing guidelines/Criminal Damage Act 1971 or the sentencing judgment correct?

I was dubious but looking at the above made me understand why.

Researching the judge and her verdicts also helped.

reading (social) media gives a biased viewpoint it is always best to look at the judgments etc

You do know though that judges are constrained by statute law? Yes we have a common law system but Statutes are king.

Yeah I just don't agree with the sentence.

Yeah you really don’t get the way the legal system works

'It's a real shame the court and the NT didn't have your expertise on hand. The whole thing could have been dispensed with in no time and virtually no cost and the judge could have learnt a thing or two.'

Very true.

Or maybe we have more excitable judges who give custodial sentences for vandalism.

It's a real shame the court and the NT didn't have your expertise on hand. The whole thing could have been dispensed with in no time and virtually no cost and the judge could have learnt a thing or two.

Facts? Reckon we know all we need to know. Tree. Chopped down.

Deliberation? Nah, who needs to think about anything that might contradict their 100% certain cast-iron confidence.

Importance of tree? Nice, but just a tree. End of. Anyone who thinks to the contrary is quite clearly wrong.

Wall? Find someone who does wall stuff online, bag of cement from the builder's merchant. Couple of hundred quid, tops.

Sentence? Bit of sweeping.

Simples!

What you’re missing is an understanding of English law and our judicial system.

We seems to be in the middle in the data I have seen (and way under the US)

We jail more per capita than other European countries because we have more criminals than other European countries.

@Gloriia its 13 pages it is quite succinct. I mean don’t bother reading it but don’t judge the sentence unless you have. It really is that simple

I'm not Scottish so I'm not as aware of the issues there but I wholeheartedly agree with you. That pair deserve everything they get and giving them a lighter sentence won't help the victims of rape but rape and violent crimes need to have longer sentences.

Gloria tells me I shouldn't quote their posts but then asks me questions.
Not going to be drawn.
😘

Oh please. Who cba to read long drawn out court essays. The media don't feed us anything they report the facts, in a nutshell not a 20 page speech.

The facts are 2 blokes lopped down a lovely tree. A sole tree as many others had been chopped down to 'preserve views' apparently. One crim had a troubled past the other didn't. The tree was viewed by some as a historical thing and it did damage an actual historical wall which for some reason cost a lot to repair, maybe short of stone masons in Northumberland. Tell me what I'm missing?

The only thing sensationalised are some of the emotive comments on this thread.

They shouldn't have done it, they should be punished but sweeping up or similar would have sufficed.

Quite @grumpygrape the problems with the justice system aren’t at the sentencing stage it is what gets to the sentencing stage indeed what makes it past CPS and even past the police.

and a lack of knowledge

I do think a lot of the apparent inconsistencies come from people not availing themselves of the facts of different cases and the rational for different sentences. Reading Judge’s Sentencing Remarks which give the rationale would give an insight.

However, it is easier for some to rely on what they have read/been fed by the media who, as we should all know by now, simplify and sensationalise their reports.

I am disgusted by this crime and glad that they have received a custodial sentence. But yes, there does seem to be weird inconsistencies with sentences handed down compared to public perception of the seriousness of the offence.

I hate to sound like a ranting taxi driver, but the system seems all out of whack. Its become a right wing cliché, but it does have some truth in it - claim that sex is real on twitter, or moan about the school governors and you'll have a riot squad at your house. Tell the police that you have been burgled or had your phone snatched and you'll get a crime reference number and text later that day to tell you that the case is closed.

Cut down a tree (albeit an iconic and particularly beautiful one) or post an irrational ill judged tweet when drunk and suffering personal trauma, and you're banged up for several years. Yet we're seeing time and time again that thieves with literally hundreds of offenses are being handed suspended sentences.

It appears that there is a political motivation to a lot of these sentences, and I'm sick of it.

My point was that other world heritage sites carry longer sentences so they’re lucky they were in the UK. This act did not merely affect the British: it had international significance (as indeed did the tree). However, you clearly think that damaging internationally important heritage sites is unimportant. I am very glad that most people seem to disagree with you - that actually gives me hope - that the majority of people do still value history and beauty.

But the WHOLE reason it was moved from a summary to an indictable offence is the financial side.

Have you read the sentencing report as to why? Because it really does explain it

and even if they do appeal the chances of it becoming non custodial are slim because it would have to be appeal IMO on the fact that the aggravating and mitigating factors weren’t applied properly

given the range specified was 4 years and that is pretty much what they got they would need mitigating factors

'I could be punched and hit yes but the impact of that for me isn’t going to be worse than someone stealing £60,000 from me.'

Someone attacking you would of course have a greater impact than a tree being chopped down and damaging a wall.

On what grounds?

'If it had been in China, they would have got up to 10 years'

So what! We surely aren't using other country's judiciary as anything to aspire to. Particularly China.

The question should be why there was only one sole tree and why all the others had been lopped to preserve the view. Bit of selective tree hugging if you ask me.

I hope they appeal the silly sentence.

@Absolutely45 do we really have the luxury to simply write off non violent crimes as not being impactful?

I could be punched and hit yes but the impact of that for me isn’t going to be worse than someone stealing £60,000 from me.

we see financial abuse as being bad like physical and sexual abuse - we cannot create a hierarchy where it isn’t because that is saying it is ok

we have different prisons for this anyway? So they are not going to be housed with violent offenders and the place they are going to is likely not to be suitable for a violent offender

there are 4 categories of prisons so it isn’t as if they are taking the place of a violent offender