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

It's not 'just a tree' in a random park, it was a cultural significant tree for that area and beyond. Probably bought in viistors to the area and was 150 years old. I'd say serves them right for a mindless act of idiocy and it's deterrent to anyone else thinking of doing similar.
I agree that rapists should get longer sentences, but that is a completely different matter.

Just wondering if you realise that the judge in this case was a woman.............

Was just coming on to say exactly this.
Even the defendants own lawyer admitted the tree would be valued at over £100.000 which put it in the highest level
Everything was further escalated by it being a UNESCO W H site.
It wasn't 'just a tree'. In the same way that rape isn't 'just a bit of Dom sex'.

Who are you to decide?

For those saying ‘ it’s just a tree’ they were convicted of the highest level of criminal damage, aggravated by its impact on a UNESCO World Heritage Site and damage to Hadrians wall.

@ObelixtheGaul I believe that was the worst most shocking episode I ever saw.
The first young lady to report, my heart broke for her, I'm still thinking about her days later, if i met her, I'd tell her, she is a brave beautiful young lady. Thank god she found the strength to report him. I hope she continues to recover. Devastating.

He should never be free.

You're right. Rape is a form of murder. My friend was raped and she has been robbed of her future. She will always be a woman who was raped. I am sure that she will survive, but she will not be able to erase this event. We should be campaigning for life sentences for rape, sexual assault and domestic violence. The fact that men are given (as they should have been) such a long sentence for cutting down a tree reminds us that the law really only exists to protect the wealthy and their assets.

I'm not 100% here, I heard a journalist explaining the law wasn't written with digital media and photos in mind, it impacts sentences, the law needs to be modernised.
It is disturbing.

Jesus, that is awful. Our neighbour had 15 years worth of child rape imagery on his computer of the worst kind. He got a 12 months suspended sentence, because his mental health wasn't great at the time. At the time! For FIFTEEN years. He was then housed in a small block of flats, in a lovely area, with several young girls under 8, with views of the garden and lots of communal areas. All this when women are jailed for being unable to pay council tax or protesting or being mouthy on public forums. What message is this sending, that pedophilia is forgivable, but poverty isn't?

They should have got far more than 4 years.

I don’t know what rapists get, but they should be punished accordingly too.

OP this might help you to get some perspective.

High-profile Case: Aldeburgh, East Suffolk (July 2023)

• Defendant: Russell Abrahams, age 62
• Offence: Felling a healthy Turkey oak under a TPO in August 2022
• Penalty:
• £5,500 fine
• £1,302 prosecution costs
• £2,000 court surcharge
• Mandatory tree replacement under a tree replacement notice

£10,000 Fine: South Hams, Devon (March 2024)

• Incident: Removal of two protected trees in woodland under a Woodland TPO (December 2022)
• Penalty:
• £10,000 fine
• £5,000+ legal costs
• Must replant replacement trees southhams.gov.uk

• Defendant: John Ogden, landowner
• Offence: Removing limbs from ~150 TPO-covered trees (oaks, sycamores, limes, chestnuts)
• Penalty:
• £13,840 combined fines, costs and victim surcharge Leeds Star+2Leeds City Council News+2Yorkshire Post+2

• Defendants: Timothy Royston-Parry and Kim Stapley
• Incident: Felling nearly 90% of trees in a TPO conservation area (~1000 m²) before March 2023
• Penalty:
• £2,000 fine per defendant
• £2,689.62 each in costs southhams.gov.uk+15Isle of Wight News - Island Echo+15The Guardian+15

• Defendant: Neil Davey
• Offence: Felling neighbour’s maritime pine under a TPO to improve his view
• Penalty:
• £75,000 fine
• £50,000 confiscation under the Proceeds of Crime Act
• Contractor (tree surgeon) fined £2,500 plus £3,000 costs The Sun+8acorn-grp.co.uk+8Leading Property Lawyers+8

• Defendant: John Davies (farm contractor)
• Offence: Felling ~140 trees in ancient woodland without licence (not strictly TPO, but within forestry regs)
• Penalty:
• £2,000 fine
• £5,000 legal costs
• £800 victim surcharge Leeds City Council News+2Nation.Cymru+2Yorkshire Post+2

• Breaching a TPO under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (s.210) is a criminal offence, punishable by:
• Unlimited fines at Crown Court (Magistrates’ Court capped at £20,000 per tree historically, though Crown Court can go beyond) The Times+15Leading Property Lawyers+15gotelee.co.uk+15
• Confiscation orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act if the land’s value increased from fellingReddit+6Leading Property Lawyers+6gotelee.co.uk+6
• For larger timber volumes, a forestry felling licence under the Forestry Act 1967 is required. Breaching this can also trigger criminal charges and unlimited fines gov.uk+1gotelee.co.uk+1. A nuance exists: trees under a forestry licence may lie outside TPO enforcement depending on volume and location gotelee.co.uk.

This is the norm. The felling of the Sycamore tree was much more complex case and needed a suitable sentence to reflect this.

It was to most people!

It was to some people.

It wasn’t bloody sacred!

They weren't drunk, it was a planned act with chainsaws etc. They pretended they were drunk as a defence and even the judge said drunkeness was highly unlikely. Things can have value which isn't monetary

Just a tree

To say, 'Its just a tree', is like saying Buckinham Palace is just a load of bricks.
The tree is iconic in the local area. The actual location of the tree is known as 'sycamore gap' for a reason. (gap in Hadrian's Wall).
Local people have photographed the tree is various settings (different light, different times of year); local people have painted the tree, from all different aspects; it features on calanders, paintings, birthday cards, etc. It has featured in a major Hollywood Film. One could argue that it has become integral to the local economy.
The tree would have taken many years to have grown in that style.
The tree is on land belonging to the National Trust, so not theirs to cut down, and the men do not come from the local area.
The sentence is justified to deter others.
I walked past the tree stump last year, and they ask people to keep away, as the tree may not be dead. However, saplings growing from the tree are not going to look like the original tree in anyway.

@Barnbrack have you read any of the transcripts around this or the sentencing hearing yesterday or the guidelines and definition of criminal damage?

Will you pay more taxes to pay for them?

A few shoots off a large stump like that won't amount to anything close to what it used to be.

But you are comparing two separate things - they have different guidelines

a discussion of where this fits on the criminal damage sentencing (max 10 years) is a valid one

No one is saying that conviction rates or sentencing for sexual assault and rape are anywhere near what they should be

but this is separate

Totally agree. It's a tree. The hysteria surrounding it seems to have driven the sentencing. Death by dangerous driving gets far less of a sentence.

Yes. See my above post- I explain very clearly

Agreed.
Rapists deserve prison time, noone disputes that.
The two tree fellers carried out such a niche crime, pled not guilty to the end and with several aggregating factors and needed to be made an example of that prison had to be the answer. This does not make other crimes less important.

The poster literally just said ‘sentences are too light’ so evidently not.