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

[Barnbrack]

Why are 2 men being given custodial sentences for cutting down a tree when men convicted of rape regularly get suspended sentences.

Is an important tree more important than a random woman! Justice system seems to think so.

I'm genuinely very fond of trees. I was pretty raging when a neighbour cut one of mine down a couple of years ago.

Not as raging as I'd have been if she'd sexually assaulted me though oddly enough...

But what if you give a slap on the wrist to those who sexually assault women? What does that do to the rest of them by the same logic? Or are women more expendable than landmarks?

Yes - and caused some minor damage.

I don’t feel sorry for them one bit. Justice is served. 4 years is correct in my opinion.

I think rapists should get 10-20 years.

The tree twats deserved longer than they got IMO, but rapists obviously deserve a lot longer than them.

The answer to 'why' is good old misogyny and full prisons.

I think there's two very different issues and you can't compare them. It's too simplistic to say they got more than a rapist for cutting down a tree.

Yes 4 years seems a lot for a tree but it was mindless vandalism of a much loved landmark and a case like this in the public eye usually carries a higher sentence. I was surprised they didn't get longer tbh

The ridiculous sentences for rape and sexual assault are the tip of the iceberg. Violence against women goes unreported, when it is reported it's rare it reaches prosecution and court and even rarer a decent sentence is given.Its been shown that there is rife misogyny in the police force etc. This is part of a much bigger issue and one that sadly never seems to be taken seriously.

Why compare? Rape sentencing is all over the place, no argument there.

The tree was a historic monument. It had value. You could argue that it took a lot longer to grow that tree than a woman, of which there are plenty. That’s not what I’m saying, before the thread explodes, just that it’s a logical argument.

But the prisons have room for tree fellers just not rapists?

Men and women care about the tree.

But unless the woman involved is 'theirs' in some way, a scary amount of men don't care about the rapes.

Why?

@Barnbrack I can't comment on sentences for other crimes but it wasn't just a "tree' it was a much loved living landmark where people spread ashes and admired natural beauty , it was chopped down for no other reason than to say they were responsible for it . Well done to the judge for giving them a harsh sentence, sadly the tree has gone !

Bits chopped off more like. And we all know two guys with a chainsaw…

It’s a shame you didn’t find that legislation before claiming that men regularly get suspended sentences for rape. The average sentence for rape in England is 10 years. I think that’s far too lenient. I also think that most of your posts show an obvious lack of understanding of the English Courts work and your stating of incorrect ‘facts’ was actually detrimental to your argument.

There is no such thing as an accidental assault.

It was a tree. Sad sure but the actual impact on any individual was none, the impact on the national interest zero. It’s a shame. That’s it.

I mean you ARE literally saying it. You are literally saying the tree is more important than human women.

And I genuinely think you're right, I think that's how the men in charge rate things in their head. The value they automatically placed on 'very important historic tree' is way more than that they place on 'meh any old women, plenty more, that one was probably trashy/drunk/used goods.... Anyway...'

It's the way they add value to that damage when planning an appropriate sentence. I really do think it's relevant to look at sentencing for less violent crimes compared to sentencing for crimes against specifically girls and women.

YABU. 4 years for felling that tree was reasonable imo - the judge must have believed they knew exactly what they were doing and what they were destroying. It needed to be a deterrent against others knowingly destroying ancient monuments.

But I do agree that rapists should get far far longer than 4 years, it’s appalling and makes me feel sick that many don’t, let alone suspended sentences 😡 But I don’t think we can equate the two. Yes, rape and sexual crimes can be notoriously hard to prosecute/prove but people also seem to get ridiculously low sentences for other violent life-altering crimes like GBH too - it’s sadly just the terrible state of the justice system which too often seems to prioritise the offenders mental health and background over the victims imo.

Maybe the focus needs to be on voting for parties that say they will create more prison spaces, so every criminal - whether destroyer of ancient monuments or violent thug or rapist has a better chance of getting a longer sentence 🤷‍♀️

Incorrect. Go read judges remarks.

This.

I don't live in England, I'm from 1 UK country and live in another and neither is England.

Priorities, priorities. It’s a beautiful tree. Women are as beautiful as a tree but we can’t possibly send the men who rape them to gaol.

Councils are always chopping down beautiful trees. I say….send them all to gaol too. Let’s fill the prisons with tree killers!!!!

😱 damage to a wall? If only there had been a convenient woman for it to fall on

Don’t fucking start with that shit. I’m not downplaying anything so don’t start with the baseless accusations. I’m pointing out that your original post stating rapists regularly get suspended sentences is utter horseshit.

I’m not saying that because obviously it isn’t true, but I was trying to show how much value the tree might have. As a pp said, it was a much loved tree where people scattered ashes of their loved ones. It was more than just a tree.

🙄

A wall?

I think you meant "just a pile of rocks" (like Stonehenge).