Cool, now do the same for Water Company executives that shit all over our nature as well.
nope. only for charismatic megaflora/fauna
nope. only for
charismatic megaflora/faunathe poors.FTFY
Very, very, very harsh. Too harsh.
Would love to see just a single one of the besuited cunts who are polluting our rivers and air get this kind of treatment by their mates in the courts. Never gonna happen tho - this has been a rich man’s world for centuries.
Nope. They’re a pair of cunts that deserve longer and it’s not a zero sum game. We can, and should, have be jailing both
i disagree with this being too harsh, but do agree with the second point about wishing to see this type of punishment extended to the industrial villains, who will never see it, deserving this type of punishment.
We’re in the middle of a prison crisis. We don’t have room for people who chopped down a tree, even if it was a really pretty one.
That’s fair. I understand the frustration and anger at these two and what they did - it was senseless and I was definitely a bit heartbroken to read about the felling at first - but four years is so long and they’re going to come out worse for it, in my opinion.
I don’t think that’s possible, even most criminals would look down on these two.
Not that they had much going for them to begin with. Maybe when they get out they’ll use their brains to do something constructive
Like organ donation
From what I understand, they really fucked around the court and lied about it which is why the sentence is harsh. If they had just admitted it, they probably would have got a suspended sentence.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2dlr05rr1lo
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/anglian-water-fined-300-000-after-pollution-killed-5-000-fish
Not one CEO properly held accountable by the law (I could have listed another 30 different cases easily. Just searching polluted river and killed fish fined uk)
“this kind of treatment” meaning harsh sentences. Fining a company means very little 🤷♂️
My point was that individuals have been responsible for a lot worse, but never held accountable. It didn’t have to be rivers and fish. I could have linked to the endless other articles referring to the destruction of something. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmjj5gl6m0po
Oh right, I read your comment as sarcastic but it seems like we’re saying the exact same thing.
Councils are constantly cutting down trees. https://inews.co.uk/news/trees-felled-uk-councils-10-years-3229184?ito=link_share_article-top
corpos rape the planet: giggling sunflower
two dudes kill a tree: angry sunflower
4 years!
Of course it’s fucked up and whatever, but this feels like a populist sentence. 4 years is an incredibly long time. In what way is this adequate for the crime. Like mentioned before, there is infinite damage being done to nature in the name of business, very rarely somebody is getting a little bit of blowback, and these two guys, who really don’t have much potential to destroy anything more are sent away as an example? To whom? The generally misbehaving public?
This was deliberate, planned, and done purely to destroy something others enjoyed.
I’d say it’s about right.
Is building a housing estate on a green belt or a park not deliberate, planned, and done purely to destroy something others enjoyed?
Cool yeah, let’s have short sentences for destroying cultural landmarks. I’m sure that’ll be fine.
We both know that these men will, unfortunately, be out far sooner than 4 years time.
They shouldn’t be inside at all. We don’t have the prison space to spend on things like this. It should be dealt with in the community.
Then make space.
We already jail more than France, Germany, Austria, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland. We’re about 40% more than the nearest one of those which is France. Several of them we’re 2-3x more per capita.
We put too many people in prison. We’re not on American levels, but it’s still too many.
I.e. translating to no real punishment. For permanently destroying a historically significant site, then constantly lying in court.
I’m sure there would be zero repercussions from that.
Jesus Christ, I am immensely thankful you aren’t a judge or legislator.
In what way is this adequate for the crime
What is the maximum sentence for damage of public property?
Definitely not harsh enough. They should have gotten AT LEAST 12 years each. And even that could never make up the damage they have done. 12 is too mild, 4 entirely laughable.
For what?
All they done is… Cut a tree.
Think about it for a sec. Just a tree.
Tree surgeons do this on a daily basis
You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about
You obviously don’t. You were advocating for practically zero punishment for it, and find incessant lying in court to be completely fine too.
I’m immensely glad you’re not involved in the justice system or legislation. What a fucking disaster that would be. A criminal free-for-all.
I wasn’t advocating for zero punishment. But what damage has been done that justifies 4 years prison, let alone 12?
They will not actually spend 4 years in prison, and I imagine you know that. They’ll be let out early, like most prisoners, unless they cause serious trouble in prison.
And destroying a national landmark, then obstructing the course of justice, and being in contempt of court. That more than justifies it.
Maybe all of that is fine to you, but it is not the kind of behaviour that should be encouraged.
Maybe you’re just far from the area, and have an attitude of “who the fuck cares mate, it’s just a tree innit!”, and don’t care about the obstruction or contempt of court part.
Maybe you think it’s just something those stupid working class northerners care about, or maybe that doesn’t enter into your head at all, I don’t know.
Would you feel the same if someone intentionally blew up Stonehenge out of pure malice? Big Ben? The Eiffel tower? The Colosseum? Parthenon? Any other national landmark that a great deal of people care about?
Behaviour like this cannot be given a “you’re a bad boy, a very bad boy indeed. £250 fine and 20 hours of community service”-style punishment.
deleted by creator
Intentionally destroying a national landmark, that’s what. And it seems to be done purely for the sake of it.
Your comments on this don’t reflect well on your intelligence, I must say.
I forgive you too, brother
Of course this is nonwithstanding other environmental crimes should be prosecuted, just as hard.
Was there a statement from either of them on why? I know why is really the hardest answer to get from someone but did they just hate the tree. Did their sisters turn down a marriage proposal from them at that site?
One claimed he was so drunk he doesn’t remember loading up his range rover, driving to the parking spot then carrying the equipment to the tree, cutting it down with precision not expected of someone blind drunk, carried all the kit back to the car, drive home then had a moment of clarity.
The other one said he’s such a weak idiot that the other one led him astray
You should look up some of the messages the court case revealed. It sums up how nasty, spiteful, and truly hateful these two men are.
They took active joy in making people miserable. They knew targeting a loved cultural landmark would make people angry and miserable, so that’s what they did.
Their motivation was purely to hurt.
No motive other than being sad losers who wanted the fake glory of being the one to chop down a beloved tree.
a 150 year sentence for killing a 150 year old tree would be nice
Given a sycamore can like for 500 years although 300 is more common.
If that the maths we follow. Potential life lost to the tree of 350 years is more reasonable.
Multiply by 2.5 given the celebrity status of the tree.
