Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers were best mates when they illegally felled the much-loved Sycamore Gap tree together. How did they end up turning on each other? It is hard to imagine they were once friends. Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers used to phone each other every day and met up several times a week but, as they stood in the dock at Newcastle Crown Court,waiting for the verdicts to be returned, they looked like complete strangers. The prosecution called them "the odd couple" who did everything together. They became friends about four years ago. Carruthers was a mechanic and did Graham "a good turn" by fixing his dad's Land Rover, making a special job of it so it could be used for Graham's father's funeral. Graham was a ground worker and he enlisted the man he called his "best pal" to help him on jobs, with tasks including the felling of trees for which they split the cash 50/50. Then one night, during Storm Agnes in 2023, the friends went to Sycamore Gap. Under the cover of darkness, they trekked across marshland in winds of up to 60mph and used their experience to mark the trunk, cut a wedge out of it so they knew which direction it would fall and then cut it down with a chainsaw. They filmed it and watched the sycamore crashing to the ground. What they didn't realise is that the phone and vehicle they used would be tracked and the conversations they had would be discovered. As the police questioning began, their stories unravelled and so did their friendship. Graham's phone was used to film the felling. Road and CCTV cameras captured his Range Rover going to and from Steel Rigg, the nearest public car park to the tree. He told the court his car and phone were used by other people, including Adam Carruthers "who didn't need to ask". Prosecutor Richard Wright was incredulous at his claims, telling jurors: "According to Graham he didn't go out all night and Carruthers took his car and phone while he slept in blissful ignorance, and his large dog let out not so much as a growl." It wasn't the only story that was mocked in court. Carruthers' phone had been traced to Northumberland the day the tree was felled. It was suggested to him he was scoping the area out. He told the court he was taking his partner out on a three-hour round trip for a meal at the Metrocentre in Gateshead after she'd recently given birth, but their baby started crying so they turned the car around at a spot that just happened to be near the tree. Christopher Knox, Graham's barrister, said: "You're telling the jury in spite of the fact she wasn't well enough to lift a baby, you were going 65 miles with [your partner] and a new-born?" Mr Wright asked Carruthers why they didn't just go for dinner in Carlisle, a short drive from their home. Carruthers agreed there were restaurants in the Cumbrian city but they were "not the best". He claimed he was at home all night, fixing the roof of his shed and washing some clothes. Since that night, the court heard the pair had fallen out spectacularly. Carruthers' barrister Andrew Gurney said Graham named his former friend as the culprit because he needed a scapegoat. "Having found himself in the dock, [Graham's] reached desperately for a lifeline," Mr Gurney said, adding: "He tried to throw Adam Carruthers under the bus to save his own skin." Graham initially told police he knew who had cut down the tree but would not "grass" as the culprit had young children, a not so subtle nod towards his friend. When he felt police were still paying too much attention to him and not enough to Carruthers, he showed officers a picture of his friend holding some owls while standing next to a box of chainsaws. In August 2024, some 11 months after the felling, he made an anonymous call to police to name Carruthers outright. Officers recognised Graham's voice immediately and he was forced to admit to jurors he had indeed made the call. Both men said the friendship ended abruptly one night in the aftermath of the felling and their arrests. Graham drove to Carruthers' home and said they each had to go their own way, and that was that. Mr Knox said his client had been accused of being "stroppy" while giving evidence in court, engaging in heated clashes with Mr Wright. "Does that make him the Sycamore Gap tree murderer?" he asked the jury , or "does it mean exactly what he said in his police interviews - he's been dropped in this?" Jurors clearly thought the former. Emotions were running high right to the very end of the trial when the judge told them both to expect a significant period of time in custody. As Graham was led away from the dock, he had an angry exchange with a member of the public. We still don't know which of the pair cut down the tree and which filmed it. The prosecution said it didn't matter, that they were "in it together, from first to last". They might have fallen out but they were side by side again in court, united by the two things they will forever share - guilt at destroying a globally-beloved landmark and too much cowardice to admit it. Follow BBC North East onXandFacebookand BBC Cumbria onXandFacebookand both onNextdoorandInstagram.
How Sycamore Gap fellers went from friends to foes
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Trial Reveals Betrayal Between Friends Over Sycamore Gap Tree Felling"
Bbc News
7.0
TruthLens AI Summary
Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers, once close friends, found themselves at the center of a legal controversy after illegally felling the iconic Sycamore Gap tree. Their friendship, which had flourished over four years, unraveled dramatically following the incident during Storm Agnes in 2023. The two men, who regularly collaborated on various jobs and shared a strong bond, embarked on a reckless adventure one stormy night, cutting down the beloved tree while filming the act. Unbeknownst to them, their phones and vehicles were tracked, leading to a police investigation that exposed the truth behind their actions. As they stood trial at Newcastle Crown Court, their once-strong camaraderie had devolved into mutual accusations, with each man attempting to distance himself from the blame. The prosecution characterized them as 'the odd couple', highlighting the drastic shift in their relationship from friends to adversaries in the wake of their illegal act.
During the trial, the prosecution presented evidence that contradicted the claims made by both men. Graham attempted to deflect responsibility by suggesting that Carruthers had used his car and phone without his knowledge, while Carruthers provided a convoluted alibi involving a dinner trip that conveniently led near the scene of the crime. Their testimonies were marked by inconsistencies and were met with skepticism from the court. As the trial progressed, it became clear that both men were attempting to protect themselves rather than acknowledge their shared guilt. Their friendship officially ended in the aftermath of the incident, with Graham asserting that they needed to part ways. Ultimately, the jury was tasked with determining the extent of their individual culpability, but the prosecution argued that their fates were intertwined, as they were complicit in the destruction of a globally cherished landmark. The emotional toll of the trial was evident, culminating in tense moments as both men faced the possibility of significant prison time, leaving the future of their friendship—and their reputations—irreparably damaged.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article sheds light on the complex relationship between Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers, two friends turned adversaries following their involvement in the illegal felling of the iconic Sycamore Gap tree. It explores their initial camaraderie, the circumstances surrounding their criminal act, and ultimately, how their friendship disintegrated under the pressure of legal scrutiny.
Intent Behind the Publication
This report seems to aim at illustrating the consequences of illegal actions, particularly how greed and poor decision-making can lead to serious legal repercussions that sever personal relationships. By focusing on the downfall of a friendship, the article underscores the theme of betrayal and the moral complexities involved in criminal activities.
Public Sentiment and Perception
The narrative can evoke a sense of shock and dismay among readers, particularly those who hold the Sycamore Gap tree in high regard. The emphasis on the friendship's decline may also create a sense of empathy for the individuals involved, while simultaneously reinforcing societal norms against illegal activities.
Potential Omissions
One could argue that the article may gloss over broader environmental implications of tree felling, including loss of biodiversity and habitat destruction. Such omissions could lead to a less informed public discourse on environmental preservation.
Manipulative Elements
The article may possess manipulative qualities in its portrayal of Graham and Carruthers as "the odd couple." This characterization might serve to create a narrative that elicits sympathy or disdain rather than focusing on the act's legal and environmental ramifications. The language used also frames them as foolish rather than malicious, which can influence public perception.
Degree of Truthfulness
The factual basis of the report seems credible, supported by court proceedings and testimony. Nonetheless, the focus on personal dynamics might overshadow the criminal act's seriousness, leading to a skewed understanding of the event's implications.
Public Impact
The story could have broader societal implications, particularly in discussions around environmental law and community responsibility. It may encourage individuals to consider the consequences of their actions more seriously, particularly in relation to environmental issues.
Support Base and Target Audience
The article is likely to resonate more with environmentally conscious readers and those invested in local heritage and nature conservation. It appeals to a demographic that values friendship but also recognizes the legal consequences of one's actions.
Market and Economic Impact
In terms of market influence, this narrative may not have a direct effect on stock prices or economic trends. However, it could spark discussions about environmental conservation practices that may impact sectors like tourism and local economies reliant on natural attractions.
Geopolitical Relevance
While the incident itself may not hold significant geopolitical weight, it reflects broader issues of environmental stewardship and illegal activities that can resonate globally, especially in regions facing deforestation and ecological degradation.
AI Involvement
It's possible that AI tools were utilized in drafting or editing the article to enhance clarity or structure. However, without specific indicators, it's challenging to ascertain the extent of AI's influence on the narrative direction.
In conclusion, the article serves to highlight a cautionary tale about illegal actions and their fallout on personal relationships. It effectively captures the emotional and legal complexities surrounding the incident while leaving some environmental concerns unaddressed.