A man accused of felling the world famous Sycamore Gap tree told police he had been framed as part of a feud. The tree had grown in a dip on Hadrian's Wall in Northumberland for more than 100 years before it wasfelled in a "moronic mission"in the early hours of 28 September 2023, Newcastle Crown Court has heard. Daniel Michael Graham, 39, from Carlisle, and Adam Carruthers, 32, from Wigton in Cumbria, each deny two counts of criminal damage relating to the tree and the Roman Wall. In his interview with Northumbria Police, Mr Graham said he did not have the skill or expertise to fell a large tree, although he later explained the technique to officers, a jury has heard. Jurors were previouslytold the tree was a much-loved landmarkand had global significance for its position on the former frontier of the Roman empire. On the night of 27 September, Mr Carruthers and Mr Graham made a 40-minute drive in the latter's Range Rover from Cumbria to chop the tree down, prosecutors allege. The felling was filmed on Mr Graham's phone and the pair took a wedge cut of the trunk home as a "trophy", jurors have heard. A video analyst said there was "no doubt" a car boot depicted in a picture of a wedge of wood and chainsaw was that of Mr Graham's Range Rover, jurors heard. The image was taken a couple of hours after the tree was felled and a forensic botanist said there was "very strong evidence" the wedge, which has not been recovered by police, had come from the Sycamore Gap tree, the court heard. The pair were both arrested on 31 October and taken for police interview, the transcript of which jurors were read on the third day of the trial. Asked at the outset of his hour and 20 minute-long interview if he was responsible for felling the tree, Mr Graham replied: "No." He said he only knew what everyone else did from the news and had gone to the site in the days afterwards out of "curiosity" to have a look at the felled tree, the court heard. Mr Graham said he had been to the tree previously to do "the same as everyone else does", namely going for a walk and staying nearby in his campervan. He told officers he did not know who had cut it down but did know who had put his name forward as a suspect in Facebook posts, adding: "I'm going to get my own back." Mr Graham said he and Mr Carruthers were embroiled in a dispute with others and it was their rivals who posted the accusations about the tree. He said he was "proper raging" and "boiled" and the accusations would ruin his life and business, adding he was "going to deal" with those who put his name forward. "I didn't touch that tree," he told police. Mr Graham said there was nothing on his iPhone 13 which would link him to the felling, adding: "I've got no worries about anything on that phone, nothing at all." He said he did not have "a clue" what he had done on the night of 27 September as it was a month before, but added he "didn't do much" and would either have been at home or with a friend or his girlfriend, who he referred to as his "bird". Mr Graham said he ran a groundworks company, DM Graham Groundworks, making "everything from house foundations, patios and fencing, the lot, it all depends on the weather". He said he had three or four chainsaws at his yard which police would find "if they looked with their eyes". Asked if he knew how to fell trees, Mr Graham said he could so small and medium ones and directed police to look at his Facebook page to see what work he had done. "I've never done a large fell," he said, adding he had done "pretty high trees" but "nothing with major diameter". Mr Graham was asked how he would cut down a large tree, to which he replied he would cut a notch in the front to mark the direction of fall then chop a wedge out the back, which jurors have heard is the "hinge-and-wedge" technique used to fell the sycamore. He also said he left the keys in all his vehicles, including his Range Rover, and they were free for anyone to use. Mr Graham said his "good pal" Mr Carruthers had used his Range Rover before and done tree felling work for him, adding: "I can put him up a tree with ropes and not worry he is going to come down." Asked if Mr Carruthers ever stayed at his overnight, Mr Graham said "definitely not" and asked if police thought they were gay, the court heard. The trial continues. Follow BBC North East onX,Facebook,NextdoorandInstagram. Send your story ideashere.
Man accused of felling Sycamore Gap told police he was framed in feud
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Trial Begins for Men Accused of Felling Iconic Sycamore Gap Tree"
Bbc News
7.2
TruthLens AI Summary
Daniel Michael Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32, are currently on trial for allegedly felling the iconic Sycamore Gap tree in Northumberland, a landmark with significant historical value. The incident occurred in the early hours of September 28, 2023, when the tree, which had stood for over a century along Hadrian's Wall, was cut down as part of what prosecutors described as a 'moronic mission.' Both men deny two counts of criminal damage related to the tree and the Roman Wall. During police interviews, Graham claimed he lacked the skills to fell such a large tree and suggested he was framed in a feud with rival individuals who implicated him. Despite his assertions, he later described the technique used to fell the tree, which raised questions about his credibility as a witness. The prosecution presented evidence, including a video taken by Graham that allegedly shows the felling, and forensic analysis indicating that a wood wedge taken as a trophy from the scene matched the Sycamore Gap tree, further complicating his defense.
In his testimony, Graham expressed frustration over being named as a suspect on social media and claimed that these accusations could severely impact his personal and professional life. He mentioned a dispute with others in his community, suggesting that the feud was the motive behind his being framed. Despite his claims of innocence, he acknowledged that he had been near the tree site after the incident out of curiosity. Graham runs a groundworks company and claimed to have experience with tree felling, although he maintained that he had never taken down a large tree before. The trial is ongoing, and the court continues to examine the evidence, including Graham's explanations and the context of the alleged feud that led to the accusations against him and Carruthers.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article outlines a legal case involving two men accused of illegally cutting down the Sycamore Gap tree, a significant landmark in Northumberland. The narrative presents details surrounding the incident, the defendants' claims, and the evidence against them. This incident, described as a "moronic mission," has sparked public interest, given the tree's cultural and historical importance.
Purpose of Publication
The article appears to serve multiple purposes, primarily informing the public about a criminal case that has attracted widespread attention. By detailing the accusations and the defendants' responses, it aims to provide transparency regarding the legal proceedings and highlight the seriousness of the crime against a beloved natural landmark.
Community Perception
The coverage likely seeks to evoke a strong emotional response from the community, especially among those who cherish the Sycamore Gap tree. By emphasizing the tree’s significance and the alleged foolishness of the act, the article fosters a sense of outrage and concern over environmental preservation and cultural heritage.
Potential Concealments
While the article focuses on the specific case, there may be broader environmental issues or local tensions that are not addressed. The framing of the defendants as potentially framed in a feud could indicate underlying social conflicts that remain unexplored in the piece.
Manipulative Aspects
The report could be seen as slightly manipulative, given its choice of language, such as "moronic mission," which conveys a negative judgment of the defendants' actions. This wording may influence public perception by framing the perpetrators in a particularly unfavorable light, suggesting a lack of intelligence or foresight.
Truthfulness of the Report
The information presented seems credible, relying on eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence. However, the defendants’ claims of being framed introduce an element of doubt that complicates the narrative. The truth of the situation may depend heavily on the unfolding legal proceedings.
Societal Implications
The case could galvanize public sentiment around issues of environmental protection and cultural heritage, potentially leading to increased advocacy for stricter laws against vandalism of natural landmarks. The incident might also provoke discussions about local community dynamics, especially if personal conflicts are revealed.
Target Audience
The article likely appeals to environmentalists, local residents, and history enthusiasts who value the preservation of cultural landmarks. It aims to engage a readership that is concerned about the implications of such actions on community identity and heritage.
Impact on Markets
While this specific incident may not directly influence stock markets or global economies, it could have ripple effects on tourism and local businesses in Northumberland, particularly if the tree's significance draws attention to the region.
Global Context
The case does not appear to have significant implications for global power dynamics. However, it reflects ongoing societal discussions about environmental stewardship and the protection of historical sites, themes that resonate in today's larger context of sustainability and conservation.
AI Involvement
There is no clear indication that AI was used in the creation of this article. The narrative seems to follow traditional journalistic practices, focusing on factual reporting rather than algorithm-driven content generation. However, if AI were involved, it might have influenced the framing of the narrative or streamlined the reporting process.
Manipulation Considerations
The potential for manipulation exists, particularly in the language used and the framing of the defendants. The emphasis on their alleged motivations and the emotional weight of the tree's significance could be designed to sway public opinion against them.
The overall credibility of the article appears strong, primarily based on the factual nature of the events described and the supporting evidence cited. However, the framing and emotional language could lead to biased interpretations of the defendants' actions and motivations.