Chopping down the Hadrian's Wall Tree

Murrmurr said:
Ok. You win. It's a cop conspiracy and that poor disgruntled former lumberjack is obviously doomed.
Click to expand...

Tbf, if they had clear evidence, he'd of been in court by now. Things have gone quiet on this for a reason - they don't seem to be able to close the circle. I don't know if he did it or not, although it seems likely. On the other hand, they seem to be struggling to close this case.
 
againstthegrain said:
Thank you, that's my point.
Click to expand...
Wait...wasn't your point that the corrupt police are railroading a possibly innocent man?...and then I pointed out that he's a likely suspect but he'll get his day in court?
VaughanJB said:
Tbf, if they had clear evidence, he'd of been in court by now. Things have gone quiet on this for a reason - they don't seem to be able to close the circle. I don't know if he did it or not, although it seems likely. On the other hand, they seem to be struggling to close this case.
Click to expand...
I don't know how the judicial system works in Nottingha... I mean, that part of England.

The way it works here (basically) for a criminal offense is arrest, arraign, and a pre-trial. If the prosecutor presents compelling evidence at the pre-trial, then the judge sets bail, sets a date for trial, and remands the defendant into custody where s/he can post bail. If the evidence isn't compelling, then the judge can dismisses the charges right then and there.

Meanwhile, those pesky coppers go about conducting their investigation, keeping both the prosecution and defense informed of their discoveries and findings.

And it sounds like that's what they're doing over there.
 
Murrmurr said:
Wait...wasn't your point that the corrupt police are railroading a possibly innocent man?...and then I pointed out that he's a likely suspect but he'll get his day in court?

I don't know how the judicial system works in Nottingha... I mean, that part of England.

The way it works here (basically) for a criminal offense is arrest, arraign, and a pre-trial. If the prosecutor presents compelling evidence at the pre-trial, then the judge sets bail, sets a date for trial, and remands the defendant into custody where s/he can post bail. If the evidence isn't compelling, then the judge can dismisses the charges right then and there.

Meanwhile, those pesky coppers go about conducting their investigation, keeping both the prosecution and defense informed of their discoveries and findings.

And it sounds like that's what they're doing over there.
Click to expand...

Well, in Nottingham it's first investigated by Robin Hood and his band of men. If they find nothing, they pass it on to the cops.

But in all seriousness, I think if they were sure then the process would have been in motion. I think this was a tree, on a hillside, in a remote location. So no cameras. They have little to go on. As bad as this made people feel, at the end of the day it's not crime of the century. If found guilty he'd get a little fine and have to move house before it's firebombed.
 
VaughanJB said:
Well, in Nottingham it's first investigated by Robin Hood and his band of men. If they find nothing, they pass it on to the cops.

But in all seriousness, I think if they were sure then the process would have been in motion. I think this was a tree, on a hillside, in a remote location. So no cameras. They have little to go on. As bad as this made people feel, at the end of the day it's not crime of the century. If found guilty he'd get a little fine and have to move house before it's firebombed.
Click to expand...
You don't remember the corrupt Sheriff of Nottingham?

;)
 
Murrmurr said:
Wait...wasn't your point that the corrupt police are railroading a possibly innocent man?...and then I pointed out that he's a likely suspect but he'll get his day in court?

I don't know how the judicial system works in Nottingha... I mean, that part of England.
Click to expand...
Northumberland.... which is the North of England... unlike Nottingham which is middle England... and where Robin hood and his drunk posse were supposedly from....(y)
 
What I want to know is did anyone do anything with the
tree itself after chopped down?? I mean they could make
souvenir's out it, something......?????
 
I don't live there, I knew nothing of this tree before now but it is so heinous, so mean, I hope the ones who did it pay the price.
 
Last edited:
againstthegrain said:
2 more arrests

NYT_"In Britain, the police can make arrests only if they have “reasonable grounds” to suspect involvement in a crime."

pretty low bar if you ask me
Click to expand...
Same standard we use, basically. "Probable cause" and "reasonable cause to suspect" are used to make arrests whether our cops see a felled tree or a toddler covered with bruises, or even if they just hear something, like kitten mewing from inside a plastic bag or a woman screaming in the distance.
 
Last edited:
This is going nowhere fast.

Sycamore Gap: Man arrested to face no further action, say police

"A man arrested over the felling of the Sycamore Gap tree will face no further action, police have confirmed.

The landmark, a focal point along Hadrian's Wall in Northumberland, was cut down in September, in what officers described as a "deliberate act of vandalism".

A man in his 60s was previously arrested on suspicion of criminal damage, but will face no further action, the Northumbria force said on Wednesday."
 
againstthegrain said:
16 yo "faces no further action"

Is "no further action" synonymous with we (the police) made a knee jerk reaction and arrested the wrong people in an effort to do "something" even if it was wrong?

Now and for the rest of his life the 16 yo has to answer the question "where you ever arrested?" with a "yes, I was accused of cutting down the tree at Sycamore Gap."
Click to expand...
When charges are dropped, you don't have a record. And employers can't ask "have you ever been arrested?" anymore, they can only ask if you've ever been convicted (of a felony). A court/judge can ask it, and so can an investigator, but they have to follow up with "Was there a conviction?"

Why are you so angry about investigators detaining suspects? Detainment and questioning is how crimes are solved. What should they do, call a psychic?
 
VaughanJB said:
This is going nowhere fast.

Sycamore Gap: Man arrested to face no further action, say police

"A man arrested over the felling of the Sycamore Gap tree will face no further action, police have confirmed.

The landmark, a focal point along Hadrian's Wall in Northumberland, was cut down in September, in what officers described as a "deliberate act of vandalism".

A man in his 60s was previously arrested on suspicion of criminal damage, but will face no further action, the Northumbria force said on Wednesday."
Click to expand...
Well, I hope they get to the bottom of it.

I'm starting to suspect @againstthegrain. :p (just kidding, ATG)
 
Murrmurr said:
When charges are dropped, you don't have a record. And employers can't ask "have you ever been arrested?" anymore, they can only ask if you've ever been convicted (of a felony). A court/judge can ask it, and so can an investigator, but they have to follow up with "Was there a conviction?"

Why are you so angry about investigators detaining suspects? Detainment and questioning is how crimes are solved. What should they do, call a psychic?
Click to expand...
Actually there is always a record of an arrest at least in the US. And for a few $ it's accessible to anyone. And why should anyone have to be arrested before there was sufficient evidence to actually bring it to trial? They were immediately bailed so they weren't flight risks.
 
againstthegrain said:
Actually there is always a record of an arrest at least in the US. And for a few $ it's accessible to anyone. And why should anyone have to be arrested before there was sufficient evidence to actually bring it to trial? They were immediately bailed so they weren't flight risks.
Click to expand...
Reasons include to make sure they can't hide or destroy evidence, flee, and coerce friends and family into lying for them. Plus, it gives authorities time to obtain and implement various search warrants and to seize, test, and explore physical and digital evidence.

When an arrest is made and then the charges are dropped or dismissed, the suspect no longer has a record. A record of the arrest exists until then, but afterward, the person has no criminal record....or they do if they do, but "for all purposes" (a legal term) this particular charge isn't on it after it's dropped by the arresting authority or dismissed by a judge.

And when the suspect is a 16yr-old, a judge can order the entire case expunged, in which case you won't find it online or on paper. In the US, that age varies from state to state and sometimes on a case-to-case basis, i.e., a weapon was used or there was associated serious bodily injury or death. I don't know what age the UK uses.
 
I imagine it was a pleasant experience being under VERY PUBLIC ARREST and a very quiet dismissal issued in a whisper.

How do they get their reputations back?

Did they spend big bucks on lawyers?

Why all the lame excuses defending the police?

They could have completed their investigation before an arrest. I wonder how they got a judge to sign off on arrest warrants and search warrants as it appears there was no actual evidence of their guilt. The police were under enormous pressure and it appears they just picked the easiest targets w NO evidence in hand.

The old boy even got chased out of his sweet rental and was living in a van.
 
againstthegrain said:
I imagine it was a pleasant experience being under VERY PUBLIC ARREST and a very quiet dismissal issued in a whisper.

How do they get their reputations back?

Did they spend big bucks on lawyers?

Why all the lame excuses defending the police?

They could have completed their investigation before an arrest. I wonder how they got a judge to sign off on arrest warrants and search warrants as it appears there was no actual evidence of their guilt. The police were under enormous pressure and it appears they just picked the easiest targets w NO evidence in hand.

The old boy even got chased out of his sweet rental and was living in a van.
Click to expand...
(In the US) He can file a formal complaint if he wants to, and since he's basically homeless right now he's eligible for free legal advice/counsel. Maybe he has grounds for a lawsuit.

The man was a crime suspect who wasn't treated any differently than any other crime suspect. And he was fully exonerated when the charges against him were dropped. If people are still treating him badly over it, he could try suing for defamation.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top