Two convicted of felling Sycamore Gap tree

Which is exactly why they didn't cut down any other tree.

They took something people loved and destroyed it because it was something they didn't care about and they thought it'd be funny to upset people. Classic scrote behavior, no sympathy for them.

I think 4 years is too much for this crime and the rape sentences were too lenient.
They cut down a tree! Come on 4 years is excessive.

Those statues were usually put up because of donations or public works , there was the same thing with college buildings. The statue was a piece of history and I don’t agree with a mob getting to decide themselves to tear it down. The tree was iconic but a four year sentence seems excessive. Both are property damage and should be treated equally.

That said there is a better argument for people burning down refugee centres based on your stand, as they lower property prices and increase the risk of terror arracks and crime in your area. Why can’t that mob get to decide that when the government bypasses planning and local objections for something that has a direct impact on their lives?

A prison sentence is justifiable but a 4-year sentence is an injustice.

Separately, it's ironic that people get so upset about the destruction of a non-native tree of no environmental significance in an unnatural, man-made landscape, while ignoring the complete absence of trees in the whole area due to centuries of environmentally destructive farming practices. It's that environmental damage that made the Sycamore Gap so "iconic" in the first place.

You’re just showing your double standards, this is fine when one group does it but different when another does it.

Who Wood have let them walk-

I hate that that tree was cut down. And those that did it are the definition of anti social.

But 4 years? There are countless cases of child abusers and rapists getting less. I'm sure there are technical reasons as to why such a sentence but it doesn't come across as a just sentence relatively speaking.

I think they'd rather prison time. Why do you think they shouldn't do time?

For the craic apparently.

at least the time they do spend in jail is time that they wont be doing stupid mindless sh1t and destroying everything around them ,

these really are the kind of people who didnt exist for long before we became a welfare world

nothing put parasites

Because sentencing should be consistent and proportional.

And there should be consistency in the crimes that get prosecuted.

You could argue that sexual assault should be more. But as it is right now the guidelines state a certain amount. That does mean that lesser crimes should get less time and greater crimes should get more time.

This was vandalism and environmental damage. I would feel that it should have a lower sentence than sexual assault.

These guys cut down a tree. Yes, it's a beloved tree. I'm not going to act like it's comparable to any other tree, but it's still a singular tree. As others have pointed out, you can do mass pollution and not get the same sentence. Currently British lakes, rivers and beaches are flooded with sewage and there's no jail time.

It feels like they're reacting harshly because of the public reaction to this.

Personally I would have thought a short prison sentence and 1000 hours of community service would have been appropriate. They damaged the environment. Make them spend time repairing the environment. Get them planting trees.

Stonehenge was sprayed with orange paint by just stop oil:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cw44mdee0zzo