Sycamore Gap accused has ‘no clue’ who felled tree, court hears

A second man accused of felling the world well-known Sycamore Hole has instructed jurors he has “no clue” who did it.

The tree had grown in a dip on Hadrian’s Wall in Northumberland for greater than 100 years earlier than it was felled in a “moronic mission” within the early hours of 28 September 2023, Newcastle Crown Court docket has heard.

Daniel Michael Graham, 39, from Carlisle, and Adam Carruthers, 32, from Wigton in Cumbria, every deny two counts of prison injury regarding the tree and the Roman Wall.

Mr Carruthers instructed jurors he was amazed on the public’s response as he thought it was “only a tree”.

Jurors had been beforehand told the tree was a much-loved landmark and had international significance for its place on the previous frontier of the Roman empire.

Mr Graham’s telephone and Vary Rover had been each tracked going to and from the location whereas a video, which prosecutors allege present the second the tree was felled, was filmed on his cellular, the court docket has heard.

A wedge of wooden was taken as a “trophy” and photographed hours later alongside a chainsaw within the boot of Mr Graham’s automobile, prosecutors have stated.

Mr Graham previously told jurors he had been asleep that night and Mr Carruthers will need to have taken his automobile and telephone with out his data.

On the sixth day of the trial, Mr Carruthers took to the witness field the place he began by denying he had something to do with felling the tree or filming it.

His barrister Andrew Gurney requested why Mr Carruthers appeared so within the aftermath, exchanging screenshots of social media posts and press experiences along with his co-accused and swapping voice notes discussing it.

Mr Carruthers stated he simply “could not perceive” the hysteria he was seeing on Fb and he needed to speak about along with his pal.

“I did not perceive how a tree would have the ability to hit the headlines as a lot because it did,” he stated. “It was virtually as if somebody had been murdered.”

He was requested a couple of voice word through which he stated a web-based commenter, who criticised the vandals, lacked the “minerals” to “launch an operation like we did”.

Mr Carruthers instructed jurors: “I believe it has been interpreted improper.”

He stated he had truly meant to say “he” as a substitute of “we,” referring to whoever it was that had felled the tree though he had “no thought” who that may be.

Mr Graham had additionally claimed Mr Carruthers was fascinated with the tree, treasured a chunk of string he had used to measure its circumference and had “talked about” reducing it down, then admitted he had executed so in a name to Mr Graham the morning after and later requested his pal to “take the blame”.

Mr Carruthers instructed jurors none of that was true.

He additionally instructed the court docket he had used a chainsaw to trim bushes however by no means to fell one.

In cross-examination, prosecutor Richard Wright KC requested Mr Carruthers who felled the tree.

Mr Carruthers replied he had “no clue in any respect”, including: “It wasn’t me.”

He stated he thought it was “only a tree” however then, the morning after it was felled, began seeing information experiences and public feedback showing “increasingly more” on social media.

The prosecutor prompt that was what was on the “coronary heart” of the case.

“You thought ‘it is only a tree’.

“When the remainder of the world did not suppose it was only a tree, that it was a horrible and depraved factor to have executed, you’ve gotten misplaced your bottle and might’t come clean with it?”

Mr Carruthers replied: “That is not true.”

He was requested about cell phone monitoring knowledge which confirmed him travelling to a spot about 4 miles approach from the tree the afternoon earlier than it was felled.

Mr Graham’s authorized crew prompt he was “doing a reconnoitre” of the tree, however Mr Carruthers claimed he was taking his associate and their new-born daughter on an impromptu tour to the Metrocentre for meals, turning round when the child wouldn’t settle.

Mr Wright requested if there weren’t eating places in Carlisle they might have visited fairly than make a three-hour spherical journey on a day when storms had been forecast to hit the world.

Mr Carruthers replied the eating places in Carlisle had been “not the very best” and the Metrocentre could be higher.

The trial continues.