RIP - Hadrian’s wall tree

[AndyRM]

One question, if it was damaging the wall / Fort near it, which would take precedence? If it had come down to a choice, which would you choose? Tree or wall? Hypothetical question now but how would you answer it I wonder.

There was no fort near it.

It wasn't damaging the wall.

Your hypothetical is/was never a consideration. The felling of the tree only damaged the wall after the event.

 

[Tail End Charlie]

One question, if it was damaging the wall / Fort near it, which would take precedence? If it had come down to a choice, which would you choose? Tree or wall? Hypothetical question now but how would you answer it I wonder.

Given that it's been there longer, I'd choose the wall. In fact, even if that weren't the case, I'd still choose the wall.
Presumably these are the sort of issues the National Trust or English Heritage are faced with on occasion.

 

[AndyRM]

For anyone still interested: the trial for this was meant to be starting yesterday, but one of the defendants was ill. The next hearing is on January 6.

They're accused of £622,000 of criminal damage to the tree and £1,400 to Hadrian's Wall. To be honest I'm not all that bothered about the fines (which I suppose will never be fully repaid in any case), but I'm hoping that we'll find out what they thought they were achieving. I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to play some "raising concerns about non indigenous trees" angle.

 

[Drago]

Or perhaps they are just nasty sheetbags?

 

[AndyRM]

Or perhaps they are just nasty sheetbags?

A distinct possibility, but I'm sure they'd prefer a slightly more robust defense, no matter how implausible!

 

[Beebo]

For anyone still interested: the trial for this was meant to be starting yesterday, but one of the defendants was ill. The next hearing is on January 6.

They're accused of £622,000 of criminal damage to the tree and £1,400 to Hadrian's Wall. To be honest I'm not all that bothered about the fines (which I suppose will never be fully repaid in any case), but I'm hoping that we'll find out what they thought they were achieving. I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to play some "raising concerns about non indigenous trees" angle.

The rumour is that the defendant being ill, is actually a bit more serious than that.
The air ambulance visited one of the defendants houses a week ago, and a man of the same age as the defendant was taken to hospital in a critical condition. It’s all very odd.

View: https://youtu.be/aeCeX4fDdco?si=KmUTglFl7ufuHE13

 

[Ming the Merciless]

but one of the defendants was ill.

That old excuse

 

[Drago]

He was well enough when he was (allegedly, your hinour) chopping trees down.

Forgive my cynicism. He may genuinely be unwell, but I've seen too many cases delayed or halted because someone mysteriously fell ill.

 

[Oldhippy]

I find it odd that the news coverage was so massive about one tree but very little or none about the devastating to the countryside every day with road widening, building and the like.

 

[AndyRM]

I find it odd that the news coverage was so massive about one tree but very little or none about the devastating to the countryside every day with road widening, building and the like.

I get what you're saying, but unfortunately I don't.

Also in the region there was a fair amount of coverage about the scrapping (again) of dialling the A1, which is just as important a (lack of) development as the HS2 train line.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c04lnek2d2xo

 

[wiggydiggy]

For anyone still interested: the trial for this was meant to be starting yesterday, but one of the defendants was ill. The next hearing is on January 6.

They're accused of £622,000 of criminal damage to the tree and £1,400 to Hadrian's Wall. To be honest I'm not all that bothered about the fines (which I suppose will never be fully repaid in any case), but I'm hoping that we'll find out what they thought they were achieving. I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to play some "raising concerns about non indigenous trees" angle.

I'm interested. I'll catch up on the news later.

There was some anecdotal talk at the time that the eldest defendent was a previous tennent of a National Trust property, and he has had various issues with them. The one I read that kept cropping up was he trying to run a campsite but being blocked by the NT. The other story was it was done 'by locals' annoyed with people coming to visit.

It'll be interesting like you say to hear why they did it.

 

[Alex321]

I find it odd that the news coverage was so massive about one tree but very little or none about the devastating to the countryside every day with road widening, building and the like.

Why do you find it "odd" that there is significant news coverage about a criminal act, while there is little about ongoing legal activities?

 

[Drago]

It'll be interesting like you say to hear why they did it.

They're denying it, so unless they change their plea we will never know.

 

[Alex321]

He was well enough when he was (allegedly, your hinour) chopping trees down.

Forgive my cynicism. He may genuinely be unwell, but I've seen too many cases delayed or halted because someone mysteriously fell ill.

Well "critica in hospital" is not just somebody making possible false claims of illness.

 

[wiggydiggy]

They're denying it, so unless they change their plea we will never know.

Damn not guilty pleas...