Sycamore Gap trial live: Prosecutor mocks suspects’ defence and calls men ‘rather pathetic’ – UK Times

The trial of Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers, both accused of criminal damage to the Sycamore Gap tree and Hadrian’s Wall, resumes this morning at 10am.

The jury has now heard all the evidence in the case, and yesterday listened to closing speeches by the prosecution and the legal representatives of both defendants.

Now we expect to hear from the judge, who will sum up the case before the jury is sent out to consider its verdict.

With all closing speeches given, Mrs Justice Lambert has now adjourned the case until 10am tomorrow.

At tomorrow’s hearing she will sum up the facts before the jury retires to consider its verdict.

Here’s our report on today’s evidence:

Chris Knox, for suspect Daniel Graham, says his client was accused of being “stroppy” when answering the prosecution’s questions.

“Does that make him the Sycamore Gap tree murderer?” Mr Knox asked the jury.

“Or does it mean exactly what he said in his interviews with the police – he has been dropped in this?”

Andrew Gurney, defending Carruthers, says Daniel Graham had “named Adam Carruthers because he needs a scapegoat”.

He says Carruthers was in the dock “not because he was found at the scene…but because of Daniel Graham’s mobile phone and the words of one man – Daniel Graham, who having found himself in the dock, has reached desperately for a lifeline and tried to throw Adam Carruthers under the bus to save his own skin”.

Mr Gurney says: “Adam Carruthers was not creeping about a national park in the dead of night. He was at home with his partner.”

He adds that “it makes no sense that, during this period of his life, he would be doing that,” reminding jurors that Carruthers’s newborn daughter had returned home from hospital just five days earlier.

As we’ve heard already, Daniel Graham claimed he was at his home the night the Sycamore Gap tree was felled.

He accepted that his Range Rover was driven to the car park nearest to Sycamore Gap and his phone was used to film the tree being felled.

But he said his co-accused, Adam Carruthers, took both.

In his closing speech, Chris Knox, for Graham, said the defendants had fallen out “spectacularly”.

They had been described as close friends earlier in the trial, with the pair bonding during work to fix a Land Rover owned by Graham’s later father.

Finishing his closing speech, prosecutor Richard Wright KC said Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers were “in it together from first to last”.

“The odd couple. Two men who did everything together and who, you can be sure, were together this night as well,” he tells jurors.

“A team who were in it together from first to last. One to operate the saw and the other to film it. But both equally responsible.”

Mr Wright tells the court that a video said to be of the moment the tree was cut down, which was found on Graham’s phone and had been sent to Carruthers, would have been “gold dust” if it had been released.

He says: “And there are only two people in the world who ever had that video on their telephones. Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers.”

The prosecutor Richard Wright KC suggests Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers chopped down the tree, for what they thought, “was going to be a bit of a laugh”.

He adds: “They woke up the morning after and soon realised – as the news media rolled in, as the outrage of the public became clear… it must have dawned on them that they couldn’t see anyone else smiling in there.

“And that far from being the big men they thought they were, everyone else thought that they were rather pathetic.

“Owning up to this arboreal equivalent of mindless thuggery would make them public enemy number one. And neither of them has got the courage to do that.”

Prosecutor Richard Wright KC turns to suspect Adam Carruthers’ defence yesterday, when asked about the rolling news coverage the day after the Sycamore Gap tree came down.

Mr Wright reminds jurors that Carruthers had said during his evidence that it was “just a tree” and the reaction was “as if somebody had been murdered”.

“And perhaps that sentiment, that lack of appreciation, actually explains a great deal about these two defendants and about why… neither of them is willing to own up to what they have done,” Mr Wright said.

We’re now hearing from the prosecutor Richard Wright KC, who is summing up his case to the jury at Newcastle Crown Court.

He says Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers realised they “weren’t the big men they thought they were” when they saw the public outrage over the felling of the much-loved Northumberland landmark.

Mr Wright says: “From Felixstowe to Falkirk, from Bishop Auckland to Barnstable, up and down the country and across the world, the reaction of all right thinking people to the senseless felling of the Sycamore Gap tree has been one of sadness and anger.

“Who would do such a thing? Why would anyone do such a thing? Take something beautiful and destroy it for no good reason.

“Go to the trouble of causing irreparable and senseless damage to an adornment to the rural landscape of Northumberland, and in the process damage the ancient structure of Hadrian’s wall. Then take away a souvenir of your moronic mission.

“The public indignation, anger and downright disgust has been palpable hasn’t it?

This morning, Mrs Justice Lambert has been setting out her legal directions to the jury in the trial at Newcastle Crown Court.

Daniel Graham, 39, and mechanic Adam Carruthers, 32, both deny two counts each of criminal damage to the tree and the Roman wall, which was damaged when the sycamore crashed down.

They are accused of driving around for 40 minutes from the Carlisle area, during Storm Agnes, to fell the sycamore beside Hadrian’s Wall in September 2023.

Mrs Justice Lambert told the jury: “It is vitally important that during your deliberations, you consider the evidence calmly and dispassionately.

“You may feel yourself reacting emotionally to some of the evidence and feel sympathy for one side or the other.

“It is your duty, however, to put these emotions to one side and judge the case solely on the evidence.”