Helen Briggs
Environment correspondent

Image source, Reuters

The felling of the Sycamore Gap tree next to Hadrian's Wall in Northumberland has put our relationship with trees, and the natural world more widely, back under the spotlight.

It has prompted calls for stricter legal protections for trees, not only to help prevent similar crimes in future but also to help the public appreciate the value of trees at a time when many of our woodlands are in poor health and targets for tree-planting are not being met.

But, even if the government was to back calls for greater legal protections, other questions remain - namely, which trees should be protected?

And arguably even more pressingly: should Britain be thinking more broadly about how to save our depleting woodlands and is legal protection enough or is a fundamental rethink required?

You can read more here.

Martin Lindsay
BBC North East and Cumbria Investigations

While we wait for the court to resume it's worth remembering the people directly affected by the tree's felling.

Gary Pickles' working day on 28 September 2023 had barely started when a farmer called his office to report the tree was down.

"It was shock," he says. He drove down to the site and was met with a gaping hole in the landscape.

But the sadness he was feeling soon turned to anger and panic.

"When I got there I realised it had been chopped down and not blown down," he said.

The news then quickly travelled around the world.

You can read more here.

Jane Downs
BBC North East and Cumbria Investigations

The court has broken for lunch and proceedings are due to resume at 14:15.

While you're waiting, you could listen to this podcast created by BBC Radio Newcastle and hosted by TV chef and Hairy Biker Si King.

It traces the story of the tree, from its roots on Hadrian's Wall to the outrage and horror caused by its felling in September 2023.

You can listen to Felled: The Sycamore Gap Story here.

The court has now broken for lunch, with the judge expecting to return at about 14:15 to deliver her sentence.

It has been a fascinating morning with the prosecution and defence sides laying out what they think are the important factors when determining the final sentence.

The maximum prison term the men could face is 10 years but the range is between 18 months and four years, prosecutors say.

They say the men planned the attack and carried it out in a professional way, with the harm caused deemed to be at the highest level.

Lawyers for the men say it was an act of "drunken stupidity" and they would have to carry the burden for the rest of their lives.

Andrew Gurney, representing Carruthers, says the question many people have is why the men felled the tree.

"Unfortunately it is no more than drunken stupidity," Mr Gurney says, adding Carruthers had made admissions to probation officers in a bid to "cleanse the burden on his conscience".

Mr Gurney says, while the damage caused by cutting down the tree was "foreseeable", Carruthers did not believe his "ignorant and stupid act" would cause as much distress to the community and nation as a whole.

He says Carruthers will have to "bear the burden of what he has done for the rest of his life" and would "forever be linked to this act". He will have to carry that as "some form of personal penance".

Mr Gurney also says it is a "unique and unprecedented sentencing exercise" due in part to the "cultural and heritage impact" of the criminal damage.

Mr Knox says when Graham is eventually released from prison he will have to "re-establish himself".

He says Graham would be effectively homeless and would rely on friends for help but he was confident he would be able to make something of himself.

Christopher Knox has just told the court his client, Daniel Graham, was a "very troubled" man who had made a "serious attempt on his own life" in December which resulted in him being in hospital for several weeks.

He was then remanded into custody ahead of the trial for his own safety, Mr Knox says. The court has heard Graham was remanded into prison from 21 December.

Mr Knox says Graham has had a "very difficult struggle not of his own making", although he would not elaborate on this in open court.

He says Graham ran a "proper business" which was attacked after his remand into custody and he had also received hate mail showing "unpleasant, malign intent to him".

Windows were smashed and removed from his caravan at his yard near Carlisle, the court has heard.

Mr Knox says Graham also admitted his involvement in the felling to probation officers.

Christopher Knox, the barrister for Daniel Graham, says he accepts the seriousness of the crime as set out by the prosecution.

He agrees there is dispute over the value of the tree, with defence experts saying it is closer to £150,000, but ultimately this doesn't matter for sentencing purposes.

Mr Knox is citing other high-level criminal damage cases, including an attempt to harm the "totemic" Van Gogh Sunflowers at a gallery. In that case two young women were jailed for 21 and 24 months, which the Court of Appeal then approved as "proper sentences".

Prosecutor Richard Wright KC tells the court both men were in it together.

"These are joint offences committed jointly throughout," he says, adding that it is "difficult to see any distinction between the defendants".

He said each may have played a different role or had different personal circumstances but "all in all both men stand or fall together".

The sentencing guidelines and range set provided "headroom", he says, with the starting point being 18 months in prison and all the aggravating factors providing "significant" uplift to that.

But, he adds, it was ultimately a matter for the court when mitigating factors had been considered.

Mr Wright also sought confiscation of Graham's Range Rover.

Image source, PA Media

Mr Wright says the tree's cultural and heritage status means its felling is in the highest category of harm.

He says serious distress has been caused and there has been a "serious economical and social impact" with a high value of damage both financial but "also in the wider societal sense".

He also says the damage to the wall, a Unesco World Heritage site, was severe but incidental to the felling of the tree.

The range in sentencing is from 18 months to four years in prison, Mr Wright says, with aggravating and mitigating features to be considered when finalising the figure.

Mr Wright says the night was chosen because the high winds wreaked by Storm Agnes would make it easier to fell the tree.

He also says each of the men had, when speaking to the probation service, admitted being on the mission but denied they intended what happened and were drunk so didn't realise what would happen, although the prosecutor says that can be rejected.

"They remain unwilling or unable to engage in their criminality. The court can be sure they were sober, prepared, and planned to do what they did," he says.

He also says there could be no question of their intention.

Prosecutor Richard Wright KC says the maximum sentence the men could get for criminal damage is 10 years each.

But, he adds, the sentence should be "just and proportionate" and the shortest possible "commensurate with the public duty" of the court.

He says the court is required to assess the culpability of the offenders and the harm caused.

There was a high degree of planning and premeditation, being an expedition that "required significant planning", he says. The pair took a vehicle, drove for 40 minutes, then walked for 20 minutes with specialist tree felling equipment.

Mr Wright says the felling was carried out in a deliberate and professional way, spray paint applied to the tree to mark the cut, and the way it was cut meant it fell across the wall.

Image source, PA Media

National Trust general manager Andrew Poad says there had been signs of regrowth at the tree's stump, while seeds had been taken and would be planted around the country as trees of hope.

He says there were "signs of life" with new shoots emerging and these had been fenced off to protect them.

The public and media interest had been overwhelming, he adds.

Andrew Poad says many people had made a pilgrimage to the site in the aftermath and this had put an extra stress on staff and the local landscape.

Many people sent comments from across the world and wrote messages in a visitor book at the nearby discovery centre, The Sill.

One comment says the tree had shown hundreds of years of nature at its best and one night of humanity at its worst.

Another says the tree would never be forgotten and its loss had left a hole in people's hearts.

In a statement read to the court, National Trust general manager Andrew Poad says the "iconic tree" could "never be replaced".

He says it belonged to the people and was a "totemic symbol for many", adding it was a destination to visit and a place to make memories.

Mr Poad says it was a "place of sanctuary" and a "calming reflective" spot people would visit year after year.

The outpouring of love and emotion was "unprecedented" with the "overwhelming sense of loss and confusion" felt across the world, he says. The reason for the "beautiful tree" being felled was "beyond comprehension".

Mr Poad also says the "mindless destruction" now dominated the work of the National Trust in the area.

The financial burden was impossible to calculate but the removal of the tree and repairs had cost just over £30,000 with a further £20,000 allocated to ongoing work, he says.

Erica Witherington
Reporting from Newcastle Crown Court

The convicted men are watching on from behind the glass panels of the dock, seated about 10ft (3m) apart from each other. Two prison officers are just behind them.

Graham occasionally sips from a cup of water.

Carruthers has just glanced towards the public gallery where two of his associates are sitting.

Those two men, dressed in black with sunglasses on their heads, have just stood up and walked out of court.

The prosecutor, Richard Wright KC, has now turned to the defendants' previous convictions.

Daniel Graham had convictions for violence and battery between 2007 and 2016 and for Public Order Act offences between 2021 and 2022.

The court heard those related to relationships he was in and he did not get any prison sentences.

Mr Graham also had a caution for stealing logs which he had chopped up with a chainsaw, the court heard.

Adam Carruthers had no previous convictions, warnings, caution or reprimands, Mr Wright said.

We are an hour behind schedule but the hearing is now starting in earnest with prosecutor Richard Wright KC addressing the court.

He starts by discussing the value of the tree, but says this is not agreed between all parties.

He said the prosecution put it at about £458,000 but, from a legal perspective, the "important thing" was it was agreed it was more than £5,000, which was the threshold for putting it into the higher category of harm.

Mrs Justice Lambert said there were a number of ways the tree could valued but none were "at all apt" so, after agreeing it was worth more than £5,000, she would "just leave that there".

Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers have now entered the dock.

Graham is sitting furthest from the door and is wearing a white shirt and black trousers, he has a thick beard and is sipping from a cup of water.

Carruthers is two seats away from him and wearing a green t-shirt.

Two security guards are in the dock with them, one standing between the two men who were once best friends.

The hearing has now resumed and after hearing submissions, the judge has rejected the application for the two defendants to wear handcuffs in the dock.

We are now waiting for the two men to be brought up from the cells.