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.

The courtroom has now been cleared as it is going into chambers.

This is when legal discussions are held out of public view and we are not allowed to observe them, let alone report what is said.

It's not known how long this will last but we are ready to resume our coverage live from Newcastle Crown Court as soon as we can.

Jane Downs, Jo Lonsdale & Martin Lindsay
BBC North East and Cumbria Investigations

We are still waiting for the sentencing hearing to resume, so in the meantime let's have a look at another aspect of this story.

Before Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers were arrested and eventually convicted for felling the tree, suspicion fell on others.

Within hours of the world-famous Sycamore Gap tree being illegally felled, Walter Renwick found himself in a maelstrom of accusations and abuse.

Online amateur sleuths, who had taken it upon themselves to investigate, thought that in the former lumberjack they had found their man.

But it was not him.

You can read more about Mr Renwick's experience.

Jane Downs, Jo Lonsdale & Martin Lindsay
BBC North East and Cumbria Investigations

Image source, Reuters

While we wait for court to resume, let's look at one of the big questions people have - why did they do it?

It's a simple question with a complicated answer, why did Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers cut down the Sycamore Gap tree?

Because they denied their involvement, no motive has ever been put forward beyond prosecutors concluding it was a "bit of a laugh" and the men seeing the landmark as "just a tree".

Maybe more will be said about motive in today's hearing, but experts the BBC spoke to said it was about a craving for attention.

Newcastle University's Bethany Usher, who specialises in crime journalism, said: "What became clear from the trial is that they enjoyed the attention they got worldwide.

"It's like they were saying 'I'm someone, I have got the attention of people'.

"The truth is they knew the tree was special, but they were trying to show they counted more."

Dr Philip Stone from the University of Lancashire, who studies dark tourism where visitors travel to sites of death, brutality and terror, said the pair may have "enjoyed watching the distress they had caused from such spiteful, wanton ecological vandalism".

He said the men got "pleasure in seeing other people's grief".

You can read more about it here.

The hearing has begun with the judge revealing an application has been made by the court's security staff that both defendants, who had been remanded in prison since their conviction in May, should wear handcuffs when in the dock.

This came as a surprise to barristers for both men and the prosecution, with the judge stepping out to give them a chance to discuss their response.

Erica Witherington
Reporting from Newcastle Crown Court

We are sitting in court, waiting for proceedings to get under way.

A sign has been affixed to the door to say the public gallery is full.

In the seats previously occupied by the jury, journalists now sit. Unable to all fit on the packed press benches.

Barristers are looking intently at their screens and chewing fingers in these last few moments before they stand to make their submissions.

The dock remains empty.

There was a loud hubbub that was quickly hushed as the judge entered the courtroom.

The hearing should start any minute now.

The three rows of benches across the centre of courtroom one are filled with barristers, bedecked in black robes and cream-coloured wigs, and their legal associates.

The dock is at the back of the room, large glass panels separating the defendants and security staff form the main room, although it is empty at the moment as we wait for proceedings to begin.

The press and public benches are filled, and we are now just waiting for the judge, Mrs Justice Lambert to enter and take her seat behind the raised bench at the front of the room.

Fiona Trott
North of England correspondent

There are 11 journalists on the press bench and seven in the jury seats.

The public gallery is full with 17 people.