And with that, Adam Carruthers finishes giving evidence to the jury.

He has spent about three hours in the witness box.

Judge Mrs Justice Lambert sends the jury home, but not before telling them tomorrow should see her giving them legal directions and then three barristers giving their closing speeches to jurors.

The judge will then sum up the evidence for the 12 before they go out to consider their verdicts.

A reminder that Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers each deny two counts of criminal damage.

Mr Wright says Adam Carruthers and Daniel Graham carried on exchanging messages for days after the felling when the global news coverage had died down and was already "chip wrappers".

Mr Carruthers accepts he did so because he was surprised at people still posting about it on social media.

The prosecutor wraps up his examination by asking: "You and Daniel Graham went out that night to cut down the tree?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "That's not true.

Mr Wright says: "When you woke the next morning you realised what you thought was 'just a tree' was global news?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "That’s not the truth at all."

The prosecutor concludes the two defendants were the only people lacking minerals because, having now realised what they had done, they did not have the courage to admit it.

"That isn't true," Mr Carruthers says.

At the end of the note, Mr Carruthers called the man an insulting term.

Mr Wright is zeroing in on that response, saying Mr Carruthers could have taken one of two sides.

Either, he could agree with the Facebook commenter who said whoever felled the tree was weak and it was disgusting behaviour, or he could support the point of the view of the person who cut it down.

"You backed the man who cut down the tree, didn't you?" Mr Wright asks.

Mr Carruthers replies: "I don't know who cut down the tree."

He also says he has "no idea" why Mr Graham was telling him it was all over the news.

Mr Wright says: "This was the two of you revelling in what you had done, isn't it?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "That's not correct."

Erica Witherington
Reporting from Newcastle Crown Court

From behind the glass panels of the dock, Daniel Graham watches his former friend on the witness stand.

He occasionally shifts in his seat and puts a hand through his hair.

He is following along, flipping the pages in a file of evidence in front of him as the prosecutor takes his co-defendant through the sequence of events.

We are returning to the voice note Mr Carruthers sent to Mr Graham in which, replying to someone who criticised the fellers of the tree as "weak", he said: "I'd like to see [the commenter] launch an operation like we did last night.

"I don't think he's got the minerals."

Mr Carruthers says: "I might have got my words mixed up but it was meant to be what 'he' did."

The message has been played three times now and Mr Carruthers is adamant he meant to say "he", as in whoever felled the tree, rather than "we".

He says "if it sounds like a 'we', I'm sorry".

"I was meant to say what 'he' did last night," he adds.

Mr Wright is asking Mr Carruthers about the messages the men exchanged the following day.

He asks if Mr Graham was paying him a compliment when he talked about a "nice angle" on the cut in pictures of the tree, but Mr Carruthers says he didn't read it that way.

Mr Carruthers circled a comment saying whoever had done it had been a professional, telling jurors he did so because it was someone agreeing with what the pair had already discussed.

Mr Wright says Mr Carruthers said in a voice note he thought it was going to go wild, rather than saying it was going wild, and asks why he expressed himself that way, suggesting he phrased it the way he did because he was talking about the reaction to something he had done.

"Because that was my opinion," Mr Carruthers says, adding it was obvious the news outlets were "going to get on it".

Mr Wright says: "Were you starting to think maybe it's not just a tree? Maybe right-thinking people are a bit upset about this? Was the penny starting to drop what you had done was not going to go away?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "I hadn't done anything."

The trial has resumed and Mr Wright is asking Mr Carruthers about the video which prosecutors say is the moment the tree was felled.

Nine minutes after telling his partner he had a video to show her, he received the video of the felling from Mr Graham's phone, Mr Wright says.

Mr Carruthers says the two were totally unconnected.

Mr Wright asks: "Why would anybody want to send you, of all people, that video of the Sycamore Gap tree being cut down at 01.39 in the morning?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "I have no idea at all."

The prosecutor says the video was only ever on the phones of two people, Mr Graham and Mr Carruthers.

Mr Carruthers repeats he has "no idea" why he got the video, saying: "It could have been a mistake."

When Mr Wright responds with surprise, "a mistake", Mr Carruthers says: "I'm just guessing because I don't know. You're asking for help so I just thought I'd put that across."

Mr Wright asks if Mr Carruthers was not "puzzled" to receive a dark video with the sounds of a chainsaw in the middle of the night.

Mr Carruthers says he gets "sent random videos all the time", adding: "You sometimes look at them and think what's that, it's not worth responding to."

He says it didn't really cross his mind "to be honest" as to why he had been sent it.

Mr Carruthers is being asked about messages he sent his partner that night.

He was sent a video of his child being fed and replied he had a "better video than that", which he claimed was of the shed being damaged in a storm but prosecutors allege is the felling of the Sycamore Gap tree.

Mr Wright says the partner replied "I bet", implying she knew where he was going that night and what he was doing.

"You had discussed going up to Sycamore Gap to cut it down?" Mr Wright says.

Mr Carruthers replies: "That isn't true."

The defendant asks why would "anyone in their right mind who had just had a newborn baby go out and do something like that", to which the prosecutor Mr Wright replies: "That's what I'm trying to understand."

Mr Wright asks if a wedge was taken from the tree as "some sort of trophy", to which Mr Carruthers replies: "I don't know anything about it, I wasn't there."

There is now a short comfort break in proceedings.

Mr Wright is quizzing Mr Carruthers about his claim, first made today, that he had gone near the tree earlier in the day while trying to take his partner and their new daughter out for a meal at Newcastle but had turned around and gone home.

Mr Carruthers says they were going to go to the Metrocentre, which sparks some incredulity from the prosecutor.

"You thought 'let's have a first trip out with a newborn baby while [your partner] recovers from a caesarean, we will go for a three-hour round trip to the Metrocentre'?" Mr Wright asks.

Mr Carruthers replies: "That's correct."

With no table reservation, the prosecutor asks.

"The thing is when you get to the Metrocentre there's always seats," Mr Carruthers says. "We'd been stuck in the house for so long, I said 'let's get out, go and have a meal'."

Mr Wright asks if there was no restaurant in Carlisle they could go to.

"There are restaurants, but they're not the best," Mr Carruthers says, adding the Metrocentre is better.

Mr Wright says Mr Carruthers knew a storm was coming yet still decided to try and take his family for a drive across the country, to which Mr Carruthers says he did not think it would that bad as there had been no announcements on the radio, adding: "If it was that bad I wouldn't have risked [my child] and partner's lives like that."

Erica Witherington
Reporting from Newcastle Crown Court

Richard Wright KC for the prosecution is now on his feet.

He’s taken off his glasses and is holding them in front of him.

He occasionally jabs them in the air as he puts a series of swift questions to Mr Carruthers - suggesting to him that they find out what they can "both agree on".

Mr Wright is asking Mr Carruthers about why he was so surprised at the international outrage to the felling.

Mr Carruthers says he thought it was "just a tree", but then started seeing news reports and public comments appearing "more and more" on social media.

"Did you think it was a bit silly, all this fuss?" Mr Wright says, clarifying when Mr Carruthers asks what he means by "a bit silly" that he thought it was "only a tree".

The prosecutor suggests that is what is at the "heart" of the case, adding: "You thought 'it's just a tree', when the rest of the world didn't think it was just a tree, that it was a terrible and wicked thing to have done, you have lost your bottle and can't own up to it?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "That’s not true."

Adam Carruthers is now being cross-examined by the prosecutor Richard Wright KC.

"Who cut down the tree?" Mr Wright asks.

Mr Carruthers replies: "It wasn't me."

"Did Daniel Graham cut it down?" Mr Wright asks.

Mr Carruthers replies: "I don't know."

The prosecutor says Mr Graham's Range Rover was taken to the scene, the felling was filmed on his phone and, "of all the phones in the world", forwarded it only to Mr Carruthers.

He repeatedly asks Mr Carruthers if he really did not know who had felled the tree, to which Mr Carruthers replies he has "no clue at all".

"So it's a mystery?" Mr Wright asks.

Mr Carruthers replies: "It appears that way."

Asked which other people "tick all the boxes" for felling the tree apart from him and Mr Graham, Mr Carruthers replies: "I'm not sure."

Mr Carruthers accepts he called Mr Graham the following morning to talk about the tree.

When asked what they talked about, Mr Carruthers says he could not remember exactly but it would have been about Facebook posts about the tree.

He says someone referred to it being blown down and he was telling Mr Graham that he had his own issues with the high wind damaging his shed that night.

He said then he saw the pictures from the scene and "thought 'hang on a sec, it hasn't been blown down, it's been cut down'".

Mr Knox asks him about Mr Carruthers comment about an "operation we did last night".

Mr Carruthers says he meant to say "he", as in the person who cut the tree down, as oppose to "we".

Mr Knox asks: "You know perfectly well the difference between he and we, don’t you?"

Mr Carruthers replies "not at all".

Closing his questioning, Mr Knox says: "The reality is you did the chopping of that tree down and tried to pin it on Dan Graham?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "Not at all".

Erica Witherington
Reporting from Newcastle Crown Court

Mr Knox is standing with one hand in his pocket and a sheaf of papers in the other.

He peers at a piece of evidence on the screen in front of him, then back up at Adam Carruthers on the stand.

Occasionally he leans and rests his weight on the bench, as he puts his suggestions to the defendant.

The members of the jury have a screen between each two of them as they follow along, examining the maps and images being put in front of them.

Mr Knox is now pressing Mr Carruthers about taking Mr Graham's Range Rover that night, which Mr Carruthers resolutely denies doing.

"My question is, who did you have with you?" Mr Knox asks.

Mr Carruthers replies: "I don’t know because I wasn't there."

Mr Knox says: "It was you and another?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "That’s not correct because I wasn’t there."

He also says it "isn't correct" that he used Mr Graham's mobile phone, adding he did not know the passcode.

Mr Knox says Mr Carruthers' claims are "complete and total nonsense", but Mr Carruthers repeatedly replies: "Not at all."

Erica Witherington
Reporting from Newcastle Crown Court

The afternoon session got going with Adam Carruthers in the witness stand of court room number one, taking questions from Christopher Knox, the barrister of his co-defendant Daniel Graham.

The public gallery is just about full.

The solemnity of this court arena can be felt by all - people were talking amongst themselves in hushed voices as we waited for proceedings to continue.

The usher announced "court rise" and everyone got to their feet as Mrs Justice Lambert entered and took her place on the bench.

The jury then filed in and filled their seats directly opposite the witness stand, where they have a clear view of Mr Carruthers.

Discussion turns to the mobile phones Mr Carruthers had.

Mr Knox alleges he had two phones - an older Samsung which he handed to police and a newer iPhone which Mr Carruthers managed "to avoid the police finding".

Mr Carruthers says that is not correct and he lost the phone, adding: "If I knew where I lost it, I'd go and find it because there are pictures on there of when my child were born, it's sentimental."

He says he did have two phones, the "tougher" Samsung he used for work and an iPhone which he kept at home until he lost it.

Mr Carruthers says the Samsung was his "main" phone and he gave it to the police.

Mr Knox is now showing phone tracking data which he claims shows Mr Carruthers' phone was picked up heading close to Haydon Bridge, which was not far from the tree, at about 17:30.

He says Mr Carruthers was "doing a reconnoitre" of the tree, but Mr Carruthers says he could not recall leaving Cumbria that day.

He says his partner was still recovering from the Caesarean birth of their daughter so he offered to take her for a meal in Newcastle but, when their child failed to settle in the car, they turned round to go back to Carlisle for a takeaway.

Mr Knox says: "You didn't tell the police this but you tell the jury now, in spite of the fact [your partner] wasn't well enough to lift a baby or anything, you were going to go 65 miles with a newborn?"

"Yeah that's correct." Mr Carruthers replies.

Mr Knox asks if it was just coincidence, then, that they turned around at a point about four miles from the tree on "the very night you cut it down".

Mr Carruthers says: "That's incorrect."

Mr Knox accuses Mr Carruthers of "having a thing" about the tree.

"Not at all," Mr Carruthers replies.

Mr Graham claimed Mr Carruthers showed him a piece of string that had been used to measure the exact circumference of the tree.

When asked about the string by Mr Knox, Mr Carruthers replies: "I don’t know anything about this piece of rope."

Mr Knox asks if Mr Graham is telling a "completely untrue tale" about the string, to which Mr Carruthers replies: "It seems that way."

Mr Knox says people are mystified about why the tree was felled but Mr Carruthers "had a purpose", namely he "had a thing about the tree?"

Mr Carruthers replies: "Not at all."

Now Mr Carruthers is being shown a picture of his lorry being used as an anchor to hold a tree which was in the process of being felled.

He confirms it is his lorry but denies they were cutting down the trees. He says the plan was to use the lorry to pull down the trees, which had been condemned, but the ground was too soft for it.

"The truth is you were good at felling trees?" Mr Knox says.

Mr Carruthers answers: "I did do the small bit because I wasn't comfortable doing larger jobs."

"You used your own kit didn't you? You had the kit?" Mr Knox says.

"That's not correct," Mr Carruthers replies.

Mr Knox says Mr Carruthers was "adept with a chainsaw" and owned several which were captured in a photo of him holding owls.

"That's not correct," Mr Carruthers says.

Mr Knox says Mr Carruthers got rid of them but Mr Carruthers replies: "Not at all."