Two in court following care home smash
A blue BMW 3-series which was reported stolen was being pursued by police when it crashed into a wall of the care home, causing extensive structural damage which meant that the building had to be evacuated.
Initially, Northumbria Police said eight residents required hospital treatment.
On Friday, the force said a woman in her 90s and a woman in her 80s, neither of whom were in the eight taken to hospital, had died.
Police inquiries into their deaths continue.
Asgari-Tabar appeared before the court charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving, said to be a resident who suffered spinal fractures.
He was also charged with robbery of the BMW 3-series, which he was allegedly test-driving, and kidnap of the woman who was taking him out in the vehicle.
No pleas were entered and Asgari-Tabar was remanded in custody to appear before Newcastle Crown Court on August 11.
Parish, who had several supporters in the public gallery, faced two charges, robbery of the car and kidnap.
Magistrates said the case was so serious that it had to be dealt with at the crown court and he was also remanded in custody to appear on the same date as his co-accused.
As he was taken down to the cells, supporters shouted: 'We are all with you.
'Take care of yourself, we all love you mate.'
Previously, police said the car was reported as being stolen in the Fenham area of Newcastle at around 9.25pm and was seen in Sunderland 15 minutes later when a pursuit was authorised.
Following the police pursuit, a mandatory referral has been made to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, officers said.
Alternative accommodation has been found for the residents.
On Friday, a spokeswoman for Avery Healthcare, which runs the care home, said: 'We are deeply saddened by the incident at our home in Sunderland and our thoughts are with all those affected.
'We are committed to supporting our residents, their families, and our dedicated staff during this incredibly difficult time.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
24 minutes ago
- BBC News
Northumbria Police participation in Newcastle pride 'unlawful'
A chief constable's decision to allow uniformed police officers to take part in a Pride march was unlawful, a judge has ruled.A case was brought against Northumbria Police Chief Constable Vanessa Jardine by Lindsey Smith, from Newcastle, who describes herself as "gender critical".Ms Smith argued Mrs Jardine and her officers' participation in Newcastle Pride last year meant they would have been unable to remain impartial if a dispute between those with similar beliefs and trans rights supporters had force said it would work through the ruling to understand the implications but would remain true to its values of "fairness, visibility, and support for all". In a judgement issued on Wednesday after a High Court hearing in Leeds earlier this month, Mr Justice Linden said it was "irrational" for Mrs Jardine to think officers could take part in the Smith said she was "delighted" with the court's judgement, feeling the force had "abandoned their duty of impartiality and embraced a highly controversial political cause"."Their participation in the Pride march clearly shows where their sympathies lie," she said. "My hope is Northumbria Police change their ways and follow this ruling. If they do, they will be policing the community for everyone." In her claim, Ms Smith described how a "contingent of uniformed officers" led by the chief constable marched behind a trade union banner during last year's march. She said Mrs Jardine had associated herself with placards, chanting and the Progress Flag, which represents the wider LGBTQ+ the march, officers carried a Police Pride flag and flags in the Pride colours, and wore uniforms with the word "police" written in rainbow colours. A police van was also painted in the same colours. Northumbria Police defended its decision to participate in the event but told the court only off-duty police officers would be permitted to take part in 2025 and would not be allowed to wear force stall would be staffed by uniformed officers who would not be allowed to exhibit Pride insignia, it said. The force said participating in Pride allowed it to be visible in the LGBT community. It said the chief constable believed the its participation in Pride was one way to demonstrate "the stigma which has traditionally afflicted members of the LGBT+ community will not be reflected" in the community's interactions with aim during events was to keep people safe but they provided an "opportunity to engage with people including those who may have less confidence in policing", it said."That is why we felt it important to challenge the case which was brought against us and which has implications for wider policing." Chief Constable Gavin Stephens, who chairs the National Police Chiefs' Council, said it would ensure the legal decision was communicated to other forces and was working with the College of Policing on broader guidance. Ms Smith previously threatened to sue Newcastle United when she was banned from St James' Park after the football club received complaints that some tweets she had made online were derogatory towards trans people. Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Police face ban from marching in Pride parades after court rules it breaches impartiality
Police officers face being banned from participating in Pride parades after a court ruled that one of Britain's largest forces breached impartiality by marching at an LGBT + rights event. The Chief Constable of Northumbria Police acted unlawfully when she allowed uniformed officers to march under a transgender flag at a Pride event last year, a judge ruled today. A judicial review was brought by Lindsay Smith, a gender-critical campaigner, who argued that the force broke the professional oath sworn by police officers to act 'with impartiality'. Officers from Northumbria had a stall at last year's Pride parade in Newcastle, marched under the Progress flag promoting transgender ideology and painted a police van with trans colours. Ms Smith, a lesbian who participated in the event, asked the court to find that 'the above activities of the Force during Newcastle Pride in the City 2024, and the decision of the Chief Constable that officers could or should participate in such activities, were unlawful'. In his ruling at the High Court in Leeds today, Mr Justice Linden agreed and said it was 'contrary to the uniformed officers' duties of impartiality', as well as the chief constable Vanessa Jardine's 'own duty of impartiality, to participate in the 2024 march in the way that they did'. The judgment states: 'If one then asks whether the officers' activity of taking part in the March was likely to give rise to the impression amongst members of the public that it may interfere with their ability to discharge their duties impartially… the answer seems to me clearly to be 'yes'. 'Moreover, the fact that they wore their uniforms, marched as a contingent, and carried the Police Pride and other flags demonstrated their support for the cause as police officers.' Mr Justice Linden added that this could suggest the force's 'institutional support for gender ideology and transgender rights' and warned that this could be seen by the public as the force 'taking sides' in the women's rights debate. Ms Smith said she was 'delighted' with the ruling as it would be 'terrifying to live in a community where the police have abandoned their duty of impartiality and embraced a highly controversial political cause'. She added: 'My hope is that Northumbria Police change their ways and follow this ruling. If they do they will be policing the community for everyone.' The ruling only relates to the Pride event in 2024 but Mr Justice Linden said that it is for Northumbria's Chief Constable to decide on the force's approach to this year's event 'in the light of what I have said in this judgment'. According to lawyers for Ms Smith, the ruling will raise questions over the participation of police forces in all Pride events - including Northumbria Police's role in Newcastle Pride 2025 which is scheduled to take place this weekend. Paul Conrathe, Ms Smith's solicitor, said that the ruling was of 'national importance' as 'British police must be above the fray and avoid taking sides on contested issues'. He added: 'This judgement should give Chief Constables and officers around the country serious pause for thought. They wield the power of the State and should not be seen to associate with controversial political causes. If they do they will be breaking the law.' A Northumbria Police spokesman said that its 'primary aim' during last year's march was 'to keep people safe' but that the event also provided the force 'with an opportunity to engage with people including those who may have less confidence in policing.' The force did not say whether it would take part in this weekend's Newcastle Pride parade but added: 'We will work through the ruling to understand the implications, while staying true to our values of fairness, visibility, and support for all.' Chief Constable Gavin Stephens, chair of the National Police Chiefs' Council, said: 'We are working through the detail of this judgment and will ensure this decision is communicated to forces for them to consider. 'We are also working with the College of Policing on broader guidance which will help local forces make decisions around participation in events to maintain their impartiality.'
Daily Mirror
5 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Bizarre story of Sycamore gap duo and moment that 'tipped them over the edge'
Former friends turned enemies, Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers, were convicted of criminal damage to the immensely popular Sycamore Gap tree, which they claimed was felled in a 'drunken prank' The two men who cut down the famous tree at Sycamore Gap out of "sheer bravado" have now been put behind bars. But their three-minute "moronic" destruction of the much-loved tree, which had stood for more than 100 years in a fold in the Northumberland landscape, will never be forgotten. The two were once pals with locals saying the plot saw "the man with no friends" - Daniel Graham, 39 - team up with "the man with no brains", Adam Carruthers, 32. Graham soon turned on Carruthers, tipping police off that he had cut down the iconic landmark in September 2023. The pair, who were each jailed for four years and three months, were convicted of criminal damage to the tree along with criminal damage to Hadrian's Wall, caused when the sycamore fell on the ancient monument. Newcastle Crown Court heard the pair had travelled more than 40 minutes from their homes in Cumbria, then carried their equipment across pitch-black moorland during a storm to carry out the act of vandalism. A wedge, which still hasn't been recovered, was taken from the tree as a trophy, while they revelled in national and international media coverage following the wrecking. So what drew the pair to carry out the felling? And was it more than just a "drunken prank"? Motive riddle Defending their case, the pair offered an underwhelming excuse for the infamous felling, claiming that it was a drunken prank. Despite their defence arguing that the act was "no more than drunken stupidity", neither the prosecution nor the judge were convinced. Andrew Gurney, for Adam Carruthers, insisted: 'People want to know why? Why did you conduct this mindless act? Unfortunately, it is no more than drunken stupidity. 'He felled that tree and it is something he will regret for the rest of his life. There's no better explanation than that.' On Tuesday Mrs Justice Lambert jailed the pair, saying their motivation was still not clear but a large factor seemed to be 'sheer bravado'. She told the defendants: 'Felling the tree in the middle of the night in a storm gave you some sort of thrill. You revelled in the coverage, taking pride in what you have done, knowing you were responsible for the crime so many people were talking about. 'Whether that was the sole explanation for what you did, I do not know, however I know you are both equally culpable.' Graham said that Carruthers had kept part of the tree as a 'trophy'. That accusation was put to Carruthers when he was asked under cross examination at the trial if he had kept a section of the trunk as a souvenir for his newborn daughter. It is believed that Carruthers had also cut down a tree to mark the birth of his first born daughter Charlie on Sept. 5, 2018. He wanted to go 'one better' for his second child Olivia and take a piece of the iconic sycamore. Like Graham, he had offered a series of pathetic lies to cover up his senseless crime, telling jurors that it was "just a tree" and he "did not understand" all the headlines. However, it was apparent he formed a "strange interest" in the Sycamore Gap tree, and in his workshop kept a length of string which he'd used to measure the circumference, knowing that when the time was right, he would cut it down. The "right time" for Carruthers came when Olivia, his second child, was born. Just 12 days later he and Graham set out in a black Range Rover to retrieve a "trophy" for her, a wedge cut from the trunk of what Carruthers called: "The most famous tree in the world." Friends to enemies The defendants were once close friends but have fallen out since their arrests, with Graham turning on Carruthers. Detectives received a call naming both the men responsible for the crime, and Graham found himself at the centre of a social media storm of abuse. He was forced to remove his name from his business vehicles and, in an anonymous phone call to Northumbria Police, named Carruthers as the man who had cut down the tree. When court proceedings first commenced, the pair turned up together, both dressed in balaclavas to hide their identities. But soon enough, Graham turned up alone, without any face covering. Giving evidence at his trial, Graham admitted he and Carruthers had been close but claimed he had 'no friends'. "You could say I am anti-social," he said. "I don't have much time for people." He claimed he had taken his car and phone without his permission on the night the tree was cut down. Graham's Range Rover was picked up on automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras between Carlisle and Sycamore Gap at night on September 27 2023, and returning early the next morning. His mobile was traced to phone masts making the same journey. The judge said that, after admissions they had both made in pre-sentence reports, she could now be sure that Carruthers cut the Sycamore Gap tree down while Graham drove him there and filmed it on his phone. She told them: 'Adam Carruthers, you told a probation officer you had no idea why you carried out the crime and could offer no explanation. You said you had drunk a bottle of whisky after a tough day and everything was a blur. 'Daniel Graham, as during the trial, your main focus seemed to be to heap as much blame as possible on your co-defendant. You now accept you were present but blame him for what happened that night.' The judge went on to say: 'You told the probation officer it was (Carruthers') 'dream and his show' and you just went along with it.' Mrs Justice Lambert said: 'Although there may be grains of truth in what you said, I do not accept your explanations are wholly honest or the whole story. 'Adam Carruthers, your account that you had so much to drink that you had no memory of what happened is not plausible. The tree felling demonstrated skill and required deliberate and co-ordinated actions by you… It was not the work of someone whose actions were significantly impaired through drink. 'Nor, Daniel Graham, do I accept you just went along with your co-defendant. You filmed the whole event, you took photos of the chainsaw and wedge of trunk in the boot of your Range Rover. The next day, you appeared to revel in coverage of your actions in the media. 'This is not the behaviour of someone who is shocked and horrified by what has happened.' Vandal's grudge Carruthers tried to portray himself as a devoted dad and claimed that he was at home with partner Amy on the night the tree was cut down. But he could come up with no explanation for the series of texts and voice note messages he and Graham exchanged. Chris Knox, defending Graham, said: 'He is a troubled man who has had very real difficulties in his life, which have not all been of his own making.' His home, and the business he operated from it, were attacked after he was remanded in custody, anxd windows broken, the barrister said. Meanwhile, in the run up to the 'moronic mission', Graham held a grudge against authorities who rejected his bid to live near Hadrian's Wall and was locked in a bitter planning dispute with his local council. He was issued with an enforcement notice by Cumberland Council for his home and business premises at Millbeck Stables on the edge of Carlisle, Cumbria, within Hadrian's Wall 's UNESCO World Heritage site 'buffer zone'. Residents and planning officials from Beaumont Parish Council, a remote Cumbrian rural community, told how they felt threatened by Graham's 'dominant and oppressive behaviour'. The council rejected his retrospective bid to live on the site of his Millbeck Stables and warned he faced eviction. He was told he had until October 28, 2025, to find 'other accommodation', but he'll now be living out the next few years in prison. But the decision means Graham will have no home to come back to when he is released from his sentence. A final letter of refusal was made in April, 2023,with the Sycamore Gap tree felled little more than five months later. Several locals objected to his application to live on the site, and believe his rage against authority may have been part of his motivation for the crime.
