text: Magistrates at Rotherham Magistrates Court took just 15 minutes to find Ms Gaynor not guilty . A mother-of-two was locked in a police cells for six hours and put on bail for seven months before being put on trial for chopping back tree branches hanging over her garden. Karen Gaynor appeared at Rotherham Magistrates Court accused of causing criminal damage by pruning the tree, after a complaint was made by her next door neighbour Kay Daye, as part of a long-running boundary dispute. But magistrates took just 15 minutes to find the 53-year-old not guilty, saying that she had acted with good intentions. The court heard how council officials had told Ms Gaynor that she could trim the tree near her home in Rotherham but physically refused to show her how much. However, the prosecution then told of how her pruning of the tree 'went way beyond the lawful excuse' and caused 'unnecessary damage'. Adam Walker, prosecuting, said that any trimming of a tree belonging to someone else could be criminal damage and that Ms Gaynor had lawful excuse, which she had exceeded. He said: 'In July 2014, Alan Hepinstall, a council mediator, visited Ms Gaynor's home. 'Mr Hepinstall told Ms Gaynor she could cut overhanging branches back vertically and in line with the boundary but did not show the defendant what he meant. 'There remains one disputed issue of fact and that's the state of the tree before it was pruned.' Neighbour Mrs Daye then told the court that before the tree had been cut last September, it was in a good condition but after she pruned it, 'it was terrible, all chopped back and dead.' However, Helen Shepherd, mitigating, said the conifer had already been dying in the middle which had created a gap but the top of the tree was healthy. Ms Gaynor confirmed to the court that she had a 90-minute meeting with three council officials at her home last July. She said she asked Mr Hepinstall to demonstrate how to cut the branches as she 'didn't want to get in any trouble.' Her daughter, Hayley, also told the court Mr Hepinstall refused to show them because he 'did not have the time.' Ms Gaynor went voluntarily to Main Street police station in Rotherham following the complaint of criminal damage but said she had been reassured she would not be arrested. She added: 'I didn't have a solicitor with me so I feel I was coaxed in. 'I went into the interview and the police read me my rights. I told them I could not understand what 'rights' meant. 'Then the officer slammed his book shut and said: 'Right, I am now going to arrest you'. 'For all the scandal in Rotherham at the moment to think that the police and council have time, money and resources to waste on such a silly thing as a tree is disgusting.' Mr and Mrs Daye have refused to comment on the case. Michael Quinn, a senior district prosecutor with the Crown Prosecution Service, Yorkshire and Humberside, said the incident followed an acrimonious eight-year long neighbour dispute. Karen Gaynor, next to the hedge that she pruned, that ended up with her being locked in a police cell for six hours, put on bail for seven months and being put on trial for criminal damage . Ms Gaynor's neighbour Michael Daye. A complaint was made about the hedge as part of a long-running boundary dispute . He said: 'The allegation was that the damage to the tree went well beyond pruning and that it had been hacked back to little more than a stump. 'A caution was not available as no admissions to the offending were made and so the police took the decision to charge the suspect. 'We respect the decision of the Magistrates' Court and note that it made no criticism of our case.' Under common law, you can cut back a branch from a tree that overhangs or encroaches on your property. The conifer hedge in this case formed the border between the gardens of Karen Gaynor and her next door neighbours. At dispute was whether she had cut back too much of the hedge. The law allows a householder to carry out limited pruning from their own side. However they are not allowed to trespass on their neighbour’s property or alter the height of trees and hedges. The work must be carried out carefully to avoid damage or cause the tree to be unsafe. The prosecution was brought under a charge of criminal damage. This may have been because prosecutors considered the damage caused to the hedge was intentional and related to a neighbour dispute. Rotherham Council's housing and estate services manager Paul Walsh said the matter of the 'boundary hedge' would normally have been discussed between neighbours but the ongoing dispute made this impossible. He said: 'Ms Gaynor was provided with appropriate advice about what she could reasonably and legitimately do. 'Clear and concise instructions were given and the officers did not leave until they were satisfied that those instructions were understood. Ms Gaynor was also advised to act reasonably.' Michael Quinn, a senior district prosecutor with the Crown Prosecution Service, Yorkshire and Humberside, said the incident over the hedge, pictured, followed an acrimonious eight-year long neighbour dispute . The hedge in between Ms Gaynor and Mrs Day's homes. Ms Gaynor went voluntarily to Main Street police station in Rotherham following the complaint of criminal damage . He said the decision to prosecute was made by the police and CPS. While a South Yorkshire Police spokeswoman said the council had provided them with a statement that demonstrated that permission was not granted for the tree to be cut. She added: 'Police received complaints about criminal damage that the complainants felt had been caused intentionally. 'A thorough investigation was conducted that resulted in a woman being charged and brought before the courts.'
target: Karen Gaynor appeared in court accused of causing criminal damage .
  Came after she pruned neighbour's tree that was hanging over her garden .
  Prosecution said her pruning was beyond lawful and had caused damage .
  But magistrates took just 15 minutes to find Ms Gaynor not guilty .