To think that there should be some consequences for Judge Nicholas Rowland

This will be disastrous for his career. Getting a sentence altered by the Court of Appeal is a very bad look. But he was in a difficult position. As PP have noted, the sentencing guidelines emphasise leniency for children, and there are endless reports and campaigners urging judges to keep children out of prison. If you google it you’ll find dozens.

On top of that the prisons are full. Sentencing two extra people to prison means letting two other criminals out early. Those others might be equally bad.

I also thought the sentence was outrageous. I would just blame the system, the guidelines, the progressive “pro-children, evidence-led” campaigners and the successive governments who haven’t built enough prison spaces, as much as I would blame the judge.

YANBU.

There needs to be punishment for judges who clearly let a personal bias influence the appropriate sentencing.

Is there a way to look up a specific judges past cases, all the sentences they have given out?

Because I suspect this (and many other judges) history would show an alarming pattern of sympathising more with rapists and criminals than the victims.

I'd encourage anyone interested - and particularly anyone who thinks sentencing children for serious offences is an easy task - to read the Court of Appeal judgment in full: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2026/845.html

Paragraphs 178 onwards are worth a careful read.

• [Content warning: judgment contains graphic descriptions of rape and CSA]

To be honest, the defence had positioned the perpetrators as very low intelligence and they were from a community regularly ostracized & discriminated against. I wouldnt be surprised if he was treading a nightmare line between the obvious threat they pose to society, and:

• the guidance pushing for leniency where children are concerned
• not wanting to be accused of having over punished children with learning disabilities
• not wanting to be accused of excessively harsh sentencing of a minority group often discriminated against

That said it was insane sentencing for planned, filmed rapes & he should not judge cases of this nature ever again.

You’re probably right, but we also need to consider that sentences should have a deterrent effect - we don’t want teenage boys thinking there is Carte Blanche to rape. Plus the victims need to be considered, the girls need to see society is on their side, and that concern for the offenders’ outcomes is not viewed as more important than justice for the victims.

They will be out in less than 4 years - the sentence is reduced by time already served and time on curfew, then they will only do 50% of whatever's left.

Part of the issue with wanting more significant sentences is that young offenders institutes are awful places that bring together people who get worse, not better from their time there. If they were genuinely supportive and rehabilitative, then it would be worth sending more children to them. Improving them and prisons would be expensive. I suspect that most of the people who want longer sentences don't want to pay more taxes to fund more prison places or better provision. Nor would they be happy to see NHS and school funding cut to pay for that.

That comment wasn’t aimed at you @Babyboomtastic btw. Sorry if it read that way!

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/770538#main-content

This will be disastrous for his career. Getting a sentence altered by the Court of Appeal is a very bad look. But he was in a difficult position. As PP have noted, the sentencing guidelines emphasise leniency for children, and there are endless reports and campaigners urging judges to keep children out of prison. If you google it you’ll find dozens.

On top of that the prisons are full. Sentencing two extra people to prison means letting two other criminals out early. Those others might be equally bad.

I also thought the sentence was outrageous. I would just blame the system, the guidelines, the progressive “pro-children, evidence-led” campaigners and the successive governments who haven’t built enough prison spaces, as much as I would blame the judge.

The original verdict was outrageous and in my opinion gave a frightening insight into the mind of the person giving it. I am glad it was appealed.

Interestingly, there's a campaign going on now, including by the Bar Council to raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14, in line with most other European countries, and UN recommendations.

If that had been the case, then once of the 3 boys would have been too young, and the other two only just old enough by a matter of weeks.

I don't think we've got an appetite for this change in the UK, as the Bulger case is still ingrained in our national memory, but it's worth remembering that in many countries (most of Scandinavia for example), the boys couldn't even be tried.

I think they should have been jailed from what I know about the case, and am pleased by the result at appeal, but I appreciate that it's a difficult job to sentence children for such a horrific offence, and to balance the need too sevens then as children but also consider the impact on the poor girls who were victims in this.

Interestingly, there's a campaign going on now, including by the Bar Council to raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14, in line with most other European countries, and UN recommendations.

If that had been the case, then once of the 3 boys would have been too young, and the other two only just old enough by a matter of weeks.

I don't think we've got an appetite for this change in the UK, as the Bulger case is still ingrained in our national memory, but it's worth remembering that in many countries (most of Scandinavia for example), the boys couldn't even be tried.

I think they should have been jailed from what I know about the case, and am pleased by the result at appeal, but I appreciate that it's a difficult job to sentence children for such a horrific offence, and to balance the need too sevens then as children but also consider the impact on the poor girls who were victims in this.

Any idea how long they've already been detained for while awaiting trial? Presumably that counts towards their sentences, so maybe they won't actually be in a young offenders institution for much more time anyway.

There was an interesting podcast that covers the sentencing. It really challenged my instinctively desire for these boys to get long custodial sentences, though I am not sure it changed my mind.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3sM5fya66iHYi44RylIAG2?si=GdW5WYTJQKiIwLh0KuoU8g

I also struggle to understand what life is like for the boy with a bottom 1% IQ.

@HoppityBun no, I’m not saying all judges should go rogue and ignore guidelines. The point I’m making is that the guidelines will almost certainly enable a lot of flexibility. So defending the judge by saying his hands were tied by guidelines is incorrect. The fact that his decision was overturned proves that there was a permitted alternative path, and he chose not to take it.