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

I have a relative who worked in criminology for a while, and she was generally quite anti-jail, but that was because her point of view was that jail was only appropriate when someone was a danger to the public. I think a person who has committed two rapes and filmed them has pretty definitively demonstrated that they are a danger to the public, and like so many women I was deeply disturbed by the initial sentence. The problem was obviously partly the judge, but I think the PP who mentions that the issue may also be with the guidelines may also have a point. I’m no expert, but I remember someone on the initial thread about this saying that his sentence could possibly be considered to be within the guidelines as they stand.

I hope one of the victims, who said the initial verdict was ‘like a rock to my face’, is able to take at least a small amount of comfort in the resulting public outcry, and the fact that the sentence has now been revised. It’s unbearable really though to think about what she’s been through.

I'd also like to see consequences for the original sentence. It particularly infuriated me that the judge commended the boys for managing to behave themselves during the court proceedings as if this in some way mitigated the rapes they'd committed and the consequences for the girls they raped. One might reasonably expect someone in his position to be aware that putting on a performance in front of authority figures is the oldest trick in the book for abusers.

His comments during sentencing were horrific

This is the issue.

I agree with everyone that the "sentence" was appalling, BUT, it was still an 'allowable sentence' within the guidelines as they are.

Personally, I think even the 4 years they have now been given is appalling. Let alone the fact they will only be expected to serve 1/2, less the time they have had 'curfews' whilst on bail. So it is STILL woefully inadequate.

The way the victims' lives have been changed FOREVER has just not been taken into account.
Nor has the fact this wasn't one crime, it was a crime they repeated, with another victim a couple of weeks later.
Nor has the fact they filmed it, and shared it on social media.
Nor has the fact that - despite the compelling evidence (that THEY filmed!), they still didn't admit it and the poor victims had to go through the trials.

They should each be actually serving 20 - 25 years IMO, which probably means they would need to be given a sentence of 40 odd years.

Remember they raped two different children, on two different occasions and two of them committed rape on both occasions. Then share the footage of the girls being attacked.

If they are old enough to commit an adult crime, then they are old enough to do enough time away from society that actually begins to reflect the harm they inflicted on the victims.

I am SO angry about this.

I mean, his name has been put out there and he has been thoroughly scolded professionally. So there's that at least.

It’s interesting that the judge who gave the commentary said that the effect on the victims hadn’t been considered enough. Says it all really - the perpetrators were considered sympathetically and the victims weren’t considered at all.

I've been thinking the same thing OP. He needs to be stuck off or at least publicly reprimanded and actively shamed.

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 agree!

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.

He's not going to be the only judge who puts the feelings of men above the violence endured by women and girls. It's dead common. I think mandatory retraining for the lot to f them.

I thought the sentence was outrageous, I suspect however that the issue is more with the guidelines than the judge. I’m happy to be corrected if that’s wrong. If the issue is the guidelines, hopefully these will now be revised.