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

This. 4 years is sickening. They should be given life.

We don't know if she'd read any or it. We know know if she reads any more than the daily mail articles. Or maybe she'd read just Rowlands remarks, which went further, or maybe she read some or all of the court of appeal judgement.

It's not an attack btw, it's just the common sense position that you can't give an informed decision of something if not sufficient informed on it.

"I feel like I am the one who has been sentenced, I feel like I am the one living in a prison even though I did nothing wrong."

This, said by one of the victims, is so true. She has a life sentence; her attackers being given only a few years in comparison feels terribly cruel.

Do you mean Baroness Carr?

You know what, after the initial judgment I said that the judge had placed these boys in a very dangerous position. If the public feel the law is not protecting them, there are great risks.

One argument I made then was that prison would actually be protective for these boys.

https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/26246433.cps-fire-inaccurate-fordingbridge-rape-case-claim/

You are making ad hom attacks.

There was a very interesting interview on Sky yesterday morning with a retired female judge. She gave a very well informed (obviously) and balanced analysis of this case. She wouldn’t agree with most of the posts on here.

I don't support the death penalty.

But anyway, it isn't up to me - the mothers of the victims and the victims themselves have spoken about how it has affected them and how they feel.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg53d9p18vo

the girls initially at least appeared to express consent

Are you sure you read it? In the case of C1 (bold mine):

"C1 initially said "no" on a couple of occasions but then said "yes". The four of them went back to the same underpass where they remained for about 90 minutes.
C1 said in her ABE interview that the only reason she had said "yes" was that she "didn't know what they would have done if I didn't say 'yeah'". She said that she felt "petrified" and "cornered".

And another genuine question @Circe7 if learning difficulties means you are unable to understand not to be cruel and violent, how should society deal with these types of people?

The poster said she had read enough of the child rape descriptions to be unable to stomach any more.

You said if she hadn't read the full thing, she couldn't have an informed opinion.

She asked what exactly was in the report that was so important to know – to be informed on – that might alter or impact her opinion.

You have been unable to point out any pivotal or crucial aspects that could affect a person's opinion on the case, which were mentioned in the report but not in the media.

I have read it, and fail to see what you think is in there that could significantly change a person's perspective on the case.

It seems there is a stalemate? Those that work in the system argue imprisonment makes people more likely to reoffend but there's no money put forward to resource the rehabilitation that they argue works. So where do we go from here?

@Circe7 that sounds good in theory. I think from what you are saying that imprisonment makes further offending more likely and alternative rehabilitation works better. But it sounds like there isn't really any as like so many other areas in modern life, there's no money and no will to do it. So then what?

I’ve posted some of my views earlier in the thread. But basically I think that the court of appeal sentences were about right and a custodial sentence was appropriate. That the boys’ very significant learning difficulties may have contributed to their ability to understand consent and the criminality of their actions in a context where the girls initially at least appeared to express consent. That I can understand why the initial judge came to the decision he did based on the guidance and don’t think he should be sacked or rebuked. And that there should be more resources put into rehabilitation in general but particularly for young offenders and that it is right for the youth justice system to prioritise rehabilitation.

But there’s a range of valid opinions here.

So where is the compassion for victims? I see none of it in your posts, or the posts by others defending these boys, and excusing their actions.

Additionally, what about a thought for the victims they may well have in the future, should their 'rehabilitation' (which is what, exactly?) not work?

Just that.

You've read it and come to a conclusion based on it.

The poster I was debating with hadn't read it. Or more precisely had read some, but not all, but bizarrely wants me to tell her what she didn't read (but obviously not in any detail).

Just that this poster says said couldn't face reading the facts (which I totally understand), but that she didn't need to, but that she didn't need to know what actually happened to be able to judge what sentence the boys should have.

If someone has read what happened and feels these boys should be imprisoned for life or executed, then fair enough. I disagree, but it's based on a knowledge of what happened.

There's a reason that rape (like most offences) has comprehensive sentencing guidelines with categories, aggravating and mitigating factors etc. The factual background is important. The psychological impact on the victim is an important part of that and what HHJ Rowland didn't take enough account of.

Compassion for victims and believing that we should try to rehabilitate where possible aren’t mutually exclusive. They can go together.

There’s no realistic prospect within our criminal justice system or international human rights standards of locking up thirteen year olds for life. This would very rarely happen even for more serious crimes. Even if we multiplied these boys’ revised sentences by 10, they would still get out one day.

So just from a practical perspective, you need to consider the best way to make them safe in once living in society.

Theoretically you might be able to rehabilitate within a custodial setting. As someone said upthread, taking a child offender away from a disordered or abusive home and the context in which they offended should be a good opportunity for reducing reoffending. But realistically YOIs are not doing that the majority of the time at present. Children can spend 22 hours a day in a cell, there is a lot of violence, the facilities are understaffed and underfunded. So the offenders who come out are even more likely to offend than those who went in.

I have no idea if it would be possible to rehabilitate these specific boys. But I would think that if (as is very common) a child offender has a different home life, has been abused themselves often including sexual abuse for perpetrators of sexual crimes (often to the extent that they have been removed from their family and are in care), has significant learning difficulties or mental health problems, addiction issues, limited education etc, there is a lot that could be done to try for more overall benefit to society and less cost than locking them up for life. And because a child does not have the same understanding of issues like consent and the same impulse control etc as an adult, there is at least the potential that they develop to the point that they will not offend in future with the appropriate interventions.

I read the documentation too — at least, what happened, the sentencing, and the notes from paragraph 178 on, while skimming over the rest.

I agree, two disgusting occurrences of rape via coercion and intimidation clearly took place, with the three boys acting in a pack rape manner, egging each other on and taking deliberate pleasure in degrading their victims.

I'm really not sure what we're supposed to be reading that would change our perspectives?

I read the documentation. What actually happened were two disgusting rapes. Am I missing something?@Babyboomtastic

What's ridiculous, or bizarre?

There seems to be more concern and compassion for the perpetrators, than the victims. I'm also not sure what's so ridiculous in asking if they're capable of gang rape as children, what will they escalate to as adults? Will they be capable of learning not to abuse women or girls if they haven't by this age? Will they ever not be a danger to the women and girls around them, given how deeply ingrained their misogyny and sexually violent beliefs seem to be? How likely is genuine rehabilitation, and given how undereported sexual violence and domestic abuse are, how would you even know?

No, I find your presumption that I'm a psychic who can tell you which bits of something you didn't read, worthy of a laugh emoji.

I guess pitchforks and frothing don't take much thought. Who needs to know what actually happened when we can just get angry instead eh?

In that case @Circe7now is a great time for you to make the case. I'm open to hearing it.

As a victim of CSA and rape, personally, I would've felt better if the abuser I'd reported (my stepfather) had been given life imprisonment or execution, instead of community service because he pled guilty and was 'sorry'. It would've definitely made a difference about how I felt, and how I coped as a teenager going forward, as I would've felt safe from him and as though society cared about me.

This is a ubiquitous issue when the media and public form opinions on criminal justice but particularly prevalent on this thread.

How can anyone feel qualified to express such strong views without (a) knowing the actual facts of the case (b) knowing the law and sentencing guidelines the judge was applying (c) knowing what the judge and court of appeal actually said.

@WrongKindOfFeminist What would this consideration for the victims look like for you?

@OtterlyAstounding seems to think it's the death penalty or life imprisonment for the perpetrators.

Is that what you would like to see? Do you think that would make a difference to how the girls feel about what happened to them? This is a genuine question - I'm not trying to goad. I'm genuinely interested in whether you think that would make a difference to the girls' ability to cope with what has happened to them.