Boy spared custody over girl rape after watching p0rn

Can I just throw something else into the mix?

From what I have read, it was not a one time event, I think it happened more than once. The little girl was then unwell and told her mum she thought she had a baby in her tummy.

Whatever say you look at it, it's two failed children (as in children who have been failed ) who should never have been in that situation. But yes by twelve, you realise you don't do that, and not with a nine year old.

having a supervision requirement could end up meaning:
at home, with an allocated social worker keeping an eye and meeting the family regularly
at home but with a whole team involved from different disciplines
with foster carers who have specialist training in handling teenagers
in a children's unit
in a residential school
in a secure children's unit

all of those options (and more) are open to the children's panel over the next four years, and changes in the arrangements can be made each time he comes back to the panel (a minimum of once a year but could be much more frequent).

Sardine - I didn't mean the little girl abused him, I mean allowing him to access pornography is the abuse. By the adult that facilitated it.

The adults who give children unlimited Internet access are going to become criminally culpable.

The primary aim of the Childrens' Panel is to ensure the best interests of all of the children involved, so would be more about rehab than PUNISHMENT!

There is no evidence that James Bulger's killers actually watched violent movies, simply that they were available in the home of one of them.

Gitta Sereny writes well on the topic of children killing children in her book about the Mary Bell case.

James Bulger's killers would also have gone through the Children's Panel had they committed their offence in Scotland. We have various options, including "jail" (but we call them "secure units") and iirc they were both over the age of 8, which we consider the age of criminal responsibilty. (Or we did then, not sure if it's changed to 12 as I no longer work in child protection and have adult DC)

I think that England does go too far with jailing children. I disagree with jailing a child for a non violent offence.

I do wonder what kind of message it sends out not jailing for rape or other violent offences. I wander what the scots would do with James Bulger's killers. Afterall they were considerally younger than this boy and they had watched violent videos.

Virtually all criminals are victims in someway. No one was born evil. Its life circumstances which turn people bad.

Well rape and similar crimes need urgent attention the world over that is obvious.

The approach to children who offend needs to be addressed in England&Wales as a matter of urgency IMO.

Dreadful case last year with an attack on a young girl by two older boys and it was heard in the crown court as per adults with cross examination of young girl and everything. Wrong way to handle it IMO.

OTOH, I am very much aware of the Lindsay Armstrong case (previously mentioned in the feminism section as the girl who had to hold her knickers up in court, and who later committed suicide, even though her rapist was jailed; he's out now) so I'm very far from thinking we have this issue sorted.

I like our system. :)

No I hear that OLKN. I think the Scottish courts have handled this well from what I have read on that report and on here.

Well, tbf, SQ, Skye is a close community with a small population, but we're not talking Summer Isle here; Skye attracts thousands of tourists every year, and the (non-toll) bridge makes a huge difference. It's far from a small, isolated community as envisaged by those who live in huge cities.

This offence was committed months ago, and the boy (who would not have been at the same school as his victim when the rape happened) was moved hundreds of miles away very soon after. It is not the case that he has been able to hang around and hassle his victim.

I imagine lots and lots of children have unfettered access to the internet TBH.

Ah in the article the way it said "scottish island community" sounded like a small and fairly isolated sort of place!

The article says he had 'unfettered access" and that what he was known to have seen was similar to what he was known to have done.

This is a case in the Scottish system, under the Scottish sexual offences act, and I think there are some differences between the Scottish and English/Welsh trial procedures and sentencing norms for children too.

Referral to the Children's Panel is a good thing, if there is to be hope of rehabilitation.

I am glad there is no reference to the victim in the reporting. If anonymity is important for adults, it is doubly so for children and I do not take silence on that as indicative of lack of focus.

The "island community" is Skye, hardly isolated; there's a bridge and everything! The Childrens' Panel system is not foster care.

ReallyTired, in Scotland we assume that a child who commits such an awful crime has him/herself been the victim of crime (sexual abuse of some sort, in this case) and we do not view it as appropriate to PUNISH victims. In this case, the boy was moved hundreds of miles from home and accommodated in a secure unit; he was not given "the freedom the average teen has." He pled guilty asap, and the girl was at least spared the agony of a trial.

Not convinced with that argument at all custardo.

Boys this age have been committing sexual assaults and rapes from long before there was porn on the internet.

A mistake I think to assume he is a poor corrupted boy. A mistake also to assume he is inherently evil. Either could be true. Fact is though even if he was corrupted by the films he raped a much smaller person which is a terrible, violent act.

Psychiatric intervention is needed to try and see which sort of criminal he is.

And as RT points out the girl in this, the poor girl, who is the focus of no-one. She needs safety and support and if that means the boy needs to leave his family then so be it IMO.

I don't agree with him being put into foster care. Many children in foster care get moved round from placement to placement and they end up with major pychological scars. Nice children without crininal records often have foster placements fail. I don't think he would stand a chance in the care system.

I feel the stablity of a severe EBD boading school might be better for him. Also the high ratios of staff would keep other children safe.

This bit is key though

"Judge Lady Smith said the case would be referred to the Children's Panel and the boy kept under supervision."

He has not just been released, I imagine (but really am guessing here, not being scottish or an expert in this) that the children's panel have powers to get him to do stuff and he will be watched closely monitored have to have therapy all sorts of things.

What bothers me on rereading it is that this happened in a "scottish island community" - places with small populations and very close communities. I imagine there are issues there and I hope they are being addressed in a serious way. Even from the POV that at the moment these children prob go to the same school. She shouldn't have to have him anywhere in her life, or anywhere she knows is even nearby.

the whole thing is sad.

the people tha tshould really be brought to account is his parents.

he lost his childhood too - that isn;t negating anything that the little girl experiences - but i think it is far far to easy to depict themale in this scenario as a villain

"Custody for children cures nothing."

The justice system is about PUNISHEMENT as well rehabitation. The lad has been convicted of rape and recieved no punishment. I think a secure severe EBD unit with boarding provision would help the boy and keep other children safe. I agree that prison is not appriopiate for him, but I do not think he should have the freedom the average teen has.

He raped a nine year old pre pubscent child. Not a teen but a little girl. Imagine the physical pain and terror she would have felt when the penis was inserted into her. Its likely that she would have bled from the physical damage. She would be bruised all over, and deeply ashamed. There is nothing romantic about rape.

That little girl has lost her entire childhood. She will struggle with mental scars for the rest of her life. It will interfere with her marriage. She will get flash backs in her thirties. It will cause her difficulties giving birth and put her at greater risk of depression.

Anyone would think the boy was victim. He knew his actions were wrong. He probably thinks its one massive joke at the moment. I feel we should empathise with the little girl and her family a little bit more.

I don't think the little girl abused the boy.
That idea makes me feel really uncomfortable.

In law no child under 13 can consent to sexual activity.
But for sure a child under 13 can be guilty of sexual abuse. He sexually abused the little girl. He raped her. This is not a crime which was committed mutually.

How that needs to be handled is a different question.