Community sentence for rape of a 13 year old

@prh47bridge - the statutory purpose of sentencing is changed if;

You change the application of a guideline, such that the purposes of the primary law is affected. That is wrong. It is changing the scope and application of law without scrutiny. A few judges and civil servants scoping these changes is not the same, is it.

The Sentencing Council in England and Wales derives its powers from primary legislation. It consults on its guidelines.

Does this happen in Scotland? It looks like someone decided to change the scope and application of sentencing law without a primary legislative change. There should have been one to back this up.

At the end of the article on the BBC: "A spokesperson for the Crown Office said: "As with all cases, the Crown will consider the sentence and give consideration to whether it might be unduly lenient."

No-one has rewritten the guideline (which, in any event, does not apply to Scotland).

In England & Wales the Sentencing Council decides how to balance punishment, rehabilitation and other factors in determining the sentence.

In England & Wales the Sentencing Council leans towards rehabilitation for young offenders. The sentencing guidelines specifically state, "For a child or young person the sentence should focus on rehabilitation where possible".

Both of the above are the same in Scotland. The main difference is that Scotland defines a young offender as being below 25, whereas England & Wales use 18.

On what basis can they appeal the sentence? None. There is no unduly lenient sentence scheme in Scotland.

The only thing that can be appealed is the conviction, by the defendant.

A leading KC in Scotland has described the sentencing as "extraordinary", which is lawyer speak for "absolutely fucking insane" so hopefully the Crown will appeal.

I can't bloody believe the defence KC is going to appeal. What? Undue leniency towards his client?

Maybe as this individual is rapistgender they just couldn't face another stramash over prisons.

It's one way of keeping the stats on youth crime low.

So....all that's needed is for an contract killer who's under the age of 25 to go to work on him and they'll be excused...have I got that right?

Nice little earner for people just starting out in life - carry out community service in the form of a spot of gene pool-cleansing and you'll have a house deposit in no time.

@prh47bridge - it is not wrong. The purposes of sentencing in England and Wales are set down in primary legislation (the Sentencing Act 2020). Punishment and rehabilitation are included but are equal in law.

To change that priority of equality, you would need an Act of Parliament. A guideline would not be a lawful change unless there was a primary legislative change to adjust those statutes.

In Scotland, it appears that someone just rewrote the guideline. With no primary legislation to change those purposes.

Absolutely horrendous. I echo what others have said- how can a teenager be informed and mature enough to to change gender but not to know that rape is wrong?

Some of the news reports said that at least one of the occasions was while the victim was asleep. It may be the case that the victim and the offender knew each other. With this in mind, we should probably avoid further discussion on this aspect in case it threatens the victim's anonymity.

This is wrong.

Judges in England & Wales are required by law to follow the sentencing guidelines unless it would be unjust to do so. The sentencing guidelines are set by the Sentencing Council, which mainly consists of judges, magistrates and lawyers, along with a senior police officer and the Chief Executive of Victim Support. The only civil servant is the Director of Public Prosecutions. They can change the sentencing guidelines without primary legislation. It would not need a debate in parliament. It would not need an Act of Parliament. Primary legislation is only needed to change the maximum and/or minimum sentences for an offence. In most cases, the maximum sentence under the guidelines is under the maximum sentence in law.

The Scottish Sentencing Council, like that for England & Wales, consists mainly of judges and lawyers along with a senior police officer, a victims expert (this position is currently vacant) and a lay person (currently an academic who lectures in criminology). As far as I can see, none of the current members can be described as a civil servant. The Scottish sentencing guidelines have slightly less legal force than those for England & Wales. Judges are not required to follow the guidelines. They are only required to take them into account and set out their reasons if they don't follow the guidelines.

They made rehabilitation rather than punishment a primary consideration, recommending an "individualistic approach" taking into account their life experiences

I have a big problem with this for sex crimes. Or any violent crime. Women have tough lives and childhoods too but we don’t rape or commit most violent offences. So he did this repeatedly but it’s okay because he’s 17? What a disgusting sentence.

This was what I was asking about earlier in the thread. The repeated aspect. Why would you arrange to meet someone again following the first assault? Again- in no way condoning this at all, but it definitely seems there is a lot unsaid in the information available, perhaps due to protecting the privacy of the young victim?

''HairyKitty · Today 08:21
The judge could have decided that in this particular defendants case, 4 years is a lifetime ago, he isn’t who he was in any way, and imprisoning him would have propelled him back to a life of further crime. Hence the non custodial sentence which is now allowed due to his age.''

FFS don't post nonsense like this.

For the girl it will never be a ''lifetime ago''. She will never forget what was done to her and the fact that she was then let down by the justice system.

Also this gives this man the green light to do it again as there were no consequences for his crime.

That judge has basically said if you are a man under 25 it is perfectly fine to assault and rape minors.

It is truly, truly appalling.

So as long as the male is under 25 he can do whatever the fuck he likes and won't go to jail, is that right?

What the fuck is going on in Scotland.

Appalling.

As usual the idea is to protect the man at all costs and find reasons why his crime should be excused/downgraded.

No wonder we have such low rape convictions in the first place. Women and girls feel like even if they report the crime, nothing or very little will be done to the perpetrator.

I hope there is a way to appeal to this.

She is under-age for goodness sake and he should be in jail.

I do hope he gets what is coming to him...

The judge could have decided that in this particular defendants case, 4 years is a lifetime ago, he isn’t who he was in any way, and imprisoning him would have propelled him back to a life of further crime. Hence the non custodial sentence which is now allowed due to his age.

If sentencing is about retribution then this doesn’t work. If it’s about rehabilitation it does. And I can’t see how the two can work together.

Since she was 13yrs he can only be found guilty of rape if she did not consent. It’s very very difficult to prove a rape case and secure a conviction, therefore there was be almost zero doubt that he did rape her.

I donot think he’s appealing the sentence but rather the conviction as he claimed it was consensual.

So yes, they did know one another and probably arranged to meet.
I wonder if he has been 16yrs or younger whether he would have been found guilty of rape? I think there must be quite a bit of info we don’t know.

Normally on these threads I explain how the sentence fits the sentencing guidelines. Here, I can't. If this was in England, he would definitely be facing several years in prison.

Scotland has only just started developing sentencing guidelines so, until recently, judges in Scotland broadly followed the sentencing guidelines for England. Scotland doesn't have sentencing guidelines for rape as yet. They do, however, have guidelines for sentencing young people, which they define as offenders under the age of 25. Those guidelines state that a custodial sentence should only be imposed when the court is satisfied that no other sentence is appropriate and, if a custodial sentence is imposed, it must be shorter than if the offender is 25 or over. In England, young people under 18 get lower sentences. This offender, being 21, would be treated the same as any other adult rapist.

My view is that this sentence is completely wrong. If this is what the Scottish Sentencing Council intended, I think they've got it badly wrong. If it wasn't what they intended, their guidelines should have been clearer. But, even with the guidelines as written, it was open to the judge to decide that anything other than a custodial sentence would not be appropriate. So, I agree that the judge has got this wrong. I hope the sentence gets increased on appeal.

If you are outraged by this, then there might be another, altogether more worrying aspect. Which is just for Scotland.

To make changes like these to England and Wales, you would need primary legislation. You would need to debate it. It takes an Act of Parliament. It is hard to do.

In Scotland, it looks like a group of civil servants have been given huge power to change the purpose of the criminal law. Sentencing guidelines are not law. They are written by lawyers and civil servants.

So you get things that sound like law but are not actual law in Scotland. With next to no scrutiny.

So by these guidelines of sentencing for 17 to 25 year olds will it follow that the predominantly young males involved in drugs and violent crime also be eligible for community service?

It was reported on Scottish news last night that he was appealing the conviction.