Content warning - Teenage boys escape prison for rape

I thought in Scotland, as JK Rowling said, the first rape is free, if you are under 25.

I just went to submit the request for review form and there’s a message saying we are reviewing the case held at Southampton Crown Court and not to submit unless you are personally connected to the case.

Basically, a transcript of the Laura Kuenssberg interview

Minister breaks down in tears on live TV as schoolgirl raped by two teen boys says decision to spare them jail was like a 'rock straight in my face' | Daily Mail Online

He seems to have completely disregarded the section on aggravating factors.

And there were many. However, I'd be in favour of a change in the law (or sentencing guidelines?) such that every rapist got an automatic prison/incarceration sentence, regardless of any "aggravating factors" or age of the perpetrator.

The girls gave interviews on Laura Kuenssberg this morning, Darren Jones almost crying when interviewed afterwards. This is not going to be let go by parliament and is under review.
Heartbreaking to listen to but great that they can put their sides across.

There's another BBC article that explains how the judge reached his decision on how to sentence the rapists

How are teens guilty of rape sentenced? - BBC News https://share.google/G7qEZlfFFXGL7tvZ4

The article helpfully includes a handy-dandy link to the sentencing guidelines. I copied it just below

Sexual offences – Sentencing children and young people share.google/bDZYY8IxJtcr6rO5K

He seems to have completely disregarded the section on aggravating factors. Although there's links within links and I haven't followed and read everything.

A 'nice' little coda, although women and girls bear the brunt of sexual offences (almost exclusively at the hands of males) guess which protected characteristic is missing from the following which would be an aggravating factor

Offence motivated by, or demonstrating hostility based on any of the following characteristics or presumed characteristics of the victim: religion, race, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

Girl raped by boys spared jail tells BBC judge's decision was like 'rock in my face' - BBC News

Really hope the review of the sentence comes up with something more appropriate. The judge is clearly deeply misogynistic.

It would probably in any case have benefitted the rehabilitation of these young offenders to have been removed from the anti social background they come from. They may not all be the same, but traveller groups I have encountered have been downright hostile and intimidating to non-travellers, and it was heart breaking to see how even young children are encouraged to despise others outside their own travelling culture. A physical break from such toxic attitudes, that brings them into realistic contact with the wider culture could only benefit these offenders, and help protect the rest of us from them in future. In that sense their parents have a lot to answer for.
From every other point of view too - to meet justice - they should have a heavy custodial sentence.

My heart bleeds for those brave girls and their parents. To go through all that, face up to the gruelling court process, secure a conviction - then have your rapist get this piddling sentence must be devastating.

One of them was trapped the times, this was gang rape. I just cannot comprehend this sentence.

The point of justice is supposed to also be restoration and retribution, making the victims feel like justice has been served. This sentence does not do this. Its supposed to support the rule of law - it doesn't achieve that either, it demonstrates that if you are found guilty of breaking a law there will not be consequences. It is supposed to protect the victims/public - it doesn't do that. Its no deterrent. The only objective the sentence supposedly meets is rehabilitation.

It makes me sick that judges like these seem to think that teen boys can't be expected to understand that no means no - a toddler can understand that!

I'd like there to be more information about how this joke of a punishment is supposed to actually result in rehabilitation. Where's their evidence that it will work?

So who is this judge? There are far too many ultra lenient judges out there for our society to bare!

It further enrages me that these boys had the sheer audacity to plead not guilty when they had themselves released film 100% proving their guilt.

So then the taxpayer has to fund a five week trial...bet that didn't cost a couple of quid!

As for not wanting to criminalise them, they ARE criminals! Foul pieces of scum who the judge has, in effect, rewarded for their savagery.

In due course, I'd like to know just how many complaints were made to the government about this as I can't be the only one who is seeing the death of Justice and it is that aspect of this case that should be of huge concern to every citizen of this country.

I think this judge should be made to apologise to the women and girls of the UK, who are being led to believe that conviction of violent sexual assault upon them, with a weapon and threats, will not lead to any meaningful outcome for the rapists.

Also, either deselect this person as a judge, or make them undergo retraining?

I completely agree.

Well, they did provide evidence on film of their offences

This is an interesting article, especially on the subject of the chances and risks of reoffending.

From the article

Characteristics which make someone more dangerous and more likely to offend are officially defined in the sentencing guidelines as mitigating when they are aggravating. Those criminals who are low IQ, don’t understand the concept of consent and are easily led are much more likely to continue committing crimes. As noted criminal barrister Adam King said to me, ‘given their disproportionately high rates of reoffending, young, impulsive criminals can be seen as precisely the people law-abiding citizens need protecting from.’

https://spectator.com/article/when-teenage-rapists-walk-free/

Although he is supposed to administer justice to and for all, it seems he only does so for the male half of the population. He is not therefore fitted to be a judge. His remarks in this case were shameful in their partisanship - care for the future of the rapists, none for those of the female victims. I despair of the outright misogyny in society from the top to the the dregs, both of which are shown in this awful case.

I just heard about the review on the radio and came to post about it, glad to see posters have already done so. I'm simply incredulous at this non-sentence, what the Hell was the judge thinking? He should be sacked.

As everyone has said, it sends a terrible message to boys, that rape is minor. To girls, that they are not relevant and of little worth.

We can only hope that Hermer puts them away for years, but I'm not confident. He's a long time ally of Starmer.

Found an article about the referral

https://archive.ph/7RsBT

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/attorney-general-rapists-spared-jail-sbrvdkr0z

I don't understand the judge's reference to 'peer pressure'. Was there something in the evidence about this? Or, as I suspect, did he pull it out of his arse? The sentence he said, 'None of you need to go to prison today.', has haunted me. Did saying that make the judge feel like Santa Claus? I picture the relief on the faces of the rapists. I can't bear to imagine how those two young girls felt when they heard it. I hope they weren't there for the sentencing.

I hope the AG rectifies this.

It's absolutely despicable. As well as the impact on the individuals in the case, it's sending a terrifying message to the girls and women in this country. And to the boys/men, that they can do whatever the hell they like to women.

Here's hoping when reviewed they get meaningful sentences .

Yes you can I think. You just need to be careful to ensure you are complaining about his behaviour not the sentence ( which can be complained about elsewhere) his remarks were sexist and offensive.

What you can report: Incidents of personal misconduct such as the use of offensive/racist/sexist language, bullying, aggressive outbursts, or falling asleep on the bench. You do not need to be a party to the case to report this kind of behavior.

Also be aware the organisation that oversees Judicial conduct JCIO has been refusing to respond to FOIA requests about complaints and why almost no complaints are even allowed to go to the investigation stage. It's clear the Judiciary is rotton and only loud voices and extreme pressure are going to break this boys club down.