Court of Appeal to review sentence in teenage rape case

[pusskins06]

Good news Sentencing of two teenage boys spared jail in rape case sent to Court of Appeal - Yahoo News UK

Saw this - a breaking news alert

Thank God.

Good. I’m interested in what happens in terms of process. They get recalled for the sentencing? What happens if they appeal this as they can’t understand reviews (bearing in mind they apparently couldn’t understand consent?)

Good. I know they're under age, but (unless they've got processing issues), theyre able to understand what they've done is wrong. They showed no remorse after the first attack, as they've gone on to do it again. And ... for all we know there could be another victim, who hasn't come forward

Absolutely should be reviewed. Judge was thinking of the boys and not the girls

The judge should be removed from that position.

Edited as the coverage unfolds.

I'm following the BBC coverage of the appeal decision. I think the original decision is absolutely disgusting and an insult to anyone who has been affected by SA. Yes they are children but they knew what they were doing.

"The judge says both offenders X and Y will be sentenced to four years' detention, but they will not have to stay in that detention for all that time....She says time spent on curfew before the trial will count toward the sentence."

This 4 years feels like creative accounting, I wonder what will actually be served.

They're above the age of criminal responsibility. Why on earth is the system busting a gut to keep these lads on the streets.

Indeed. Why aren’t they being punished for being convicted rapists. And are they actually safe to be around other girls/women if they don’t understand consent - which is an argument I read in defence of the
pathetic original sentence.

Why does the judge keep banging on about the “very young age” of the boys. Infuriating.

very young is 3 and 4. Not 13 and 14

They kept reiterating that children going into custody is avoided wherever possible because the child's welfare and mental health needs to be put first. What about the welfare and mental health of the victims, their families, and the wider community.

I am a teacher and children are taught from a very young age about consent, and this is reiterated year after year in our curriculum. Rape is not something that you do accidentally or something that happens in a moment so quickly that you couldn't stop and think. I cannot see an excuse for their behaviour here.

The James Bulger case was a huge contributor to the age of criminal responsibility being reduced to 10, so why does this case not reflect that the boys are entirely culpable.

Agree. And the judge does reference the fact that the boys committed the crime against more than one victim and degraded them further by filming the crimes, so obviously they knew that what they were doing was wrong.

I know Tom Little KC, the barrister for the attorney-general. He's a good egg and a friend to women. He got Sarah Everard's killer (I'm not going to write his foul name here) jailed for a whole-life tariff, and he got Jo Cox MP's murderer convicted. He also successfully prosecuted the killer of David Amess MP, and Max Hastings and Constance Marten and Mark Gordon for their foul crimes. So I am a bit surprised at the "leniency" of the sentences handed out to X and Y today, as I'm sure he would have argued for the absolute maximum sentence possible. I can only conclude that the guidelines have now been followed as stringently as possible (I'm at work so I haven't had a chance to read everything fully yet).

I hope that, as with the James Bulger case, this case contributes to the actual sentencing guidelines for children committing violent crimes to be reviewed further.

Isn't this case a prime example of how everyone's feelings have to be considered nowadays, and the attackers' feelings were put on a par with those of the victims? I can't help feeling that we have gone too far with this. At the end of the day, these boys X and Y (and Z tbh, the vile little shit who stood by and complicitly filmed the second attack) are rapists and they need to be in a position where they can physically never rape again. I don't care if this involves a lengthy custodial sentence and I don't care if this is traumatic for them; I care about the victims and I care about all the women and girls that these two vile pieces of shit might hurt in future once their 4-year (let's face it, they'll be out in 2) sentences have been completed. I want a cast-iron guarantee that these people will never attack another woman or girl ever again.

Is there actually any concrete evidence anywhere that any rapist, ever in the history of time, has only ever raped once and then has 100% never done it again after a custodial sentence?? I bet my house there isn't.

I hope the increased sentences are of some comfort to tbe victims.

He should go to jail with them.

It's good the sentences have been revised - but I don't see why they had to bring apparent "misinformation" into it - that had absolutely nothing to do with sentencing and makes it sound like the court of appeal are still trying to minimise what was happened

I’m even more angry than I was when the first betrayal of those brave heroines was read out. Four years for two rapes?? And this is supposed to be the righting of a wrong? Women and girls really are worth very little in the eyes of the law.

Because the judiciary does not take rape seriously.

My sister was raped and I can't even begin to explain how traumatic, life-changing and fucking awful it was and still is 💔 and it is beyond me why this utter violation of those girls was not punished more harshly.

so true, absolute awful.

It seems a common theme for the perpetrators to be sympathised with more so than the victims in sexual assault and rape cases. Lets not ruin these men/boys lives for their silly "mistake"

It is still sadly very much a men’s world where the impact of the punishment on these reprobates seems to be the main concern here. I don’t know what why the legal
system is bending over backwards to be lenient, we all know they will be a danger to women and should be locked away and tough shit if it’s hard on them. Am so angry.

Seems like for adult male rapists the concern is about their reputation and employment prospects (ref the appalling Ulster rugby case) and if they are young males they are too young to be punished

That's not correct. Mary Bell was charged with murder at the age of 11 in 1968. (She was 10 when committing the crime.)The age of 10 was set by the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.

Sorry, I wasn't aware. I suppose my general point was just that if we are saying that children are legally and criminally responsible for their actions at 10, why at 13/14 was there so much emphasis on their 'very young age' being a factor in their lenient sentence.