Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think these boys should have been incarcerated?

779 replies

newrubylane · 21/05/2026 14:06

BBC News - Teenage boys sentenced for raping lone girls
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clypg68e2neo

I've never started an AIBU before, but I'm genuinely really shocked. I'm just not sure how this sentence is justifiable. Their actions were premeditated and deliberate, they were carrying a knife and they filmed themselves. They're obviously a danger to women/girls, and probably to other boys too.

If anyone knows how and why this sentence might have come about, I'd be interested to hear it.

A footpath beside a river, leading under a road bridge

Teenage boys sentenced for raping lone girls in Fordingbridge

The boys filmed themselves laughing and encouraging each other as they raped girls in separate attacks.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clypg68e2neo

OP posts:
Thread gallery
37
aquitodavia · Yesterday 12:20

BloominNora · Yesterday 11:09

Petitioning for the boys to have their sentence reviewed and upgraded to custodial will also do nothing to bring about justice for the girls though and beyond a short term sense of relief will do nothing to address their long term trauma.

The boys were found guilty, they will have a criminal record for life, even if their conviction is spent. It will always show up on any future enhanced DBS checks. Depending on what the judge ordered, they may have to report to the police their whereabouts and will be on the sex offenders register for between 5 years and life.

Being in a Youth Offending Institute for 18months, with little access to rehabilitation support and getting into regular fights will either force them to become 'alphas' and come out with an untouchable arrogance or they will be bullied and beaten to the point where they come out with an enormous amount of resentment. Neither of those will do anything to help them understand the severity of what they did and is in fact likely to increase the likelihood of them re-offending.

Community orders like YROs, which can also result in them losing their freedom through secure orders, tagging etc are more likely to get them access to better rehabilitation services and significantly reduce the likelihood of re-offending.

If the sentence is reviewed and they are given a custodial sentence, it won't be for life - it will likely not be for more than the three years that their YRO is - maybe even less.

Calling for them to be incarcerated does nothing to help the victims and in fact increases the likelihood of re-offending and creating more victims in the future. It's mob justice.

If the concern is truly about helping the girls, it would be much more effective to use the outrage to demand that support for victims is improved.

Well, advocates against VAWG are currently lining up to disagree with you. And the wider message matters too, both to would be perpetrators and victims weighing whether to report. We're in such a delicate moment in the fight against violence against women, rape culture is thriving, only a small percentage of victims ever report and it's precisely because of cases like this. Every time this is the outcome in a serious case like this, violent boys and men are emboldened and victims convinced it will only bring them more pain and suffering to go to the police, ultimately for nothing.

Brunts12 · Yesterday 12:20

BloominNora · Yesterday 11:09

Petitioning for the boys to have their sentence reviewed and upgraded to custodial will also do nothing to bring about justice for the girls though and beyond a short term sense of relief will do nothing to address their long term trauma.

The boys were found guilty, they will have a criminal record for life, even if their conviction is spent. It will always show up on any future enhanced DBS checks. Depending on what the judge ordered, they may have to report to the police their whereabouts and will be on the sex offenders register for between 5 years and life.

Being in a Youth Offending Institute for 18months, with little access to rehabilitation support and getting into regular fights will either force them to become 'alphas' and come out with an untouchable arrogance or they will be bullied and beaten to the point where they come out with an enormous amount of resentment. Neither of those will do anything to help them understand the severity of what they did and is in fact likely to increase the likelihood of them re-offending.

Community orders like YROs, which can also result in them losing their freedom through secure orders, tagging etc are more likely to get them access to better rehabilitation services and significantly reduce the likelihood of re-offending.

If the sentence is reviewed and they are given a custodial sentence, it won't be for life - it will likely not be for more than the three years that their YRO is - maybe even less.

Calling for them to be incarcerated does nothing to help the victims and in fact increases the likelihood of re-offending and creating more victims in the future. It's mob justice.

If the concern is truly about helping the girls, it would be much more effective to use the outrage to demand that support for victims is improved.

Hm, 'mob justice', really? People are having a measured discussion on a forum, some have already submitted a formal legal referral through the correct channels. That is not mob justice. That framing is dismissive and frankly a little insulting.
On the substantive points, you are presenting a very one-sided picture of youth custody. Yes, some young offenders come out worse. Some don't. The quality of provision varies enormously and to write off all custodial settings as brutalising environments that inevitably increase reoffending is an oversimplification that the evidence does not uniformly support.
You argue that a custodial sentence won't be longer than the YRO anyway. But that misses the point entirely. Custody and a community order are not interchangeable simply because their durations might be similar. One involves a significant loss of liberty as a direct consequence of the offending. That matters, not as revenge, but as proportionality.
You've also told us what would 'truly' help the victims. I'd suggest that neither of us is in a position to speak for them. Some victims find that a proportionate sentence is itself part of healing. Dismissing that as mere 'short term relief' is not yours to decide.
And yes, absolutely, victim support should be improved. Nobody is arguing otherwise. But 'focus on victims instead' is not a counter-argument to sentencing concerns. It's a deflection. We can care about both.

EstoyRobandoSuCasa · Yesterday 12:28

I’m horrified by the claim that when young people commit serious crimes, we have to choose between punishment and rehabilitation as it isn’t possible to have both. If that’s true, then the system is hopeless and young offenders must be laughing at it. Where’s the deterrent?

shinysabre · Yesterday 12:32

Bobcurlygirl · Yesterday 11:23

As well as filling in an unduly lenient request via gov UK, why don't we all fill in the "complain about a Judge" form on the gov website. You can't challenge a sentence but I am going to challenge his statements as being misogynistic as he praised the boys and made no reference to the girls.. Anyone else fancy complaining?

Yes indeed

shinysabre · Yesterday 12:42

from the Telegraph today

Three teenage boys spared prison terms for raping two girls could have their “unduly lenient” sentences overturned after a public outcry. Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, is considering whether to refer the case to the Court of Appeal to decide if the three boys should have a tougher punishment.
It is understood Lord Hermer’s office has received a number of submissions requesting that he refer the case to the Court of Appeal under the unduly lenient sentence scheme.

The three teenage boys raped the two girls in separate attacks which they “brazenly filmed” on their phones, the court was told.
The film showed the boys laughing and encouraging each other as they sexually assaulted the girls, one of whom they raped at knifepoint.
Two of the boys were 14 when they carried out their attacks in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, in 2024 and 2025. The third boy was 13 when he aided and abetted the assaults on the second girl.

The boys were given youth rehabilitation orders and walked out of court with 11 rape convictions between them.
Explaining his sentencing decision at Southampton Crown Court, Judge Nicholas Rowland said: “I should avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily and understand the effects of their behaviour and support their reintegration into society.”

The judge did stress the “seriousness” of the boys’ crimes and said their filming of the attacks made them even “more serious”. But he then emphasised their “very young” ages and said: “None of you need to go to prison today.”
Alicia Kearns, the shadow safeguarding minister, said she was seeking a review of the sentences as unduly lenient.

“This gang lured and gang-raped at knifepoint a young girl while they filmed it, laughing. I will refer their sentences as unduly lenient – let’s see if this time the Government again says the rapists are too immature to receive stronger sentences,” she said.
“Who are these disgraceful judges? Judge Nicholas Rowland praised the boys for their conduct during the trial. ‘I think of you as very young and none of you have been in any big trouble before.’”

Laura Trott, the shadow education secretary said: “No custodial sentence for a gang rape is sickening. The judge even praises the boys involved. This cannot be allowed to stand.”
Donna Jones, the Hampshire police and crime commissioner, backed any appeal against the “too lenient” sentences.
“I’m deeply concerned these boys felt they could carry out such terrifying acts and share them online and not go to prison,” she said.
“Their sentences reflect a clear focus on rehabilitation rather than criminalisation. They are far too lenient.”
Ms Jones added: “Should the victims and their families take the decision to appeal the sentences, I will offer my support.”
‘Labour’s soft-touch sentencing policy’
Nick Timothy, the shadow justice secretary has written to David Lammy, the Justice Secretary, to rethink proposals to imprison fewer teenagers.
“These despicable gang-rapists deserve to be put behind bars, but Labour’s soft-touch sentencing policy means even fewer young criminals will be sent to prison,” he said.
“David Lammy should drop his dangerous plans to weaken sentences for violent criminals and support this case’s referral to the unduly lenient sentencing scheme.”

Det Sgt Naomi Stocker from Hampshire Police praised the girls’ “immense bravery” and added that “we are liaising with our partners at the Crown Prosecution Service in relation to the sentence passed”.
The victim of the first attack was 15 when she was raped three times in an underpass by the River Avon in Fordingbridge, during what she had thought was a first date.

She had travelled to meet one of the boys for the first time, after he had begun a “relationship” with her on the social media platform Snapchat.

But then two other boys appeared. During the trial, the court heard she was “petrified”, felt “cornered and trapped” and feared being thrown into the river.
The boys shared a video of the attacks on social media, resulting in her receiving abusive messages, prosecutors said.
During the sentencing hearing, the girl spoke anonymously from behind a screen and said: “No one deserves the trauma of being raped. I will never get that innocence back.”
‘All I want to do is die’
She also wrote a poem directed towards her attackers which included the line: “All I want to do is die. I no longer have fear for when that comes.”
The second girl was 14 when she met the boys at Fordingbridge Recreation Ground, and was raped repeatedly in a nearby field.
Forensic evidence revealed her leggings had been cut with a “sharp instrument”.
Video footage seen in court during the trial showed her lying motionless on the ground with “her face buried in her hands”, while another boy was heard shouting words of encouragement.
In a statement read on her behalf immediately before sentencing, she described suffering “flashbacks”.

“Sometimes I can still feel their hands on me,” her statement said.
She added: “I feel ashamed, insecure and uncomfortable in my own body. The person I was before has completely gone.”

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 12:47

Which poster was it that said we were all wasting our time ? And that the quantity of reports didn’t matter?
perhaps they should revisit their opinion!

itsasmallworldafteralll · Yesterday 12:49

Let them be free, but castrate them first.

WearyAuldWumman · Yesterday 12:57

AccidentallyWesAnderson · Yesterday 10:36

Quite, but the Scottish Gov think you can change your sex from 16 (luckily this was blocked). Via my job I’ve heard young male criminals say to me ‘but I’m under 25, I’m no getting any jail’. When jail is exactly where they should be. They know nothing will happen to them. So depressing.

When I was still working they’d tell me that they could do as they pleased until the age of 16. It’s so much worse now.

WearyAuldWumman · Yesterday 12:58

itsasmallworldafteralll · Yesterday 12:49

Let them be free, but castrate them first.

They’d still be dangerous.

OonaStubbs · Yesterday 13:08

The justice system in this country isn't fit for purpose. We lock people up for selling dodgy firesticks but violent gang rapists are set free. To may people working within the system see criminals as the real victims, and see it as their job to "save them" while the actual victims of crime aren't even a consideration. There needs to be drastic change and fast.

Pigeonpoodle · Yesterday 14:18

If the concern is truly about helping the girls, it would be much more effective to use the outrage to demand that support for victims is improved.

Surely that support starts with the perpetrators of these acts being locked away so the victims don’t have to worry about encountering them again.

Sure, they have a restraining order, but they committed multiple violent gang rapes without being imprisoned… so, there’s a good chance they’d wouldn’t care about breaking a mere restraining order.

BlueMum16 · Yesterday 14:26

Bobcurlygirl · Yesterday 11:23

As well as filling in an unduly lenient request via gov UK, why don't we all fill in the "complain about a Judge" form on the gov website. You can't challenge a sentence but I am going to challenge his statements as being misogynistic as he praised the boys and made no reference to the girls.. Anyone else fancy complaining?

You can challenge a sentence. Many of us have completed the form.

BlueMum16 · Yesterday 14:29

BloominNora · Yesterday 11:09

Petitioning for the boys to have their sentence reviewed and upgraded to custodial will also do nothing to bring about justice for the girls though and beyond a short term sense of relief will do nothing to address their long term trauma.

The boys were found guilty, they will have a criminal record for life, even if their conviction is spent. It will always show up on any future enhanced DBS checks. Depending on what the judge ordered, they may have to report to the police their whereabouts and will be on the sex offenders register for between 5 years and life.

Being in a Youth Offending Institute for 18months, with little access to rehabilitation support and getting into regular fights will either force them to become 'alphas' and come out with an untouchable arrogance or they will be bullied and beaten to the point where they come out with an enormous amount of resentment. Neither of those will do anything to help them understand the severity of what they did and is in fact likely to increase the likelihood of them re-offending.

Community orders like YROs, which can also result in them losing their freedom through secure orders, tagging etc are more likely to get them access to better rehabilitation services and significantly reduce the likelihood of re-offending.

If the sentence is reviewed and they are given a custodial sentence, it won't be for life - it will likely not be for more than the three years that their YRO is - maybe even less.

Calling for them to be incarcerated does nothing to help the victims and in fact increases the likelihood of re-offending and creating more victims in the future. It's mob justice.

If the concern is truly about helping the girls, it would be much more effective to use the outrage to demand that support for victims is improved.

The boys are from backgrounds that don't care about DBS.

Their background/culture does not value females. Being released into their home environment is not going to help them realise the error of their ways.

Martha23 · Yesterday 14:46

I reckon they’ve had a few forms sent in then ha 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

AIBU to think these boys should have been incarcerated?
Goseeastarwar · Yesterday 15:01

Just on the BBC website in last 20 minutes
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy2x7wxjego

Allisnotlost1 · Yesterday 15:25

Sworkmum · Yesterday 00:19

If they had life sentences then that would be different. But in reality if they were given custodial sentences. They wouldn’t be anywhere near that length and would likely be less than the 2 years.

Im not disputing the sentences seem lenient, but I am saying that in reality the way it works, this likely is the best option for rehabilitation and a longer term. This will not likely feel good enough justice for their victims, I am not saying that is wrong either. But if we want to prevent further victims working within the framework we have, this is likely the best options

Where do you get less than two years from? Here’s some examples of sentencing in other cases (obvs there are some differences in age/circumstances).

https://www.cps.gov.uk/wessex/news/16-year-old-serial-rapist-jailed

https://www.cps.gov.uk/west-midlands/news/two-teenagers-sentenced-rape-leamington-spa

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/teenagers-sent-to-young-offender-a87543/

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jun/22/schoolboy-rapist-gets-reduced-term

16-year-old serial rapist jailed | The Crown Prosecution Service

https://www.cps.gov.uk/wessex/news/16-year-old-serial-rapist-jailed

Allisnotlost1 · Yesterday 15:32

Brunts12 · Yesterday 12:20

Hm, 'mob justice', really? People are having a measured discussion on a forum, some have already submitted a formal legal referral through the correct channels. That is not mob justice. That framing is dismissive and frankly a little insulting.
On the substantive points, you are presenting a very one-sided picture of youth custody. Yes, some young offenders come out worse. Some don't. The quality of provision varies enormously and to write off all custodial settings as brutalising environments that inevitably increase reoffending is an oversimplification that the evidence does not uniformly support.
You argue that a custodial sentence won't be longer than the YRO anyway. But that misses the point entirely. Custody and a community order are not interchangeable simply because their durations might be similar. One involves a significant loss of liberty as a direct consequence of the offending. That matters, not as revenge, but as proportionality.
You've also told us what would 'truly' help the victims. I'd suggest that neither of us is in a position to speak for them. Some victims find that a proportionate sentence is itself part of healing. Dismissing that as mere 'short term relief' is not yours to decide.
And yes, absolutely, victim support should be improved. Nobody is arguing otherwise. But 'focus on victims instead' is not a counter-argument to sentencing concerns. It's a deflection. We can care about both.

I broadly agree with your points, but there is no custodial environment available to these boys that is not brutalising. I still think they should go to prison, because we have a terrible system where people who do less also go to prison. We have a system that is not rehabilitative, it’s entirely punitive. There is a tiny provision in some YOIs for boys convicted of sexual offences, I’m not aware that there’s anything in the community at all. Unless these boys go to prison, there really is no consequence for them.

Ohcrap082024 · Yesterday 15:33

Goseeastarwar · Yesterday 15:01

Just on the BBC website in last 20 minutes
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy2x7wxjego

Brilliant news. I desperately hope that the 2 girls and their families can find some comfort in the fact that so many people believe that they have been wronged.

As I have posted previously, if there is a slither of a chance the girls or their families ever know about the posts on here… we believe you and we support you.

Meadowfinch · Yesterday 15:36

Good news the sentences have been called in for review.

Now let's see a sentence that protects the young women of the South, and involves some sort of punative measures for the offenders.

Lalgarh · Yesterday 15:41

Goseeastarwar · Yesterday 15:01

Just on the BBC website in last 20 minutes
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy2x7wxjego

Also sky. Multiple requests received

https://news.sky.com/story/attorney-general-receives-multiple-requests-to-review-lenient-sentence-of-boy-rapists-in-hampshire-13546972

Also, from the anti carceral poster, "Being in a Youth Offending Institute for 18months, with little access to rehabilitation support ..."

Actually, a secure environment is usually the only place that offenders can actually be given rehabilitation support. Do you think they'd be inclined to attend assorted struggle sessions about their victims feelings and what they did to her if they are out and about? You'd have to have some sort of compulsory element with a sanction of incarceration to compel them either way.

And with regards to restorative justice, which is advocated a lot by the Gwen Adsheads of this world, there are always the pilot programmes that yield positive results but which then gets rolled out and transmute into tick box exercises that get used in place of actual convictions.

The father of Sara Sharif for instance, when he was hauled up for domestic violence before she was born, wasn't actually convicted let alone sentenced, but sent on a domestic violence awareness programme.

"The seriousness and serial nature of his abusive behaviour to his family was not recognised beyond the second set of care proceedings. There was an assumption that attendance at a group programme for domestic abuse perpetrators was sufficient and his account of completion of this programme was all that was needed. There was no clear statement of what needed to change to mitigate his future risk to women and children and how change in his behaviour would be evaluated."

(https://transparencyproject.org.uk/sara-sharif-what-we-now-know-from-the-safeguarding-review/)

latetothefisting · Yesterday 15:48

BlueMum16 · Yesterday 14:26

You can challenge a sentence. Many of us have completed the form.

Yes, which is why the poster you replied to literally suggested complaining about the judge "as well as" doing that?

Meadowfinch · Yesterday 15:54

BloominNora · Yesterday 11:09

Petitioning for the boys to have their sentence reviewed and upgraded to custodial will also do nothing to bring about justice for the girls though and beyond a short term sense of relief will do nothing to address their long term trauma.

The boys were found guilty, they will have a criminal record for life, even if their conviction is spent. It will always show up on any future enhanced DBS checks. Depending on what the judge ordered, they may have to report to the police their whereabouts and will be on the sex offenders register for between 5 years and life.

Being in a Youth Offending Institute for 18months, with little access to rehabilitation support and getting into regular fights will either force them to become 'alphas' and come out with an untouchable arrogance or they will be bullied and beaten to the point where they come out with an enormous amount of resentment. Neither of those will do anything to help them understand the severity of what they did and is in fact likely to increase the likelihood of them re-offending.

Community orders like YROs, which can also result in them losing their freedom through secure orders, tagging etc are more likely to get them access to better rehabilitation services and significantly reduce the likelihood of re-offending.

If the sentence is reviewed and they are given a custodial sentence, it won't be for life - it will likely not be for more than the three years that their YRO is - maybe even less.

Calling for them to be incarcerated does nothing to help the victims and in fact increases the likelihood of re-offending and creating more victims in the future. It's mob justice.

If the concern is truly about helping the girls, it would be much more effective to use the outrage to demand that support for victims is improved.

Given that these boys are dangerous, getting them off the street is the first requirement, to protect other young women, and to give the victims the security of knowing their attackers are locked up while they rebuild their lives.

Next it is important to get these boys away from the toxic family environments that have allowed them to develop in this way. And thirdly, they need to be separated.

Then, and only then, can rehabilitation be started. It is not all about them. If our justice system is to be of any value at all, their victims and the safety of the general public come first.

DrPrunesqualer · Yesterday 16:02

latetothefisting · Yesterday 15:48

Yes, which is why the poster you replied to literally suggested complaining about the judge "as well as" doing that?

@BlueMum16
I agree
this is a good idea
but
Complaints are made to The Judicial Conduct Investigation's Office and from what I’m seeing on their website we can’t complain to them in matters relating to a case

Here’s what it says

‘ What can I complain about?

We can only deal with complaints about the personal conduct of judicial office holders. This means that we cannot accept complaints about a judge’s decision or the way a judge has managed a case, that does not raise a question of misconduct. Complaints which fall outside our remit will be rejected.
If you believe the way that a judge has handled a hearing or a judge’s decision was unfair, you might be able to appeal to a higher court. The JCIO is unable to intervene in court cases. We would suggest seeking advice about your options from a solicitor, law centre or the Citizens Advice ‘

SweetSummerHerbs · Yesterday 16:18

EstoyRobandoSuCasa · Yesterday 12:28

I’m horrified by the claim that when young people commit serious crimes, we have to choose between punishment and rehabilitation as it isn’t possible to have both. If that’s true, then the system is hopeless and young offenders must be laughing at it. Where’s the deterrent?

If we have to choose, I choose harsh punishment every single time.

The advantage to this is that very harsh punishment will create fear and that will be useful in "rehabilitating" some who may think of doing or repeating a crime.

So, that's two for the price of one.

Punishment will rehabilitate through fear, whereas rehabilitation on its own is not punishment. So, given the choice-hard physical punishment, which keeps getting harder until their criminal heart is squashed under the boot

I know bleeding hearts will object but little do I care and nor should anyone with a grain of wit.

Anyway, good news that the sentence for these particular bastards is to be reviewed.