AIBU to think these boys should have been incarcerated?

[newrubylane]

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.

It’s another example of why girls and women don’t come forward and report it the police because they do sweet F A!!!!!

Absolutely disgusting, most likely they’ll all go on to reoffend and if this is what they’ve started with, god knows what they’ll carry on to do!

This is crazy to me! They did it twice and shared the footage online! Why would the judge "not want to criminalise" them when they've done it themselves, repeatedly. Just because they haven't been caught committing any crimes before certainly doesn't mean they haven't done anything.

You are oversimplifying the position. Rehabilitation is an important aim of the criminal justice system yes but punishment is also part of it, as is acting as a deterrent to other potential offenders by ensuring it is clear and known the consequences of the decisions they are taking are not worth the risk of the outcomes- in this case the later purposes are especially important because there is an epidemic of violence against women and girls and these offences are not taken seriously, which is further driving the embedded misogyny in our culture. We need to start giving these offences the consequences these deserve and which are reflective of the effects they have on victims.

I don't think this particular case is the fault of the police who assembled all the evidence....it is on the judge who imposed these insultingly lenient sentences.

It really makes me despair. Rape has already been described as effectively decriminalised in this country, due to the tiny conviction rate in relation to initial complaints. This is one of the exceptional cases where there actually were convictions thanks to the large amount of evidence; and yet the case ends with a slap in the face to the victims with these pathetic sentences being imposed. It feels as though the justice system as a whole has yet again collectively shrugged its shoulders in the face of the risks to women and girls.

No consideration from judge fudge as to the victims brain development huh

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjrp98285yvo

But they wouldn’t. Farage the idiot has justified and minimised the Giant Tangerine’s misogynistic statements and assaults on women, plus he hangs out with Andrew Tait, and that’s before you start to look at the behaviour of reform councillors and candidates . If you think a party led by him values women and will stand up for them then he has you fooled, and if others are like you we are doomed as a country. The only reason he and others like him would “punish” sexual assaults against women is that it “damages” the property of men, a la the handmaid’s tale.

If I was one of the girls Mums, I honestly would take this into my own hands now and dispense my own justice.

Me too. I’d rather do that than drag my daughter through the vile court system. I’d happily do time knowing he was dead or scarred. I’d drive over them.

Well we know they committed other crimes - animal cruelty and illegal hare and rabbit coursing.

Apparently the government are now reviewing the sentencing (apologies if this has already been mentioned here).

Will the judge be sacked? Surely he has to be?

No. Even if the sentence is altered Judges do not get sacked just because they make a sentencing mistake. Nor should they.

The judge is probably just applying guidelines in their most lenient sense.

I'm wondering how "180 days of close supervision" that one of the rapists has been ordered to undergo is applicable outside of a secure setting. What. Probation officers following him round?

If you saw the documentary series Police Protecting Children (iirc the name) there are already huge surveillance operations tracking convicted sex offenders once they're out and inevitably there are slip ups.

Yes sorry I didn’t mean just the police but the whole system in general, I have a close friend who went through a similar ordeal and the case was thrown out regardless of the amount of evidence against them.

Disgusting!

Same. This again shows how the system lets women & girls down. I’m so angry and those brave girls deserve so much more from us as a society.

Not wanting to criminalise children who committed crimes of this degree is mind blowing. Stealing a packet of sweets from a shop as a one off. Being caught drunk in a park and taken home by the police. I can see that as fair. Multiple organised violent gang rapes on multiple victims and sharing of child pornography online? That’s so far from the line we can longer see it.

The judges remarks sound like a benign and kindly adonishment dished out to children who have done something mildly irritating.

These boys organised, co ordinated, carried out, recorded and broadcast the violent rapes of young girls.

I'm anti vigilante justice and anti violence. But when the courts and the system have given organised violent rape their blessing, I can understand how and why it happens.

This judge hasn't the faintest idea of the damage he's done.

Bearing in mind the community these boys come from, that would likely end very badly for you.

True.

Punishment should fit the crime, I’ve always believed that. I don’t believe the criminal justice system is fit to protect victims given this sentence.

Yes I was telling my DH about this - he said he'd definitely be doing time if that happened to either of his DDs

This offence is clearly at least category 2A and possibly category 1A. If it was category 2A, the starting point for sentencing an adult would be 10 years with a range of 9-13 years, and I would expect the aggravating factors to push it towards the top end of the range. If it was category 1A, the starting point for an adult would be 15 years with a range of 13-19 years.

As the offenders were under 18, they would normally receive a lower sentence than an adult committing the same offence. Given the contents of the sentencing guidelines regarding children and young people, I can understand why the judge may have thought a YRO was an appropriate sanction for these offenders. However, I think he has got it badly wrong. In my view, this crime is so serious that the only appropriate sanction is a custodial sentence. I hope the Attorney General decides to appeal the sentence on the basis that it is unduly lenient and that the appeal is successful.

My thoughts are with the victim.

Informative post , many thanks 🙏
just wanted to point out , it was victims, there was two girls .

I think I read the judge praised the boys behaviour in court. Shows they can behave when it’s in their interest to behave.