Judge lets three boy rapist go free with no jail time

[ThreadGuardDog]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/may/24/uk-judge-decision-rape-girls-hampshire

The judge said he wanted to avoid the boys attracting a criminal record so early in life. Is it so unreasonable to think that they should have thought of that before they committed the crime ? Rape/sexual assault, is up 10% according to national statistics. With sentences like these, reflecting the clear misogyny within the judiciary , is it any wonder ?

Thoughts ?

They might have a learning difficulty but they have enough ability to plan , carry out and share a gang rape.

It feels close to minimising the brutality or excusing it.

I posted on the other thread, re a gang rape by similarly aged boys in the mid 90s. They got hefty sentences, the leader a ten year sentence.
They had raped an adult tourist, taking her down onto the canal towpath in King’s Cross. She hadn’t been afraid of them as they were so young.

They need all their previous sentencing reviewed. There needs to be a Cochrane for judge decisions - pull and map the meta data across time.

Is this a one off (bad enough) or does this judge have form for siding with perpetrators.

I wonder if what we need is a petition to ask that rape sentencing guidelines change? They can only impose such sentences because it falls within the guidelines so maybe that is what needs changing.

Would be interesting to see their previous sentences for sure

very likely they’ll be outed and their comeuppance dished out.

Yes, and that's why the aggravating factors are taken into account.

Again: the judge cannot go off-piste and hand down a sentence on a whim.

The sentencing guidelines determine what a judge can and cannot do.

The judge must act within those guidelines, taking into account the offence, the aggravating and the mitigating factors.

The sentence is now being reviewed by the AG. But if it is determined that the judge in this case did take proper care and applied the law correctly and was not unduly lenient ("unduly" meaning that it falls outside the range of sentences that could reasonably be considered appropriate in law, it does not merely mean lenient), then there will be no change.

Am I right in thinking if it gets 100,000 signatures it needs a parliamentary debate?

This would be a more effective way to approach the situation. I'd fully back a campaign to review and amend the sentencing guidelines for sexual offences.

Slippery slope there.

We had a long period of advocating for female judges on the basis that they were not all emotional and would be just as competent and dispassionate as any existing judge.

You're arguing that judges own lived experiences and biases should come into judgements and sentences, and that the law is not therefore equal.

What next, female judges for DV as well?

What about divorce courts?
Or custody hearings?

And what would you say when someone appeals on the basis that the judge was deliberately selected to be biased against men.

Ps. I don't understand the sentencing decision at all ...

I may be wrong but I think that was one of the strands of the recent "reclaim the nation" (or whatever its called) marches (though only from certain religions no doubt). Not so much as a peep from the keffiyah brigade.

Changing topic, I think their low IQ was mentioned as a mitigating factor. I'm not sure how being too thick to realise rape is a heinous crime should make you immune to punishment. Personally i'd have thought that was an extra argument for keeping them out of the way of decent people.

But this isn’t YouTube? Sorry very confused.

Nope, they'll be protected by their "community".

Fucking RAGING about this. We live in a world where people can go to prison for posting things on social media but not for actually raping women. Wow.

I think a petition is needed, surely there is one?! Nobody decent or with a modicum of sanity will be agreeing with this sentence!

That’s the government petitions site. White parliament might debate sentencing guidelines in general they won’t debate a specific sentence as that would be stepping on the independence of the judiciary.

He described them as ‘very young children’.

‘very young children’ are incapable of rape. They will have gone through puberty. they will have had lessons in school about sexual behaviour. He didn’t want to ‘criminalise’ them. But they are criminals!

along with a sentence review the judge should get retraining. I wonder what his wife/daughter/female acquaintances said when they heard. If that was my husband I would rip him a new one.

I feel that my hours of mindless Mumsnetting finally became worthwhile when someone posted about this a few days ago and said that we (ie, anyone) could ask for a review of this case as "unduly lenient". I think it has gained traction since then. I certainly put forward a request to have this reviewed and I know lots of other people have. I didn't even know that was a "thing", to be honest. Nicholas Rowland is a disgusting human being, based on this case. I sincerely hope he doesn't have daughters. Or sons. I wouldn't want to be him right now. I wouldn't want to be associated with him in any way.

I think judges need to be made aware that the sentence is not just about rehabilitating the offenders ... it is about deterring others.

There has to be a really strong deterrent for rape. If this lenient sentence stands, there will be a lot more teenage rapists, that is for sure.

Sad to say, but footage of the real life gang rape of a teenage girl is pornographic gold. If teenagers are not going to be severely punished for it, I can imagine them being groomed into doing it by organised criminals. Just as they are groomed into the drugs trade for similar reasons. Get a grip, judiciary, please.

They will be protected by their community. Noone would be daft enough to take them on.

We can all ask for this case to be reviewed as "unduly lenient". I learned this here a few days ago. You can do so at Gov.uk. It asks for the defendants names and I copied and pasted a link to the case in that box. I think this case will be reviewed, but we definitely need to do all we can to ensure it is.

They were old enough to know what they were doing. That should be enough. Learning disabilities or not, if you’re capable of the disgusting acts these boys committed, then you’re capable of accepting responsibility and punishment. I agree that reviewing the sentencing guidelines won’t be of any use in this case but something needs to be done to stop this happening again.

If he was my husband the marriage would be over.

Someone upthread has mentioned that as this case is now being reviewed, there is no need for anyone to apply for the review, which is good news. From the gov.uk website:
We are already considering applications to have the sentences in the following case reviewed:

• Three unnamed offenders aged 15, 15, and 14, sentenced on 21st May 2026 in Southampton Crown Court for sexual offences including rape.

Unless you have a personal connection to the case, there’s no need to make another application for one of these cases – it will not affect how the review is handled. But we still want to hear from you if you are the victim of the offence, or an immediate family member, and want to make a personal application.

What is judgement for, these days? Just to sigh over mitigating circumstances? What about creating deterrents so that mitigating circumstances can be overcome. Wtaf, so so so so tired about the huge fear of giving consequences for criminality.