Scottish government may introduce unlocked housing for young prisoners and nationalise secure care services.

[Scoffingbiscuits]

The Scottish government is extremely kind towards young convicted criminals. For example, until the age of 25, when they're sentenced the judge has to put what's in their best interests first and only sentence them to imprisonment as a last resort. This is what led to a young man convicted of raping a 13 year old girl in a park, twice, getting a community order to do 270 hours of community work.
It seems that they now want to make things pleasanter for young offenders who have, until now at least, been locked up for the safety of the community. It's short on detail as yet, but a warning of what's to come. The SNP are also looking at nationalising secure care services. A young person has to be very dangerous to end up locked up in Scotland these days, so let's hope that when secure care services are nationalised and the doors are unlocked all will go well for local communities.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15484349/SNP-want-young-thugs-therapeutic-hubs-no-locked-doors.html?i

It’s been many years since being a property owner or taxpayer was the only qualification for the franchise! Most 16 - 18 year olds are not taxpayers.

Raise your standards. Violence is certainly not commonplace in independent schools. You know why? Because you get one chance and if you don’t behave you’re out. The kids know that.

Teachers in my family who have worked on both sides of the border say that discipline is far stricter in English schools.

There also appear - at least in some areas - to be levels of exclusion and escalation with disruptive elements being left in no doubt that they’ll be sent elsewhere away from their friends etc if they continue to misbehave. Maybe that’s one reason why the academic standards in England are now so much higher.

It’s appalling what has happened to Scottish education. Once upon a time it was one of the highest achieving systems in the world..

What aspect are you struggling with ?

But the Scottish Government, after failing to get support from the public, changed its mind about lowering the age you can be an MSP, didn't it? Do you not think that to perform a role like that you need some life experience, and in fact some work experience, as well as a fully-functioning brain? Do you really want this country to be run by children? It is perfectly legal not to allow 16 year olds to stand for parliament, because public office carries significant responsibility. And that's without consideration of the brain development theory the Scottish Government is so keen on.
Driving is by far the most dangerous thing that most of us do, and the government allows 17 year olds to drive. But you claim that 24-year-olds are not mentally capable of realising that it's morally and legally wrong to rape someone and to take the full consequences of that? By that time they may well have been married for several years and have children. If they don't realise that raping someone is wrong and is subject to criminal punishment, I suggest you make some changes to the school curriculum, rather than giving rapists a community order with zero time in prison. What message does that send both young men and the girls and women they rape? The message I read from that is that girls and women are fair game. And there is clearly absolutely no point in putting yourself through the horrors of rape proceedings when even if the rapist is eventually convicted he's likely to walk free, with no more than a slap on the wrist.
Remember the young man charged with rape who was told, just a couple of days before his rape trial, that the trial wouldn't go ahead? That was because he'd been offered a football scholarship in the United States. It was decided that it wasn't fair to him to risk his losing the scholarship, so the criminal trial was simply cancelled. Can you even begin to imagine how that must have affected the girl he raped and her family, and the message that sent to all girls and women?

Yes and it’s all the more important for their peers and society generally that miscreants are educated when young enough to be malleable that engaging in banned behaviour that hurts others has severe consequences (for them).

It hurts the kids misbehaving if we dont educate them - they end up unable to access employment , in poverty and /or in prison. Severe sanctions - reform schools etc - with genuine help to address lack of emotional and physical control - would be far kinder.

And let's all remember that this isn't just about 18 and 19 year olds. It's about 24 year olds too.

Old enough to join the army but not old enough to vote for which government could send their regiment to war.

Makes sense!

This is just hyperbole.

Completely emotive, no logic.

Pretty much all of your previous post.

Yes because kids who go to independent schools have exactly the same stability, upbringing and peer groups as those who go to deprived schools.

So you’re right, it must be the threat of expulsion that makes the difference.

I really hope you’re trolling because no-one can surely be that simple.

Would also be keen for you to actually provide evidence to the allegation you make against me here?

Such as

1. “But you claim that 24-year-olds are not mentally capable of realising that it's morally and legally wrong to rape someone and to take the full consequences of that?”

You know I have never claimed that, it’s just an attempt to taint me with an accusation.

You seem obsessed with making emotive descriptions of sexual assaults as if this in some way backs up your arguments.

I don’t know about the scholarship case but the case where a rapist got community service isn’t as cut and dry as you describe.

The sentence was handed down, the PF appealed because it was unduly lenient.

Given the fact not other cases have attracted the same sentence the PF’s appealed would probably have resulted in a custodial sentence.

Is this not the way our justice system is meant to work, safeguards in case of incorrect representation?

In any event it was all null and void because the accused appealed the conviction and won on the basis of the judge’s misdirection.

It sounds like the root cause of this fiasco was a judge’s incompetence, not something fundamentally wrong with our system.

Then get rid of child soldiers

And if one is pro-children that should be a no-brainer

The judge made a misdirection, and by reason of that the rapist got off completely, with no punishment at all for his 2 rapes of a 13 year old. But there hasn't been any suggestion that I'm aware of that he made a mistake in law in not sentencing the rapist to prison. He expressly referred to the "under 25" legislation to explain his not sentencing to imprisonment.

Scotland has seen a big rise in sexual violence against women in recent years, so I think it's entirely appropriate to comment on the way that young men receive very little punishment for sexual violence. The two things may well be connected. There was a 15% increase in rapes in Scotland in 2024.
Rape Crisis Scotland told the BBC that we need "to be really clear that this behaviour is criminal and there are serious consequences".
'Staggering' increase in reports of sexual crime in Scotland - BBC News

Here's a newspaper article about the teenage boy whose rape trial for the rape of his girlfriend (didn't want sexual relations and was asleep in a different bedroom) was pulled literally hours before he was due to go on trial. He was told that instead he could go off on his football scholarship to a university in the United States, and would just need to complete a short online course on how to respect women.
Alleged teen rapist spared prosecution to go to US has visa revoked - Daily Record

Whether he’s aware he made a mistake in law or not is not the point, the PF was in the process of an appeal.

There are no other precedents of a sentence like that given out, obviously we will never know but it is highly likely the appeal would have been successful.

I don’t disagree with your opinion on the judge.

@Meeplemakeglasgow your post re You seem obsessed with making emotive descriptions of sexual assaults as if this in some way backs up your arguments.

so you think that’s a bad thing? That people shouldn’t be emotive that rapists and people who commit violent assaults aren’t getting a “aw bless poor lads… they’re only little” response from everyone?

OP, the case you keep citing, of the man who was not jailed for raping a young girl, is utterly horrifying. But it’s not the norm. The reason it’s so high profile is because it’s not the norm.

If we want an independent judiciary, we have to accept that sometimes judges will make what we think are very bad decisions.

Have a look at Sentencing Statements on the Scottish Courts website. There you will see scores of examples of judges referencing the under 25 guidelines, sometimes dismissing them and sometimes giving a small reduction in a still custodial sentence as a result.

that awful case aside, that does not sound suitable for this. We can do better with rehabilitation, and certainly younger offenders. It costs so much money and is such a waste of lives (both theirs and victims) to let them go down that path.

if you look at norways model, their reoffending rates are so low. In the long term it saves so much money, as well as turning people into productive members of society whose children don’t carry on the cycle.

Norwegian prison system works well and is really unique and interesting but is incredibly expensive and staff heavy. What the SNP seem to be doing here is the Norwegian model on the cheap, unlock the doors without providing the necessary intensive rehabilitation needed to keep the public safe. It’s scary stuff.

It’s a strategy for gaining support and sympathy without any substance.

It’s as transparent as cling-film.

You focus on a couple of outliers and taint our entire justice system with it.

Then if anyone disagrees you then try and accuse them of enabling sexual crimes by not supporting being tough on them.

Quite disgusting really.

What do people think about the "diversion from prosecution" approach? In the recent case I've posted on this thread a teenage boy allegedly raped a teenage girl. As we all know, rape cases are only prosecuted if there's a good chance of a conviction, and it takes ages to get them to trial and is very traumatic for the victim, all the more so if she's very young. Literally hours before the trial, the trial was cancelled and the boy was spared the trial, a criminal record and of course the likely punishment he'd have got if and when convicted. This was so that he wouldn't lose his chance to go to America to take up a football scholarship. All he would have been required to do was to do a short online course on respecting women. Luckily (nothing to do with the criminal justice system), he wasn't able to get a visa to the US, because they picked up on the criminal allegations. So no trial or punishment if that might actually adversely affect your life - imagine the effect on the girl of this.

What's disgusting is that the system allows young men who commit rapes, even the rapes of young girls, to go without any meaningful punishment.
Luckily most of us won't have been personally touched by these cases (although there's been a very big increase in serious sexual crimes). What most of us probably have been touched by is the day to day lower end crime perpetrated by young teenagers (nearly always boys in my experience). In my local community there are constant complaints about vandalism - teenage boys simply wrecking things for the fun of it. This has escalated to include serious damage to property, including arson. They particularly enjoy destroying things that have been carefully put in place and maintained for the enjoyment of local people. Every time something is replaced or repaired, they destroy it again. Apparently the police know who these teenage boys are, but are powerless to do anything to stop them. When they go round and talk to the boys and their parents, they're just laughed at. The boys feel, and apparently are, invulnerable. Needless to say, local schoolchildren also drop litter all over the place and no-one requires them to pick it up.

That’s ridiculous. I’m 24, two kids, oldest is 8, married with a mortgage.
I heard they don’t expel students at all in Scotland? Even violent bullies in secondary school? I would not want to be a student in Scotland right now. That’s the problem with this kind of ideology it revolves around people with issues and no thought is given to the people affected by their issues.

It was bad enough when I was in school ten years ago in England