Community sentence for rape of a 13 year old

[Shelefttheweb]

Wtf?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-65164041

To be found guilty of raping a 13 year old, the jury would have to be convinced the girl did not or could not consent.

The age of consent is, technically, 13, not 16. Sex with someone 13 - 15 yrs who consents is still a crime, but it’s the crime of “Sex with an older child”, it’s not rape. It’s a much lesser crime and wouldn’t be referred to as rape by either the court or the papers (because - libel).

It feels dangerously like incitement to vigilanteeism.

Agreed. If the courts are going to be this atrocious at achieving justice, then it almost feels like the moral thing to do is to avoid the trauma of a court case for the victim.

I’m horrified by these sentencing guidelines , my dd1 is a teacher , is her brain not mature enough to do the job?

So according to the Scottish government, a person is old enough at 17 to be able to be set on the gender pathway, and request dangerous drugs with unknown side effects and surgery to remove healthy parts of their bodies, but they can be convicted of rape because they are too young. People can get married at 16 in Scotland, join the army, leave school, but they’re too young to be convicted of rape. The Scottish government really really hate women don’t they?

I’m really horrified by my home country right now. Women and girls under the bus, time and time again.

Thanks @NumberTheory was unaware.

The most shocking part of that article was that the most time given for raping a 13 year old child, is 5 years. Wtaf. The bar to secure a conviction for rape is set so high that very few are successfully prosecuted. But if they are, the sentence is a joke.

It wasn't even the first time he'd attacked her:

"Hogg attacked the victim, 13, on several occasions between March and June 2018, when he was 17, court documents show. He also assaulted the teenager by threatening her and pulling down her clothing. He then grabbed her by the wrists and raped her"

Here is what he was accused of: https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/edinburgh-man-accused-raping-schoolgirl-24158530.amp

"Sean Hogg is accused of threatening the 13-year-old – who can’t be named for legal reasons – youngster before forcing her to have sex with him on multiple occasions."
"He is also charged with raping her while she was asleep and incapable of giving or withholding consent."

"In addition Hogg, 20, is charged with sexually assaulting another under-age girl at an address in Penicuik, Midlothian, by touching her buttocks, thigh and breasts and attempting to touch her vagina on various occasions between 1 October and 30 November 2017."

"A jury at the High Court in Livingston was told that Hogg, of South Lanarkshire, had lodged special defences claiming each of the girls consented to sexual activity with him."

Rehabilitation my arse!!! Its a greenflag to twisted minds. This infuriates me so much. I'm disgusted in the judge, thinking that is acceptable! Woman and children will never be safe

If the SNP believe that a 24 year old isn't old enough to be accountable for their actions, then why on earth have they given the vote to 16 year olds? Never mind allowing children to make irreversible changes to their bodies.

Scotland . Where woman and children don’t matter and count for nothing.
Utterly disgusting and disgraceful but that’s what we need to accept from the Scottish government. Nicola Sturgeon is a disgrace.

The comment about him arriving to court in tears annoyed me.
If he was genuinely sorry he would have pleaded guilty and spared that little girl a trial in the first place.

It was reported on Scottish news last night that he was appealing the conviction.

So by these guidelines of sentencing for 17 to 25 year olds will it follow that the predominantly young males involved in drugs and violent crime also be eligible for community service?

If you are outraged by this, then there might be another, altogether more worrying aspect. Which is just for Scotland.

To make changes like these to England and Wales, you would need primary legislation. You would need to debate it. It takes an Act of Parliament. It is hard to do.

In Scotland, it looks like a group of civil servants have been given huge power to change the purpose of the criminal law. Sentencing guidelines are not law. They are written by lawyers and civil servants.

So you get things that sound like law but are not actual law in Scotland. With next to no scrutiny.

Normally on these threads I explain how the sentence fits the sentencing guidelines. Here, I can't. If this was in England, he would definitely be facing several years in prison.

Scotland has only just started developing sentencing guidelines so, until recently, judges in Scotland broadly followed the sentencing guidelines for England. Scotland doesn't have sentencing guidelines for rape as yet. They do, however, have guidelines for sentencing young people, which they define as offenders under the age of 25. Those guidelines state that a custodial sentence should only be imposed when the court is satisfied that no other sentence is appropriate and, if a custodial sentence is imposed, it must be shorter than if the offender is 25 or over. In England, young people under 18 get lower sentences. This offender, being 21, would be treated the same as any other adult rapist.

My view is that this sentence is completely wrong. If this is what the Scottish Sentencing Council intended, I think they've got it badly wrong. If it wasn't what they intended, their guidelines should have been clearer. But, even with the guidelines as written, it was open to the judge to decide that anything other than a custodial sentence would not be appropriate. So, I agree that the judge has got this wrong. I hope the sentence gets increased on appeal.

Since she was 13yrs he can only be found guilty of rape if she did not consent. It’s very very difficult to prove a rape case and secure a conviction, therefore there was be almost zero doubt that he did rape her.

I donot think he’s appealing the sentence but rather the conviction as he claimed it was consensual.

So yes, they did know one another and probably arranged to meet.
I wonder if he has been 16yrs or younger whether he would have been found guilty of rape? I think there must be quite a bit of info we don’t know.

The judge could have decided that in this particular defendants case, 4 years is a lifetime ago, he isn’t who he was in any way, and imprisoning him would have propelled him back to a life of further crime. Hence the non custodial sentence which is now allowed due to his age.

If sentencing is about retribution then this doesn’t work. If it’s about rehabilitation it does. And I can’t see how the two can work together.

Appalling.

As usual the idea is to protect the man at all costs and find reasons why his crime should be excused/downgraded.

No wonder we have such low rape convictions in the first place. Women and girls feel like even if they report the crime, nothing or very little will be done to the perpetrator.

I hope there is a way to appeal to this.

She is under-age for goodness sake and he should be in jail.

I do hope he gets what is coming to him...

So as long as the male is under 25 he can do whatever the fuck he likes and won't go to jail, is that right?

What the fuck is going on in Scotland.

''HairyKitty · Today 08:21
The judge could have decided that in this particular defendants case, 4 years is a lifetime ago, he isn’t who he was in any way, and imprisoning him would have propelled him back to a life of further crime. Hence the non custodial sentence which is now allowed due to his age.''

FFS don't post nonsense like this.

For the girl it will never be a ''lifetime ago''. She will never forget what was done to her and the fact that she was then let down by the justice system.

Also this gives this man the green light to do it again as there were no consequences for his crime.

That judge has basically said if you are a man under 25 it is perfectly fine to assault and rape minors.

It is truly, truly appalling.

This was what I was asking about earlier in the thread. The repeated aspect. Why would you arrange to meet someone again following the first assault? Again- in no way condoning this at all, but it definitely seems there is a lot unsaid in the information available, perhaps due to protecting the privacy of the young victim?

They made rehabilitation rather than punishment a primary consideration, recommending an "individualistic approach" taking into account their life experiences

I have a big problem with this for sex crimes. Or any violent crime. Women have tough lives and childhoods too but we don’t rape or commit most violent offences. So he did this repeatedly but it’s okay because he’s 17? What a disgusting sentence.

This is wrong.

Judges in England & Wales are required by law to follow the sentencing guidelines unless it would be unjust to do so. The sentencing guidelines are set by the Sentencing Council, which mainly consists of judges, magistrates and lawyers, along with a senior police officer and the Chief Executive of Victim Support. The only civil servant is the Director of Public Prosecutions. They can change the sentencing guidelines without primary legislation. It would not need a debate in parliament. It would not need an Act of Parliament. Primary legislation is only needed to change the maximum and/or minimum sentences for an offence. In most cases, the maximum sentence under the guidelines is under the maximum sentence in law.

The Scottish Sentencing Council, like that for England & Wales, consists mainly of judges and lawyers along with a senior police officer, a victims expert (this position is currently vacant) and a lay person (currently an academic who lectures in criminology). As far as I can see, none of the current members can be described as a civil servant. The Scottish sentencing guidelines have slightly less legal force than those for England & Wales. Judges are not required to follow the guidelines. They are only required to take them into account and set out their reasons if they don't follow the guidelines.