Content warning - Teenage boys escape prison for rape

[ArabellaScott]

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

These poor girls. An absolutely sickening article.

'Two 15-year-old boys and a boy, 14, were previously convicted of rape following a trial at Southampton Crown Court.
The 15-year-olds were given three-year Youth Rehabilitation Orders with intensive surveillance and supervision. The younger boy's probation supervision will be for one and half years.
Two of the boys' mothers burst into tears as Judge Nicholas Rowland told the attackers "none of you need to go to prison today".
The judge praised the bravery of the two girls for giving evidence.'

How is surveillance/supervision going to make the slightest bit of difference? These boys should have gone to prison or a YOI.

Judge praises girls for their bravery while failing to dish out any consequences whatsoever.

This is an interesting article, especially on the subject of the chances and risks of reoffending.

From the article

Characteristics which make someone more dangerous and more likely to offend are officially defined in the sentencing guidelines as mitigating when they are aggravating. Those criminals who are low IQ, don’t understand the concept of consent and are easily led are much more likely to continue committing crimes. As noted criminal barrister Adam King said to me, ‘given their disproportionately high rates of reoffending, young, impulsive criminals can be seen as precisely the people law-abiding citizens need protecting from.’

https://spectator.com/article/when-teenage-rapists-walk-free/

Well, they did provide evidence on film of their offences

I completely agree.

I think this judge should be made to apologise to the women and girls of the UK, who are being led to believe that conviction of violent sexual assault upon them, with a weapon and threats, will not lead to any meaningful outcome for the rapists.

Also, either deselect this person as a judge, or make them undergo retraining?

Yep.

Can we make complaints?

It further enrages me that these boys had the sheer audacity to plead not guilty when they had themselves released film 100% proving their guilt.

So then the taxpayer has to fund a five week trial...bet that didn't cost a couple of quid!

As for not wanting to criminalise them, they ARE criminals! Foul pieces of scum who the judge has, in effect, rewarded for their savagery.

In due course, I'd like to know just how many complaints were made to the government about this as I can't be the only one who is seeing the death of Justice and it is that aspect of this case that should be of huge concern to every citizen of this country.

https://www.complaints.judicialconduct.gov.uk/what_can_i_complaint_about//

One cant complain about a judges decision but perhaps his comments could come.under misconduct. Seems unlikely, unfortunately.

So who is this judge? There are far too many ultra lenient judges out there for our society to bare!

My heart bleeds for those brave girls and their parents. To go through all that, face up to the gruelling court process, secure a conviction - then have your rapist get this piddling sentence must be devastating.

One of them was trapped the times, this was gang rape. I just cannot comprehend this sentence.

The point of justice is supposed to also be restoration and retribution, making the victims feel like justice has been served. This sentence does not do this. Its supposed to support the rule of law - it doesn't achieve that either, it demonstrates that if you are found guilty of breaking a law there will not be consequences. It is supposed to protect the victims/public - it doesn't do that. Its no deterrent. The only objective the sentence supposedly meets is rehabilitation.

It makes me sick that judges like these seem to think that teen boys can't be expected to understand that no means no - a toddler can understand that!

I'd like there to be more information about how this joke of a punishment is supposed to actually result in rehabilitation. Where's their evidence that it will work?

It would probably in any case have benefitted the rehabilitation of these young offenders to have been removed from the anti social background they come from. They may not all be the same, but traveller groups I have encountered have been downright hostile and intimidating to non-travellers, and it was heart breaking to see how even young children are encouraged to despise others outside their own travelling culture. A physical break from such toxic attitudes, that brings them into realistic contact with the wider culture could only benefit these offenders, and help protect the rest of us from them in future. In that sense their parents have a lot to answer for.
From every other point of view too - to meet justice - they should have a heavy custodial sentence.

Really hope the review of the sentence comes up with something more appropriate. The judge is clearly deeply misogynistic.

Girl raped by boys spared jail tells BBC judge's decision was like 'rock in my face' - BBC News

There's another BBC article that explains how the judge reached his decision on how to sentence the rapists

How are teens guilty of rape sentenced? - BBC News https://share.google/G7qEZlfFFXGL7tvZ4

The article helpfully includes a handy-dandy link to the sentencing guidelines. I copied it just below

Sexual offences – Sentencing children and young people share.google/bDZYY8IxJtcr6rO5K

He seems to have completely disregarded the section on aggravating factors. Although there's links within links and I haven't followed and read everything.

A 'nice' little coda, although women and girls bear the brunt of sexual offences (almost exclusively at the hands of males) guess which protected characteristic is missing from the following which would be an aggravating factor

Offence motivated by, or demonstrating hostility based on any of the following characteristics or presumed characteristics of the victim: religion, race, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

The girls gave interviews on Laura Kuenssberg this morning, Darren Jones almost crying when interviewed afterwards. This is not going to be let go by parliament and is under review.
Heartbreaking to listen to but great that they can put their sides across.

He seems to have completely disregarded the section on aggravating factors.

And there were many. However, I'd be in favour of a change in the law (or sentencing guidelines?) such that every rapist got an automatic prison/incarceration sentence, regardless of any "aggravating factors" or age of the perpetrator.

Basically, a transcript of the Laura Kuenssberg interview

Minister breaks down in tears on live TV as schoolgirl raped by two teen boys says decision to spare them jail was like a 'rock straight in my face' | Daily Mail Online

I just went to submit the request for review form and there’s a message saying we are reviewing the case held at Southampton Crown Court and not to submit unless you are personally connected to the case.

I thought in Scotland, as JK Rowling said, the first rape is free, if you are under 25.

its on the National news right now!

its on the National news right now!

Thank you for the further information.

Whatever the mitigating factors for an underage rapist - as shown in one of your links - while it may mean these perpetrators need special treatment in a specialist units, that cannot mean they do not go to some sort of prison.

They need a special prison for a long time so there is a chance to re-educate and rehabilitate them, and keep girls safe.

If none exist, make some instantly. It can’t be impossible.

We already have secure units for under age criminals, some are used for children in demand and some provide therapeutic secure care. They were good at providing this back in the 1980's and 90's, so I can't believe that we have lost the way to the extent that they are no longer in use.

Yup -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-65173054

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/over-1000-sex-attacks-men-29916121?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

news.sky.com/story/sean-hogg-and-the-guidelines-for-sentencing-under-25s-in-scotland-12868279

If she thought she was meeting one boy for ‘a first date’ and they were all waiting, then that rape was planned. They are cunning and malevolent.

Then they raped a second girl. How can that not be a plan?

These sentences will not be enough to change their evidently porny and misogynist upbringing. They have not really been sentenced.

I should think lots of boys now see how easy it is.

Also, what is this? “restraining order for 10 years not to contact their victims”?

So when those girls are 25 and 24 those monsters are free to turn up?