Court of Appeal date set to review sentencing of teenage boys spared jail in Fordingbridge rape case
The sentences of three young boys who escaped custody for the rape of two girls will be reviewed at the Court of Appeal next month.
Two 15-year-old boys who raped two girls in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, were given non-custodial sentences by a judge at Southampton Crown Court who said he wanted to “avoid needlessly criminalising these children”.
A third boy, now 14, was also found guilty of being involved in the second offense of assault and indecent images.
Sir Keir Starmer previously announced the “regrettable” case would be referred to the Court of Appeal under the overly lenient plan.
Sentences will now be assessed by senior judges at a two-day hearing starting on July 1.
Arguing for the referral, Attorney-General Lord Hermer said there was “an epidemic of violence against women and girls in this country” and that the two girls “showed tremendous courage in coming forward”.
The first 15-year-old defendant was given a three-year youth rehabilitation order (YRO) with 180 days of intensive supervision and supervision (ISP) for rape and two indecent images charges each of two girls, aged 14 and 15 at the time.
The second boy, 15, was given the same sentence on three counts of rape against each of the two victims and four counts of indecent photography related to the filming of the events.
A third boy, aged 14 at the time and aged 13, was sentenced to 18 months YRO on two counts of rape for inciting the second defendant and making an indecent image in the second incident.
In his statement while handing down the sentence, Judge Nicholas Rowland said that the crimes committed by two 15-year-old teenagers “exceeded the threshold of detention”.
He also said rules on state supervision of young offenders should be seen as a “last resort” and “should take into account the objectives of youth justice, which are to prevent children from offending and to ensure the welfare of the child”.
He said: “I need to take into account the ages of the children at the time these crimes were committed.
“As this decision makes clear, what I am concerned with is not just chronological age but also emotional and developmental age.
“I need to take into account the ages of these children … and act on the basis that custody is a last resort.”
Judge Rowland explained that although the two 15-year-olds were assessed by the Youth Justice Service as a “medium risk” of re-offending but a “high risk of serious harm” to the young women, he had to take into account their backgrounds.
He said the first defendant had been diagnosed with ADHD and “long-standing anxiety”, while the second had an IQ in the bottom 1%, had ADHD with “extreme neurodevelopmental impairment” and was “more like an eight-year-old”.
