Two teenage boys who initially walked free after being convicted of raping two girls in Fordingbridge have been sentenced to four years in detention following a Court of Appeal ruling that their original sentences were 'unduly lenient'. The case sparked nationwide outrage after the sentencing judge said he wanted to 'avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily'.
Original sentences sparked public fury
Three boys, two aged 15 and one aged 14, were spared any custodial sentence and walked free from Southampton Crown Court after being given youth rehabilitation orders. Judge Nicholas Rowland admitted their offences, which combined totalled 10 counts of rape and seven indecent image offences, 'crossed the custody threshold', but he should 'avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily'.
This led to public outrage, with one of the victims saying she does not think 'she will ever be the same', while the other said: 'I am the one being punished.' Even Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer became embroiled in the fall-out, describing it as 'appalling' and escalating the decision to the Court of Appeal.
Appeal Court ruling
The Court of Appeal today decided the sentences of the two 15-year-old boys were 'unduly lenient' and sentenced them to four years in detention. The sentence of the 14-year-old boy who encouraged one of the rapes did not change. Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said: 'We have decided that we do need to change your sentences and both of you do need to go into detention. What you did was so bad that we have no other choice.'
Tom Little KC, speaking for the Attorney General, said Judge Rowland's sentencing remarks were 'entirely lop-sided' with the discussion of the offenders given much more weight compared to the victims. In the original remarks, the word 'rape' was not mentioned, and the impact on the victims was given only a line and a half each.
Criticism of the original judge
Mr Little argued the judge 'failed to grapple with the seriousness of the offending'. He said: 'The judge was wrong to conclude that neither the first victim nor the second victim suffered severe psychological harm.' Southampton Crown Court heard the perpetrators recorded the attacks on their phones, laughing while outnumbering their 'cornered and petrified' victims.
The Attorney General argued previous sexual activity from the survivors had swayed the judge's decision, which was described as a 'significantly outdated approach'. One of the victims, named Jazmine, said she is 'traumatised' and 'cannot move on'. She said: 'When I gave evidence, I was questioned in detail about what I apparently did. I was asked about the details of what happened. I was asked why I had two hands around the perpetrator's penis. It was implied that I wanted it. It was implied that I was experienced in what I was doing. It was implied that I had chosen it or taken part in it. I cannot explain how humiliating and painful that was. I was 15 years old. I am a child who has been raped. I felt like I was being treated like I had done something wrong. The hardest part was being accused of lying. I knew I was telling the truth. I knew what had happened to me. I tried so hard to do my best whilst talking about something which has left me with such lasting pain. That broke something inside me.'
Campaign against violence against women
This case comes amid Metro's This Is Not Right campaign, launched on November 25, 2024, to address the relentless epidemic of violence against women. With partners at Women's Aid, the campaign aims to shine a light on the scale of this national emergency.
