Teenage rapists detained for four years after ‘unduly lenient’ sentence reviewed by Appeal Court Judges
Two 15-year-old boys who were spared custody for the rape of two girls in Fordingbridge have been sentenced to four years’ detention after the Court of Appeal ruled their sentences were “unduly lenient”.
The boys, known as X and Y, and another aged 14 known as Z, were given non-custodial sentences in May for a combined 10 counts of rape and seven indecent image offences related to two victims, who were separately attacked in the Hampshire town in November 2024 and January 2025.
The two older boys were involved in both attacks, while the 14-year-old encouraged the rape of the second victim.
They were given non-custodial sentences in May after a judge at Southampton Crown Court said he should “avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily” and that detention was a “last resort”, but the Attorney General referred the sentences to the Court of Appeal as “unduly lenient” days later.
At a hearing on Wednesday, lawyers for the Attorney General said detention was the “only appropriate sentence”, while barristers for the boys said the sentences were correct and focused on rehabilitating them.
On Thursday, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Edis and Ms Justice Norton sentenced X and Y to four years’ detention, while leaving Z’s sentence unchanged.
Reading a summary of their judgment to X and Y, who appeared by video link from Southampton Crown Court, Baroness Carr said: “We have decided that we do need to change your sentences and both of you do need to go into detention.”
She continued: “We have made this decision because we think that what you both did was so bad that we have no other choice.”
Baroness Carr later added: “Even though you will not be in detention for the whole of the four-year sentence, we know that it will still be a long time for you to be away from your home and families.
“But what you both did was so bad that we decided that we had no other choice than to make these sentences.”
Addressing Z, who also attended Southampton Crown Court, Baroness Carr said: “We have decided that because you were very young and find some things really very difficult to understand, and because you were only involved on one occasion, we do not need to change your sentence.”
The judge also said that while the sentencing judge, Judge Nicholas Rowland, faced a “difficult sentencing exercise”, a custodial sentence for X and Y was “unavoidable”.
The families of the girls said they were “deeply grateful” and “relieved” after the decision to increase the sentences.
One family added: “We believe this was the correct decision, and we are thankful that our voices were heard throughout this process. While nothing can undo our family’s anguish, this outcome brings a greater sense of justice and accountability.”
At the sentencing hearing, Judge Rowland said that although X and Y’s offences “crossed the custody threshold” and posed a “high risk of serious harm” to young females, he had to consider their backgrounds.
He said X had been diagnosed with ADHD and “long-standing anxiety” while Y had an IQ in the bottom 1%, had ADHD with “extreme neurodevelopmental impairment” and presented “more like an eight-year-old”.
X was previously given a three-year youth rehabilitation order (YRO) with 180 days of intensive supervision and surveillance for raping and taking indecent images of both victims.
Y received the same sentence for three charges of rape against each of the two victims and four counts of taking indecent images by filming the incidents.
Z was given an 18-month YRO for two charges of rape related to the latter victim after encouraging the second defendant, and for an offence of indecent images.
But Baroness Carr said that Judge Rowland “undervalued the seriousness of their offending and the serious harm caused by it to the complainants”.
She continued: “The involvement in the two incidents taken together was such that an immediate and substantial period of detention was required.”
In the Court of Appeal’s 52-page full judgment, Baroness Carr said statements from the two girls “spoke of enduring distress and despair”, but Judge Rowland “did not explain why he found that this material did not prove severe psychological harm”.
Baroness Carr continued: “It appears that he may have placed substantial weight on his own impressions formed during the trial.
“He was entitled to take that into account, but great care is required before allowing that impression to lead to the rejection of evidence of the kind we have described.”
The senior judge added that the two girls’ rapes are “very likely to have long-term and profound consequences, not all of which are immediately apparent”.
The boys are pursuing appeals against their convictions, Baroness Carr also said, adding that any appeal “will be decided separately”.
Baroness Carr later said the original judge failed to explain “how, if at all, he was reflecting the fact that both X and Y had been involved in two incidents involving different victims, each of whom was raped more than once by different people”.
She also said the judge had found that peer pressure was involved in the incidents, “although he did not identify any substantial evidence to support that view”.
The leading judge added: “The principal offenders, X and Y, do not appear to have required much encouragement and, anyway, simply repeated their behaviour after the first incident rather than learning from it or gaining any insight.”
She concluded the judge had “materially undervalued the seriousness of the offending by X and Y”, who would have been given sentences “substantially in excess of 10 years” if they were adults.
The three judges also extended X and Y’s restraining orders, preventing them from contacting either victim, from 10 years to an indefinite order.
Baroness Carr also said there had been “misinformed and inappropriate commentary” on the case, having previously criticised the Crown Prosecution Service over inaccuracies in a press release issued when the boys were first sentenced in May, which were not corrected for several days.
Following the decision, Attorney General Lord Hermer said: “Rape is a horrifying crime, and one that our justice system should and will punish severely. I welcome the Court of Appeal’s decision to increase the sentences of the two boys, resulting in their detention.
“No-one should have to endure what the victims went through, and I commend their bravery in coming forward and campaigning for justice. This Government will continue to do everything it can to tackle violence against women and girls.”
Justice Minister Jake Richards said: “I welcome today’s judgment from the Court of Appeal. These were appalling crimes, and I pay credit to the victims for their courage in coming forward.
“This demonstrates that the Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme can work. That is what victims and the public rightly expect.”
Published: by Radio NewsHub