Image source, Getty ImagesA judge was “wrong” to pass community sentences on three boys convicted of raping two teenage girls in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, the Court of Appeal has heard.
The sentences were referred to the Court of Appeal as “unduly lenient” by Attorney General Lord Hermer.
Tom Little KC, for the Attorney General, told the court: “It is submitted that the extent and nature of the offending was so serious such that the only appropriate sentence for [the boys] was detention”.
But lawyers for the boys argued the judge had approached sentencing correctly, giving the best chance of rehabilitation while protecting against future offending.
To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
This video can not be played
Warning: This story contains details some may find distressing
All the children in the case have been granted anonymity because of their young age – with the offenders referred to as X, Y and Z.
One of the girls – C1 – was 15 when she was raped by X and Y in November 2024 at an underpass near a river in Fordingbridge after first engaging in some consenting sexual activity with X. Parts of the rape were filmed.
The second girl – C2, who was 14 – was raped by X and Y in January 2025 in a recreation ground in Fordingbridge. Again there had been some consenting sexual activity before the rape began, and again parts of the rape were filmed, this time by boy Z.
At the time of the rapes X and Y were 14 and Z was 13. They were convicted of 10 rape offences between them.
Tom Little KC said the judge in the case was “wrong to conclude that a community sentence could be justified for any of them”.
“Had the judge properly assessed the seriousness of the offences, he could only reasonably have concluded that lengthy sentences of detention were required for both X and Y and that a sentence of detention was required for Z,” he said.
Image source, Crown Prosecution ServiceDuring the hearing the Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr criticised the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for putting out an inaccurate press release suggesting a knife was involved in the rapes.
When Judge Nicholas Rowland passed the sentences at Southampton Crown Court in May, there was an outcry from the girls and their families and from politicians. The Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer described it as “an appalling case.”
One of the girls described the sentences as a “slap on the wrist”.
She told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg that it “almost made it seem as if what the boys did was not OK – but it was OK in the eyes of the law because they were still children”.
C2 told BBC Newsnight that she was suffering from vivid flashbacks.
“I just want to be able to go on a walk without being scared that I’m going to see them and they’re gonna try to do something again,” she said.
Judge Rowland gave X and Y three-year Youth Rehabilitation Orders (YRO) with 180 days of intensive surveillance and supervision.
The third boy, now 14, was given an 18-month YRO.
All three boys were also made subject to a three-month curfew and given a restraining order for 10 years not to contact their victims.
Explaining his sentencing decision to Southampton Crown Court, Judge Nicholas Rowland said he wanted to avoid “criminalising” the boys unnecessarily.
He said the guidelines required him to use custody as “a last resort”.
He also took into account that X and Y had served the equivalent of 18-month and 17-month sentences, as they had lived under curfews while awaiting trial.
‘Different approach’
During the Appeal Court hearing, Tom Little KC said: “We accept… that the judge did try to apply the relevant principles, but our submission is he misapplied them along the way, the cumulative effect of which was to lead to unduly lenient sentences.”
He also said that that the judge’s sentencing remarks made “limited reference to the marked impact of this offending on both victims and the clear evidence of extensive harm suffered as a result”.
Ed Henry KC, representing Y, said the boy had been made a “pariah” as a result of the public being misled by reporting of the case because of an inaccurate press release from the Crown Prosecution Service.
“Y behaved deplorably and disgracefully and he of course deserves to be punished,” Henry said.
“But the public outcry, the opprobrium..has gravely exacerbated his punishment.”
Henry said: “Parliament has decided that when sentencing children an entirely different approach is required.”
He said his client was in the bottom one percent of IQs for his age.
“He has a very, very simplistic understanding of the word consent.”
On behalf of boy X, Clare Wade KC said “We submit that the learned judge approached the sentencing exercise correctly.
“The sentences imposed broadly provide the best opportunity for the child offenders to learn and develop and provide the most effective way of protecting women and girls in future by preventing future offending.”
Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr criticised the CPS for issuing an press release suggesting that the boys had been convicted of a “knife-point rape”.
“The judge made an express finding to the contrary,” she said.
“I would like to know what steps are being taken to prevent anything like this ever happening again.”
She also expressed deep concerns that it had taken weeks to correct the press release.
“How on earth could it have taken so long, given all of the inaccurate reporting about the nature of this offending that was swirling around immediately?,” she said.
The hearing in front of the Lady Chief Justice, Lord Justice Edis and Ms Justice Norton is listed for 2 days.
The boys have been told to attend Southampton Crown Court at 14:00 on Thursday to watch the judges’ decision by videolink.
The hearing continues.
Previous stories
Related link
