The sentences of teenage boys who escaped jail after raping two girls in Hampshire have been referred to the Court of Appeal by the Attorney General following cross-party outrage and a personal intervention by the Prime Minister — who described the case as “appalling.”
Attorney General Lord Richard Hermer referred the sentences under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme after widespread concern that the boys had avoided custody for a series of serious sexual offences. If the Court of Appeal agrees the sentences were unduly lenient, they can be increased.
Southampton Crown Court sentenced two 15-year-olds and a 14-year-old to youth rehabilitation orders for raping two lone girls in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, in attacks carried out less than two months apart in November 2024 and January 2025. Judge Nicholas Rowland said he aimed to avoid “criminalising these children unnecessarily” — a phrase that has since provoked fierce cross-party condemnation and a wave of public anger.
In the sentencing hearing, one of the 15-year-olds was handed a three-year youth rehabilitation order with 180 days of intensive supervision and surveillance for the rape of each of the two girls and two indecent images charges. The court heard he had been diagnosed with ADHD and long-standing anxiety. A second 15-year-old received the same sentence for three charges of rape against each victim and four counts of taking indecent images.
The crimes themselves were harrowing. The first victim travelled to Fordingbridge believing she was going on a first date with a boy she had been speaking to on Snapchat. Two other boys appeared without warning. She was taken to an underpass by the River Avon where she was “significantly outnumbered” and raped while being filmed. She feared she might be thrown into the river if she did not comply. Afterwards, the boys bought her a drink before leaving her at a bus stop and blocking her on social media.
One of the victims, now 16, appeared on the BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme and said of the sentencing: “The words hit like a rock straight in my face. He 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.” She asked: “What was the point in putting me through that?”
Sir Keir Starmer said the sentences were “appalling” and confirmed he believed it was right that they should be reviewed. The Court of Appeal may now increase the sentences if judges determine they fell outside a reasonable range — though they also have the power to leave them unchanged if they conclude the original judge acted within his discretion.
