The case was reviewed under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme after the boys were given youth rehabilitation orders by a judge who said he wanted to ‘avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily’
Two boys spared custody for rape have today been locked up for four years after the case was reviewed by the Court of Appeal.
The 15-year-olds, known as X and Y, were originally given youth rehabilitation orders (YRO) and put on a supervision programme by a judge in May, over the rape of two girls in separate attacks in Fordingbridge, Hampshire in November 2024 and January 2025.
A third boy, 14, and known as Z, was also given a YRO for encouraging one of the offenders – and for an indecent images offence – over the January attack. One victim was raped three times. The boys shared videos of the attacks on social media.
Today, the two older boys have been locked up after their cases were referred to the Court of Appeal by Attorney General Lord Hermer under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme.
Handing down her judgment, Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, sitting with Lord Justice Edis and Ms Justice Norton, spoke directly to the boys who were on a live video link.
Baroness Carr told the two boys: “We have decided that we do need to change your sentences and that both of you do need to go into detention.
“We have made that decision because we think that what you both did was so bad that we have no other choice.
“You both raped two girls on two different occassions. You were enjoying it and you were egging each other on. You made it worse by filming what you did, which was horrible. We have decided that both of you need to go into detention for four years.”
Baroness Carr said that, because of the young age of the third boy and the fact he did not touch the girls, the judges had decided not to change his sentence.
Sentencing the boys at Southampton Crown Court previously, Judge Nicholas Rowland said the offences of the two older boys “crossed the custody threshold”, but he should “avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily,” adding that detention was a “last resort”.
Tom Little KC, for the Attorney General, told the Court of Appeal at the start of the two-day hearing into the sentences on Wednesday that the boys should be locked up.
The boys, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were convicted of a combined ten rape and seven indecent image offences after the attacks.
Lawyers for the boys told the hearing on Wednesday that the sentences were appropriate, with Y’s barrister claiming that the sentencing judge “applied the correct legal framework with conspicuous care”.
Sentencing the boys at Southampton Crown Court previously, X was given a three-year youth rehabilitation order 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.
Mr Little said, during the appeal hearing, o that parts of Judge Rowland’s approach to sentencing were “fundamentally flawed” and “appear to minimise aspects of the case”, including the harm caused to the victims.
The barrister argued that each victim and the evidence of the “extensive harm” they had suffered was given only a line-and-a-half in part of the judge’s sentencing remarks.
He continued: “It is submitted that is symptomatic of an approach which was, regrettably, incomplete and inadequate by the judge.”
Mr Little added: “It is difficult to understand how the judge could properly have come to the conclusion that he did, given the sheer number of rape offences, which the judge does not properly address in any way in… his sentencing remarks, the underlying seriousness of the offending and the harm sustained.”
In a statement ahead of the hearing, the victim of the first attack said it had “left me harmed so severely that I do not think I will ever be the same” and that the trial of her attackers “broke something inside me”.
Clare Wade KC, for X, said: “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.”
Edward Henry KC, for Y, said his client has a “constellation of comorbid conditions that dramatically reduced his culpability” and that the Attorney General had not established that Judge Rowland made a “gross error”.
He said that the sentence given to Y was a “rigorous, structured, rehabilitative programme”, adding it was “the best opportunity to ensure that this child, for all the defects that fate has vested upon him, becomes an adult who poses no risk to anyone”.