The sentencing, for rape, of young offenders resulted in an enormous volume of critical public comment.
Previous post 31 May - Law and Lawyers: Youth Justice and sentencing for very serious offences
The Prime Minister said that he was "appalled" at the sentences - Starmer 'appalled' by case of boys spared jail after raping teenage girls - BBC News. Several other politicians could not resist the lure of Twitter (X) - The Independent ()22 May). There was no
recognition in such statements that the legal framework for sentencing young offenders is set by Parliament for which, of course, politicians are responsible.The Attorney-General referred the sentences to the Court of Appeal under the unduly lenient sentence scheme. The outcome of that is awaited.
The Children's Commissioner (Dame Rachel de Souza) issued a statement - Statement from the Children’s Commissioner on the sentencing in the Fordingbridge rape case | Children's Commissioner for England.
Much of this criticism might have been avoided had sentencing remarks been published at the time. Such remarks inform the public about cases, the relevant law, and how judges arrive at particular sentences (which always depend on the actual facts of the case).
A Court Transcript of the sentencing was published on 4 June and may be read at R -v- J, N and E: court transcript of sentencing hearing - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. (23 pages). This shows how the judge reached the actual sentences imposed including the fact - not previously reported - that J and N had been on "qualifying curfew" for 462 and 461 days respectively. They had also been in local authority accommodation for 27 and 20 days respectively.
Note: Qualifying curfew is a condition of pre-trial or post-conviction bail that requires an individual to remain at a specified address for not less than 9 hours per day. This is taken into account when sentencing.
No comments:
Post a Comment