Court of Appeal to review sentences imposed on young offenders + a more in depth look at sentencing law

It has been announced that the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) will review the sentences on the young offenders convicted of rape.

Court of appeal to review rape sentences of three teenage boys | UK criminal justice | The Guardian (26 May 2026)

The Guardian report provides more detail about the cases. The report states:

The sentences relate to the rape of two girls in separate incidents in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, in November 2024 and January last year.

In the first attack, a 15-year-old girl was raped by two of the defendants, both aged 14 at the time.

In the second attack, the three boys threatened a 14-year-old girl with a knife and two of them took it in turns to rape her while the others encouraged and filmed the offending.

The boys were sentenced at Southampton crown court on 21 May, when the two 15-year-olds were each given a three-year youth rehabilitation order and intensive supervision and surveillance (ISS). The 14-year-old boy was given an 18-month youth rehabilitation order.

The court heard that one of the 15-year-old defendants had been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as well as “longstanding anxiety”, while the other had an IQ in the “bottom 1% of his contemporaries” and had been diagnosed with ADHD. The 14-year-old was described as having “mild cognitive impairment”

Sentencing:

My previous post looked at sentencing of young persons such as the defendants in this case - Law and Lawyers: Youth Justice - sentencing for serious offences // Government's White Paper (25 May 2026)

It is perhaps worth taking a deeper dive into the sentencing provisions.

Detention and Training Orders are addressed by the Sentencing Act 2020 . The law relating to DTTO is complex 

There is no legal definition of persistent offender but for guidance see Persistent Offender | Youth Justice Legal Centre.

A judge considering imposing a DTTO would, by s235, have to consider 235(2) and 235(3). 

But, crucially, by section 235(3), if the offender is aged under 15 when convicted the court may not make a detention and training order unless it is of the opinion that the offender is a persistent offender.

s235(2) points the judge to section 250 - 'A sentence of detention under this section is a sentence requiring the offender to be detained for the period specified in the sentence.' Section 251 deals with when section 250 applies but section 251(2) states - The court may impose such a sentence if it is of the opinion that neither a youth rehabilitation order nor a detention and training order is suitable.

s235(3) points the judge to section 254 - Extended sentence for certain violent, sexual or terrorism offences. Section 255 imposes various restrictions on this form of sentence.  Amongst other things, the court has top be of the opinion that there is a significant risk to members of the public of serious harm occasioned by the commission by the offender of further specified offences.

This legislation is undoubtedly convoluted. Taken overall,  it seems difficult to see how anything other than a Youth Rehabilitation Order was possible but this is a difficult area and this view may prove to be wrong.  

The view of the Court of Appeal is awaited.

Political comment:

Political comment has invariably been sympathetic to the victims and that is perfectly correct. Politicians would however do well to consider the actual law which, after all, has been made over recent years by Parliament.  Some acknowledgment of the sentencing difficulties and its restrictions would be welcome.