Three teenage boys who escaped custody after being convicted of raping two girls should have been detained, the Court of Appeal has heard — as the attorney general labelled their community sentences “unduly lenient” following a public outcry.
The two victims — aged 15 and 14 at the time of the attacks — watched from the public gallery as Tom Little KC, for Attorney General Lord Hermer, argued that the sentencing judge was “wrong to conclude that a community sentence could be justified for any of them”.
“Three teenage boys given community sentences for raping two girls face possible detention after Court of Appeal hearing.”
The boys, referred to as X, Y and Z because of their young age, were convicted of a combined 10 rape offences and seven indecent image offences. X and Y, now 15, raped both girls in separate incidents in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, in November 2024 and January 2025. Z, now 14, encouraged the second rape and filmed parts of it.
When Judge Nicholas Rowland passed the non-custodial sentences in May, the girls and their families reacted with fury. One of the victims told the BBC the sentences felt like a “slap on the wrist”, adding 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”. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer called it “an appalling case”.
At Wednesday’s hearing, Little said the judge had misapplied sentencing principles, arguing that “the extent and nature of the offending was so serious such that the only appropriate sentence for [the boys] was detention”. He criticised the judge for failing to properly address the “sheer number of rape offences” and the harm caused.
The boys’ lawyers countered that Judge Rowland had approached sentencing correctly, balancing rehabilitation against future risk. The judge had noted that X had been diagnosed with ADHD and “long-standing anxiety”, while Y had an IQ in the bottom 1%, with “extreme neurodevelopmental impairment” making him present “more like an eight-year-old”. Youth Justice Services assessed both X and Y as “high risk of serious harm” to young females, but the judge chose community orders.
During the hearing, Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr criticised the Crown Prosecution Service for an inaccurate press release that suggested a knife was involved in the rapes — a claim not supported by the evidence.
Little also argued that the 10-year restraining order imposed on the boys should have been indefinite, saying its limited duration had caused the victims “very significant concern”.
The boys did not attend the hearing. The court has reserved its decision, leaving the victims and their families waiting to learn whether the sentences will be increased.