The Fordingbridge Rape Sentences: The Dilemma of Sentencing Children for Serious Crime.

The non-custodial Youth Rehabilitation Orders handed down by Judge Nicholas Rowland at Southampton Crown Court on 21st May 2026 on 3 teenage boys (aged 14 and 13 at the date of their crimes) for the gang rape of two lone girls aged 14 and 15 in Fordingbridge, Hampshire in 2024 and 2025 has triggered a major public outcry, generating public intervention by the Prime Minister and a decision by Attorney General Lord Hermer KC to refer the sentences to the Court of Appeal under the Unduly Lenient Scheme set out in s.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Attorney general had 'no doubt' on reviewing teen boys' rape sentences). The hearing is listed on 16th June. To discuss the very difficult sentencing issues generated by the case and the tension it reveals between diversion from the criminal justice system and rehabilitation of child/young offenders on the one hand and the needs of punishment, deterrence and public safety on the other, Ken Macdonald KC and Tim Owen KC are joined once again by Sarah Vine KC, a barrister with extensive experience of defending adults and children charged with rape and other serious sexual offences. Bearing in mind the appalling conditions in and disastrous outcomes from detention in Young Offender Institutes such as Feltham (as revealed in the 2025 HM Inspectorate Report) as well as the clear priority set out in the Sentencing Council’s guidance on Sentencing Children and Young People that the focus on sentencing a child should be on rehabilitation “where possible” (https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/guidelines/sentencing-children-and-young-people/) is it possible to argue that Judge Rowland’s sentences are radically out of line with sentencing principles to the extent that they represent a “gross error” on the basis they “fall outside the range of sentences which the judge, applying his mind to all relevant factors, could reasonably consider appropriate” (Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 1989 [1990] 1 WLR 41) ? And do the interventions by Keir Starmer and Richard Hermer show that, despite their human rights backgrounds, they respond as typical politicians in the face of a populist demand to send more people, including children, to prison and for longer. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices