A recent sentencing in a Hampshire rape trial has caused controversy as three boys, convicted of raping two girls in separate incidents, avoided jail due in part to their intellectual impairments. The judge’s full remarks shed light on the case.

The sentencing, which took place last month, saw the trio found guilty of a total of 10 rape counts stemming from assaults in 2024 and 2025. Instead of imprisonment, they received youth rehabilitation orders, prompting public outcry.

The case gained national attention and was referred to the Court of Appeal for further scrutiny following the sentencing. Two of the boys, aged 14 at the time, were convicted of raping a 15-year-old girl in Fordingbridge in November and were also involved in the rape of a 14-year-old girl in January 2025. The third boy, aged 13 during the incidents, was found guilty of aiding and abetting in the attacks.

Subsequent to the sentencing, the BBC requested and obtained a transcript of the judge’s remarks, which highlighted considerations of the boys’ neurological impairments.

The boys, identified as J, N, and E, were sentenced on May 21 at the Southampton Crown Court.

Judge Nicholas Rowland noted that J, the first offender, had ADHD and slight cognitive difficulties, which did not absolve him of responsibility. N, the second defendant, was described by experts as having an IQ in the bottom 1% for his age group and extreme neurological impairment, akin to that of an eight-year-old according to his mother.

Regarding N, Judge Rowland stated that his culpability was diminished due to his profound impairments, affecting his understanding of the events significantly.

E, the youngest boy, was characterized as having very low intellectual capacity and a limited grasp of consent. Judge Rowland cited these factors in his decision not to incarcerate the boys, emphasizing the importance of rehabilitation over custody for minors as per sentencing guidelines.

The judge stressed the need for a personalized approach to sentencing, focusing on the individual child or young person rather than solely on the offense committed. He emphasized rehabilitation as the primary goal for young offenders.

Judge Rowland highlighted that although the victims initially consented to some sexual activity, their withdrawal of consent after the incident was filmed rendered the subsequent acts as rape, underscoring that initial consent does not excuse such actions.

Furthermore, the judge mentioned that the two main defendants, J and N, had already spent significant time in detention, a factor considered in determining the necessity of an immediate custodial sentence.

For quick access to your preferred news, select Daily Mirror as a ‘Preferred Source’ on Google News.