Rapist of a child gets community sentence

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-60137866

volver3 - I may be the first consideration, but I would hope you dont think there are no further considerations to be had. And that there is no crime that should result in jail for someone under 25? Or do you?

The judge would obviously have been privy to the full evidence presented in the case, both by the prosecution and defence. But, as the defendant was found guilty, I cannot for the life of me understand what circumstances would not merit some kind of custodial sentence, given that the victim was 13 years old at the time of the offence.

Fear? Blackmail? Forced in some other way?

Blondiescot

volver3

Blondiescot

I don't see anyone on here acting like a vigilante, to be honest. I just wondered if you thought prison would be appropriate in this case. You don't have to be a judge or have legal training to have an opinion on that.

I think you do.

Otherwise one has an opinion about something one has no background in.

I think I'm entitled to have an opinion on anything I choose - whether or not I have a 'background' in it, whatever you mean by that. Good job I do have 40 years' experience of court reporting and the law (in Scotland) to back up my opinion in this case then...

Good.

Do you think all this was put in train by the SNP? Do you think they are trying to undermine women? Do you think that we should have sentencing guidelines that encourage rehabilitation rather than punishment of immature people, leading to more offending? Do you think that all this was the result of an over-lenient judge? Do you think it should be revisited?

All rhetorical, please don't feel obliged to answer unless you want to.

Perhaps the judge knew more than we do about the case? Without knowing the details of his defence, except that he denied the charge, and said it was consensual sex, we can only go by the finding of "guilty". At thirteen, she was under the age of consent, so even if she HAD consented and there had been no question of force, it would have been what is also called "statutory rape"

If he "carried out the attacks on the girl in Dalkeith Country Park, Midlothian, on various occasions in 2018" and he "threatened the girl, seized her by the wrists and forced her to carry out a sex act before raping her." and she was traumatised by the experience, then I don't quite understand why she repeatedly went again to Dalkeith Country Park, where she met him again and experienced the same attacks on "various occasions".

Rosie51

volver3

Rosie51

Volver "how he must have known" are you seriously saying that a 17 year old male would not know that raping a child of 13 is wrong and against the law?

Good lord, NO. That is not what I'm saying.

I do wish people would read what is written instead of adding their own interpretation to everything.

I did read what you'd written. What did you mean by "How he must have known", what don't you think he knew?

You may have read it, but it doesn't seem that you understood it.

volver3

GrannyGravy13

volver3 I haven’t got a background of law, I do know right from wrong.

Are you actually posting that unless we have a background in any given subject we are not entitled to an opinion?

Anyone can have an opinion.

Some are just more valid than others.

I agree.

So why persist?

GrannyGravy13

volver3 I haven’t got a background of law, I do know right from wrong.

Are you actually posting that unless we have a background in any given subject we are not entitled to an opinion?

Anyone can have an opinion.

Some are just more valid than others.

volver3 I haven’t got a background of law, I do know right from wrong.

Are you actually posting that unless we have a background in any given subject we are not entitled to an opinion?

volver3

Rosie51

Volver "how he must have known" are you seriously saying that a 17 year old male would not know that raping a child of 13 is wrong and against the law?

Good lord, NO. That is not what I'm saying.

I do wish people would read what is written instead of adding their own interpretation to everything.

I did read what you'd written. What did you mean by "How he must have known", what don't you think he knew?

volver3

Blondiescot

I don't see anyone on here acting like a vigilante, to be honest. I just wondered if you thought prison would be appropriate in this case. You don't have to be a judge or have legal training to have an opinion on that.

I think you do.

Otherwise one has an opinion about something one has no background in.

I think I'm entitled to have an opinion on anything I choose - whether or not I have a 'background' in it, whatever you mean by that. Good job I do have 40 years' experience of court reporting and the law (in Scotland) to back up my opinion in this case then...

Iam64, the child was much older when she gave her evidence and was older when the abuse stopped. She saw something on tv and commented about it. It made her parents realise something was not right and it all eventually came out. The police were wonderful and it made it to court. Happily her evidence was undisputed (yes, I agree that should be taken into account) but I was horrified that 6 is not considered particularly young by the courts.

Rosie51

Volver "how he must have known" are you seriously saying that a 17 year old male would not know that raping a child of 13 is wrong and against the law?

Good lord, NO. That is not what I'm saying.

I do wish people would read what is written instead of adding their own interpretation to everything.

Blondiescot

I don't see anyone on here acting like a vigilante, to be honest. I just wondered if you thought prison would be appropriate in this case. You don't have to be a judge or have legal training to have an opinion on that.

I think you do.

Otherwise one has an opinion about something one has no background in.

Volver "how he must have known" are you seriously saying that a 17 year old male would not know that raping a child of 13 is wrong and against the law?

fancythat

Oreo

volver3 permits no criticism about anything which goes on in Scotland, it’s a bit sad really.

You have to wonder about some judges dontcha?

Ah.

"Prison should not be the first option for people under 25. That's the guidelines".

volver3 You agree with that?

Why wouldn't I?

I don't see anyone on here acting like a vigilante, to be honest. I just wondered if you thought prison would be appropriate in this case. You don't have to be a judge or have legal training to have an opinion on that.

Blondiescot

volver3

A whole lot of people on here opining that he must have known it was wrong.

Yes probably.

But he didn't get off Scot free (no pun intended) and the sentence will probably be reviewed. The sentencing guidelines are about justice, not revenge. Now you may all want his b***s cut off but that's not how justice works.

So go on then, what do you think would have been an appropriate sentence in this case?

I don't know because I'm not a judge and I don't work in the law.

Prison probably. Buy I will not apologise for not behaving like a vigilante.

Oreo

Do you need a bigger shovel Volver3?

I'm not here to be popular, I'm here to be factual.

If you don't like that, too bad.

Do you need a bigger shovel Volver3?

Iam64

volver3 - please link to any post that suggests the offender has his testicles cut off?
Suggesting a prison sentence rather than community in the circumstances of this offender seems perfectly u derstandabld to me
A 17 year old male who commits a number of offences against a 13 year old girl, is then found guilty after subjecting the victim to a trial, then appeals the sentence doesn’t sound like someone ready to engage with necessary treatment.

Can I link to one from yesterday about rapists? No, that probably won't do. Anyway.

Yes, prison sounds like the more acceptable option. So the judge needs to reconsider, or there needs to be a review or something, I'd don't know how that works but I'm sure there are many here who do.

However, we have had a cavalcade of people blaming the government, thinking that rapists in Scotland don't go to prison if they are less that 25 years old, making posts about "how he must have known" and ridiculing the Scottish judicial system. Its not on, its an excuse to have a go and (sorry) its ignorant.

I feel shocked if someone is that biased.

volver3 - please link to any post that suggests the offender has his testicles cut off?
Suggesting a prison sentence rather than community in the circumstances of this offender seems perfectly u derstandabld to me
A 17 year old male who commits a number of offences against a 13 year old girl, is then found guilty after subjecting the victim to a trial, then appeals the sentence doesn’t sound like someone ready to engage with necessary treatment.

Oreo

volver3 permits no criticism about anything which goes on in Scotland, it’s a bit sad really.

You have to wonder about some judges dontcha?

Ah.

"Prison should not be the first option for people under 25. That's the guidelines".

volver3 You agree with that?

volver3

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Here's a little nugget for you.

The guidelines are the work of the Scottish Sentencing Council. Chairwoman Lady Dorrian. Anyone suggesting that she is politically motivated needs to give their head a wobble.

I think our heads are perfectly straight and focussed on what is right and what is wrong.

We cannot speak for yours, of course.