Judge Nicholas Rowland

[TonTonMacoute]

Must never be allowed to preside over a trial involving rape or sexual assault ever again.

This is an interesting article, and looks at sentencing guidelines and other complexities, but please don't let more victims suffer his complete lack of any empathy towards female victims.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/a653d1ed-e178-41a7-bb03-3d433a704520?shareToken=b714a3cc871c7c657515b6594349108e

It is said that the original judge was trying to follow the guidelines, in which case how is it that the court of appeal (presumably following the same guidelines) has come to such a different conclusion? Either something is wrong with the guidelines, or something is wrong with the original judge.

Being young and of low intellectual capacity might help us to understand someone's actions, but it does not make them any less dangerous to those around them, and the principle of protection of the public should hold good.

Someone should be talking to the original judge about this error of judgement and the proper processes followed to deal with this.

That’s helpful, thank you.

A general question:
I wonder how diligently people who don’t have a settled/fixed home keep informing police of their change of address.

Isn't this was what J K Rowling called out about a case in Scotland a few months ago. A man of 24 was charged with rape that he carried out as a minor some years earlier. but did not get a custodial sentence. JK said of rape in Scotland: "The first one is free".

That case was particularly terrible and an example of what is being allowed today.

At one point, being over 21 would have meant a prison sentence but Scottish courts are now treating those under the age of 25 as not being responsible for their actions.