Incredible decision

cymrococh · June 25, 2007

Anger at 'lenient' rape sentence

Children's charities have reacted with anger after a window cleaner who raped a girl of 10 was jailed for two years.

Keith Fenn, 24, will be free in four months after a judge said the girl, who was attacked in Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, had appeared older.

The charity Kidscape accused Judge Julian Hall of "trying to find excuses" and said a child must never be blamed.

Attorney General Lord Goldsmith is to decide whether the sentence should be appealed against as "unduly lenient".

Judge Hall had said that the sentencing had been the most difficult decision he had ever made, but the girl had appeared to be 16.

She was attacked by Fenn and an accomplice in a park in Henley-on-Thames on 14 October last year.

Moral dilemma

Oxford Crown Court heard that Fenn removed her clothes and raped her, while an accomplice, Darren Wright, 34, took her home and sexually assaulted her.

The judge said in sentencing he faced a moral dilemma as the fact they had sex within 45 minutes of meeting was an absolute crime.

But he said the girl had dressed provocatively and looked as though she was 16.

He gave Fenn concurrent two-year and 18-month sentences, but he will be free in eight weeks after serving eight months in prison awaiting sentence.

Wright is already free as Judge Hall had already given him a nine-month sentence for inciting the girl to perform a sex act.

'Back to the 1950s'

Dr Michele Elliott, director of Kidscape said the decision had left her "lost for words".

She said: "It takes us back to the 1950s when the victim was blamed if they were dressed provocatively.

"No one in my opinion could mistake a 10-year-old child, even dressed up, for a 16-year-old. They are just trying very hard to find excuses.

"You can never blame a child victim for sexual abuse when excusing the abuser of any kind of abuse."

The NSPCC added: "There is no excuse for having sex with a 10-year-old, no matter how she dresses."

A spokesman for Lord Goldsmith said he had asked the Crown Prosecution Service to send him the papers on the case, and would consider whether or not to refer the sentence to the Court of Appeal as "unduly lenient".

He has 28 days to make a decision.

What the f*ck is up with judges?

Cobs · June 25, 2007

This post is not viewable to guests.

You can sign in to your account at the login page here