Teenage rapist walks free from horrendous act

A 14-year old male teenage babysitter rapes a 4-year old girl in Cambridgeshire, UK. He blindfolds her with a Hello Kitty apron and promises her chocolate

The 14-year old whose is not named for security reasons, who was a family friend and neighbor, had been asked to look after the girl. While the parents were away he put an apron round the little girl’s face. While she was expecting to be fed with chocolate he performed his vicious acts.

Later the girl entrusted her parents with the weird thing that happened to her. While she was not able to understand what had been done to her, her mother is certain that her daughter “knows what happened was something horrible”.

The parents were completely devastated after their daughter told them what happened to her at bedtime. They had been watching an older sibling in a school play while they trusted their youngest to be in safe hands with the boy whose family they were friends with.

Police reports state that the attacker had recorded that he “lost his mind” because his “hormones took over”. He further stated that he excessively watched pornography on his laptop at home.

As a consequence of the boy’s offence his mother left her job as a child minder to stay home.

In July 2012 the case was brought in front of Judge Gareth Hawkesworth at Cambridge Crown Court.

The culprit, who appeared in his school uniform in court, pleaded guilty to raping a girl under 13 at her home in December 2011.

Advised by their lawyers the victim’s parents expected he would receive a three-year custodial sentence – but he was let off with a community order instead after a judge blamed ‘the world and society’ for his porn addiction.

Judge Gareth Hawkesworth: “You have not shown any sexual interest in children.

“I’m satisfied it was impulsive and I believe you have become sexualized by your exposure to and the corruption of pornography. Your exposure at such a young age has ended in tragedy. It was the fault of the world and society.”

John Kellett, prosecuting, said the girl spoke to her father after the boy left, describing how she had been subjected to oral rape. “The father thought he must have misheard and she repeated it.”

The sentence caused a public outcry.

However, Judge Gareth Hawkesworth said exposure to adult pornography had led to the incident and blamed “society”.

The boy’s defender Julia Flagan said: : “He is an isolated and solitary child. He was watching excessive pornography, which was very inappropriate for his age.” She continued saying that her client lived in fear  “He knows that what he has done will follow him for the rest of his life. He is marked to some as a sexual deviant forever.”

The sentence set terms and conditions that reports of the boy’s progress have to be brought to the judges attention in a frequent manner and that he has to register his whereabouts with police for the coming two and a half years. Further a five–year sexual offences prevention order states he must not seek access to pornography of any kind or use any mobile device or computer without filters to block pornography.

The offender was told he had only been spared six-and-a-half years in jail because he was still a minor.

The victim’s mother believed the sentence “just isn’t enough”, and continued that it sent the “wrong message to people – that you can do something like that a get such a light punishment”.

“The judge was more concerned with justifying the sentence by making a cheap point about pornography. It was really cheap to use that as an excuse for what the boy did,” she said.

“The sentence isn’t enough. He should be punished. His family  were told to expect a three-year custodial sentence so we were shocked when he didn’t get one.

“If the act is treated as rape, he should be punished for rape. It sends the wrong message to people — that you can do something like that and get such a light punishment.

“And it could stop victims coming forward. What’s the point in going through all that?”

The parents decided to appeal to the Attorney General – a new hearing was declined in first week of November 2012 because the case was ‘difficult to sentence’

However, the Attorney General promised that the babysitter’s period of supervision will be ‘tough’ and ‘challenging’ and will ‘force him to address his behaviour’.

An AGO spokesman stated: ‘Following complaints from the victim’s family as well as members of the public, the former Attorney General, Edward Garnier QC MP asked the Crown Prosecution Service to send the case papers to him for review.

‘After very careful consideration of all the factors in the case, he decided not to refer it to the Court of Appeal as he did not believe they would increase the sentence.’

The boy still lives in the neighborhood of his victim. While he can live a close to normal life – even though under more strict control now – the girl’s family needs to find their way back into routine.

The girl’s parents saw their marriage under a harsh tension since the father was against the appeal and wanted to get “back to normal” while the mother believed in justice.

Now the parents face the challenge of raising their children in a society which allows a young rapist to walk free.

The names of the girl’s family as the name of the attacker are kept for security reasons.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in News and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Teenage rapist walks free from horrendous act

  1. Daniela says:

    In my view this is very, very sad for all involved and from all angels. Whenever children are involved, and at 14 the boy is basically still a child, the question that comes to my mind is; where were the parents? Someone who, at the age of 14, is described as solitary and isolated child heavily involved in pornography, most certainly ought to have been noticed as such by his parents and appropriate steps taken to help him. What eventuated is result of multiple failures; that of his immediate family and that of community in which he lived including school. Does that somehow minimize/excuses his outrages act? No, it does not, but the fact remains that he was/is 14.

    Thank you
    Daniela

    • Dear Daniela,

      thanks for your thoughtful comment.
      The point you are making is very true – it was a 14 year old boy.
      We surely cannot blame him alone and it is right to ask why the parents did not notice that their son was consuming pornography.
      As much as this boy should receive help and not be stigmatized for life – how do you put his rights against the girl’s and her family’s rights?
      Yes he is just 14 and surely needs to be supported BUT he is the offender and it cannot be right that he is allowed to keep his daily routine and to continue living in close distance to his victim. He made a mistake and his parents failed in their responsibilities – but the victim’s family has to carry the burden to find back to normal knowing the little girl could meet him any time again.
      That is the miscarriage of justice.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s