A 21-year-old man accused of raping a 13-year-old girl in a park has caused outrage after he was allowed to walk free from court. The judge considered him too young to be jailed, a decision that has caused widespread anger and disbelief. The case highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the age of criminal responsibility and raises questions about whether the justice system is doing enough to protect victims of sexual assault. This article will examine the details of the case and explore the public’s reaction to the verdict.
A Scottish judge has received criticism for considering Sean Hogg, who was found guilty of raping a 13-year-old girl, too young to be jailed. Hogg attacked the victim, 13, on several occasions between March and June 2018, when he was 17 years old, court documents show. He also assaulted the teenager by threatening her and pulling down her clothing. He then grabbed her by the wrists and raped her at Dalkeith Country Park in Midlothian, Scotland. Hogg has been placed under supervision and put on the sex offenders’ register for three years, however, he has avoided jail, and will have to carry out 270 hours of unpaid work.
According to new guidance by the Scottish Sentencing Council, criminals under the age of 25 are treated more leniently due to their “lower level of maturity”. Lord Lake said he had to take Hogg’s age into account while sentencing him. “For the level of seriousness, I have to consider your liability and have regard to your age as a factor. This offence, if committed by an adult over 25, you attract a sentence of four or five years,” he said. “I don’t consider that appropriate and don’t intend to send you to prison. You are a first offender with no previous history of prison; you are 21 and were 17 at the time. Prison does not lead me to believe this will contribute to your rehabilitation.”
The sentencing has sparked outrage among those in the legal and political profession, with Rape Crisis Scotland’s CEO Sandy Brindley describing the sentencing as “worryingly lenient”. “This is an extremely serious case and we are shocked this perpetrator has not received a custodial sentence,” she said. “Given the gravity of this crime and the fact it was tried at the High Court, this sentence appears to us to be worryingly lenient. Our thoughts are with the survivor of this crime. For survivors of any sexual violence, it can be very difficult to see reports of convicted perpetrators walking free from court.”
Scottish Conservative justice spokesman Jamie Greene shared Brindley’s views and called the lack of a prison sentence “a total insult to the young teenage victim in this case”. He also questioned the SNP’s sentencing guidelines, stating that “it once again reaffirms how misguided the SNP’s sentencing guidelines are in reality and how judges’ hands are tied as a result.”
Hogg’s case raises concerns over the issue of lenient sentences given to perpetrators of serious crimes, particularly rape, which can deter victims from coming forward and can lead to more people being victimised. It is important to ensure that justice is served, and rape victims receive the support and protection they deserve to rebuild their lives after being traumatised by such a heinous crime.
In conclusion, the judiciary must be careful when considering the age of an offender when deciding the severity of a sentence, and the focus must remain on the harm that has been done to the victim rather than the age of the perpetrator. It is crucial that justice is not only done but seen to be done, and that the system as a whole works to show that this kind of behaviour will not be tolerated. A robust justice system that humanely but effectively holds offenders to account is essential in order to protect vulnerable members of society, instil confidence in survivors of sexual violence and ensure they feel safe reporting such crimes no matter who the perpetrator is.
