SCOTLAND'S Lord Advocate has decided that the Crown should appeal against the sentence of a man who was spared jail for raping a 13-year-old girl, on the grounds it was “unduly lenient”.
Sean Hogg, 21, was sentenced earlier this month at the High Court in Glasgow to a community payback order of 270 hours of unpaid work after being found guilty of rape.
Hogg, from Hamilton in South Lanarkshire, was also put under supervision and added to the sex offenders register for three years.
The sentence sparked outrage and calls to review guidelines which advise that custodial sentences should only be imposed on those under 25 if no other punishment is appropriate.
READ MORE: Rishi Sunak dubs Scottish Parliament a 'devolved assembly'
Kenny Donnelly, deputy Crown agent at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, said: “Sentence is quite rightly the domain of the independent judiciary.
“However, the law provides for some limited circumstances in which prosecutors have the right to appeal against sentences.
“The appeal court has set a high test to be satisfied for this to happen. The sentence must be unduly lenient, which means that it must be out with the range of sentences which the sentencing judge, taking account of all relevant factors, could reasonably have imposed.
“The question of Crown appeal against sentence in this case has been carefully considered and the decision to place this matter before the appeal court has been communicated to the complainer through her representative.”
The victim was 13 when Hogg, then 17, raped her in Dalkeith Country Park, Midlothian.
Speaking on her behalf, her solicitor Aamer Anwar said on Friday: “This morning we were advised that the Lord Advocate has decided that the Crown should appeal the sentence imposed upon Sean Hogg convicted of rape, on the grounds that it is ‘unduly lenient’.
“My client is relieved and grateful to the Lord Advocate – it has been nearly a month since Sean Hogg walked free from the High Court, ordered to carry out 270 hours of unpaid work after being convicted of rape.
“My client still does not understand why Hogg was allowed to get on with his life when he had ruined her, she wonders how many girls will think there is no point in reporting rape after seeing a rapist walk free.
“Whilst the police, prosecution and jury did its job, she feels that in the end she was failed by our justice system, but today once more she has some hope that justice will be done.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel