A judge’s decision not to jail two teenage boys who raped two girls has been described by one of the victims as a “rock straight in my face”.The trial at Southampton Crown Court heard the girls were raped in two separate incidents in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, the first attack on November 26, 2024 and the second on January 17, 2025.The boys, both aged 15, were given youth rehabilitation orders (YRO) and made subject to intensive supervision and surveillance (ISS).In an interview with the BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme, one of the victims – who was 15 at the time of the incident – asked: “What was the point in putting me through that?”Speaking anonymously alongside her family, the now-16-year-old said the judge’s decision “almost made it seem as if what the boys did was not OK, but it was OK in the eyes of the law because they were still children”.Jodie Mittel KC, prosecuting, told the trial the girl had visited one of the defendants in November 2024 after meeting him on Snapchat.The prosecutor said that after performing sex acts on the boy, who was then 14, she became “scared and anxious” when the second defendant arrived, and the pair raped her while the incident was filmed.The trial was being held at Southampton Crown Court (Chris Ison/PA) (PA Archive)Ms Mittel said that afterwards, videos of the incident had been sent around and other people made jokes about her, and she received messages calling her a “slag”.The complainant in the January incident, who was 14 at the time, was raped in a field near to Fordingbridge recreation ground while the incident was also filmed.In the sentencing hearing on Thursday, a 15-year-old boy was handed a three-year YRO with 180 days of ISS for the rape of each of the two girls and two indecent images charges.The court heard he had been diagnosed with ADHD as well as “long-standing anxiety”.A second 15-year-old was given the same sentence for three charges of rape against each of the two victims and four counts of taking indecent images in relation to filming of the incidents.The court was told he had an IQ of the “bottom 1 per cent of his contemporaries” and had been diagnosed with ADHD.A third boy, 14, was given a YRO for 18 months for two charges of rape in the January incident by encouraging the second defendant and an offence of indecent images.He was described as having “mild cognitive impairment”.Judge Nicholas Rowland told the defendants: “I have to remember that you are not small adults. I have to think how likely you are to do serious things again and I need to make sure you do not do serious things again in the future.”Explaining his sentence, he said: “I should avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily and understand the effects of their behaviour and support their reintegration into society.”He added that “peer pressure played a large part in what went on”.During the BBC interview, the girl’s mother issued an appeal to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, asking: “If it was your daughter, your niece, your son, your nephew, your family member, would you be happy?“Because we’re not happy and I don’t think any other member of the public will be happy too. So you’re in a position of power to help, so please help.”Speaking to BBC Breakfast on Sunday, Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner Donna Jones said: “What is really alarming is the judge’s comments praising these three young males for their good conduct from the charge up to the point of their sentence.Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire Donna Jones (Andrew Matthews/PA) (PA)“But let’s not forget, these were not guilty pleas that were entered. This is three males who put their victims through the trial and the ordeal of having to re-live all of that. That has really added to the burden for those two survivors.”Ms Jones said she agrees that rehabilitation is “important”, but added: “These are not low-level offences. They are some of the worst offences you can do to another human being.“The police often refer to rape as the worst offence you can survive… and the victims will have to live with the consequences of this for the rest of their lives.“That’s why (a custodial sentence) is appropriate, for the protection of others and so (the culprits) can get that support in prison. They should be sent to youth offending.”A Government spokesman said the attorney general’s office had received “multiple” requests for the sentences to be reviewed under the Unduly Lenient Scheme.He said: “We share the public’s shock at the details of this horrific case, and our thoughts are with the young victims during this distressing time.“The law officers are urgently reviewing the case with the utmost care and attention.”