A teenage girl asked why her attackers were allowed to walk free while the Attorney General has been urged to review the 'too lenient' sentences passed on her rapists11:33, 24 May 2026Updated 11:34, 24 May 2026A girl who was 'petrified' as she was raped by two teenage boys says a judge's decision to spare them jail sentences was like a "rock straight in my face".Speaking to the BBC, the girl, now 16, blasted their lenient sentences, saying 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."She said: "Why did I sit and put myself through the pain of going to court, going through a trial, reliving everything...because of evidence and watching it all happen again...what was the point of putting me through that?"READ MORE: 'I worked for Donald Trump and fear what he'll do next — here are my four predictions'READ MORE: P&O Cruises paracetamol 'penalty risk' for passengers travelling to certain countriesShe said it took her six months to speak up about the rape after it sent her 'spiralling' and she was left feeling like she "just wanted to die".The girl, then 15, was attacked after she travelled to meet one of the boys for the first time, after meeting him on social media platform Snapchat.But when his pals arrived she was raped in an underpass by the River Avon in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, suffering a 90-minute horror ordeal, as she was forced into a 'threesome'.Jodie Mittel KC, prosecuting, told the trial the girl had visited one of the defendants in November 2024 after meeting him on Snapchat. She said the girl was "nervous" but "comfortable" when alone with the boy because she was feeling "some love towards" him.But she became "scared and anxious" when others arrived "pressuring her" and recording her as they laughed. Videos of the incident were later sent around and other people made jokes about her, and she received messages calling her a "disgusting" and a "whore and a slag".The boys were convicted of the rape of two girls, with the first attack on this girl taking place on November 26, 2024, and a second on another girl on January 17, 2025.Her mum said they had been through a trial which had taken 18 months: "Quite frankly what for, for a slap on the wrist?...How are they still walking around?"She appealed directly to the prime minister, saying: "Please help. 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."The girl and her family want the sentences to be changed, and the boys sent to jail.The mum's partner, who was in court when the sentences were handed down, said he had to "bite his lip" and he felt "physically sick", when he heard the judge's decision: "It seems to me like the victims are the ones suffering and the perpetrators are the ones that have seemingly got away scot-free."The attorney general is now to review this sentence to see if it was too lenient. A Government spokesman said the attorney general's office had received "multiple" requests for the sentences to be reviewed under the Unduly Lenient Scheme.The family appeared to be backed by Cabinet Minister Darren Jones, who was visibly emotional as he said the girls "deserve justice, telling the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg: "It's a horrifying story. For any parent to imagine their children in those situations is unimaginable. The legal process is that the attorney general now reviews the decision from the court."He has 28 days to make a decision, whether to refer it to the Court of Appeal. The Attorney General will make a decision quicker than that."As a minister, what I can't do is get ahead of the Attorney General's decision. But look, as a parent and as a member of the public, you can imagine what my personal view is on the situation."Mr Jones added: "I'm not allowed to get ahead of the Attorney General's decision, but those girls deserve justice as do their families, both for them, but also for other girls that put in that position, and quite frankly, other boys need to know that they can't behave in that way and get away with it."‌Asked if the interview was hard to watch, he said: "It was very hard to watch because no parent wants their daughter to be in those circumstances and you don't want a society in which girls are growing up in those circumstances."Last week Judge Nicholas Rowland, said he wanted to avoid "criminalising" the "very young" boys.The two defendants, who are now 15, were also convicted of attacking a second victim, who was raped in a field in January 2025. Another boy, now 14, was also convicted for his involvement in the second attack.‌A 15-year-old boy was sentenced to a youth rehabilitation order (YRO) for three years with 180 days of intensive supervision and surveillance (ISS) for the rape of each of the two girls and two indecent images charges. The court heard that 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 that he had an IQ of the “bottom 1% of his contemporaries” and had been diagnosed with ADHD.A third boy, aged 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".The attorney general will have 28 days to decide whether the sentences should be referred to the Court of Appeal.‌A government spokesperson 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."At the sentencing hearing at Southampton crown court, the judge stressed the "seriousness" of the crimes and said the filming of the assaults made them even "more serious". After making the comments about their age, he praised the boys for how they had behaved during the trial.Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner Donna Jones has offered to support the families of the victims if they wish to appeal against the "leniency" of the sentences.‌She said: "This is an extremely disturbing case. I'm deeply concerned these boys felt they could carry out such terrifying acts and share them online and not go to prison."Their sentences reflect a clear focus on rehabilitation rather than criminalisation. They are far too lenient."As they stand, they offer little comfort to their victims as they try to rebuild their lives after such harrowing experiences.Article continues below"The education of young people about sexual violence and misogynistic attitudes is vitally important if we're to prevent crimes like this from happening again."