Thursday, April 24, 2014

Boy who raped his younger sister 50 times in two years - starting when he was 13 and she was just nine - is jailed for 10 years

A teenager who repeatedly raped his sister - starting when she was just nine years old - has been jailed for 10 years.
The shocking case came before Lincoln Crown Court this week, when a judge told how the boy raped his sister over 50 times during a two-year 'campaign'.
The boy had denied six charges of rape between 2008 and 2011 but was found guilty by a jury following an earlier trial.

Jailing the boy, Recorder Gareth Evans QC told him: 'This was akin to a campaign of rape. This was an entrenched pattern of deviant behaviour.

'When you were 13 you began raping your own sister, who was then aged just nine years old.
'You continued raping her on a regular basis at least once a fortnight until she was 11. You caused her physical and mental anguish which must have been obvious.
'Her innocence was taken away in the very place she should have found safe - her home.'
The court heard the attacks only ended when the teen formed a sexual relationship with another girl.
The judge added: 'You callously used [your sister] for your own selfish needs. You made threats to her designed to stop her from telling people what was going on.
'That was sufficient to keep her quiet for a very long time. I have no doubt that you continued to rape your sister because you believed the threats had effectively silenced her.'
The judge said he would have imposed a 20-year sentence for similar offences committed by an adult, so ordered the boy to serve 10 years in a young offenders' institution.
The boy, from South Lincolnshire, had denied six charges of rape both to police and in court but was later convicted by a jury.
Matthew Lowe, prosecuting, said the offences were committed when the family lived in South East England before they later moved north.
He told the court: 'The complainant is his sister. Over a period of two years or so when she was aged nine to 11 he raped her on a regular basis.'

DAILYMAIL.CO.UK

No comments: