Appeal judges would be unlikely to criticise the attorney general, Richard Hermer, if he asked them to review “unusual” non-custodial sentences handed to three teenage boys convicted of raping two girls, one of his predecessors has suggested.

Dominic Grieve, who also served as shadow home secretary, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the goal of rehabilitating offenders – particularly younger ones – needed to be balanced with providing deterrence.

The two girls were raped in two separate incidents in Fordingbridge in Hampshire in November 2024 and January last year.

In the first attack, a 15-year-old girl was raped by two of the defendants, both aged 14 at the time. In the second assault, the three boys threatened a 14-year-old girl with a knife and two of them raped her while the others encouraged the offending and filmed the assaults.

Two 15-year-old boys were sentenced to three-year youth rehabilitation orders and made subject to intensive supervision and surveillance (ISS). The third boy, aged 14, was given an 18-month youth rehabilitation order.

Asked about people finding it difficult to understand how non-custodial sentences could be imposed, Grieve said: “I fully appreciate that. The decision by the judge was certainly unusual in view of the seriousness of the offence. But these were, at the same time, juveniles – indeed, quite young. And, therefore, the judge can seek to justify his decision as to why to depart from the guidelines for sentencing.

“But people are perfectly entitled to ask the attorney general to review the matter.”

Charlotte Proudman, a leading barrister specialising in violence against women and girls, said non-custodial sentences risked sending the wrong message to victims of sexual violence. “The impact on other girls and women, listening to what these survivors have been through – and the fact that it resulted in rapists receiving no prison time whatsoever, is likely to send out strong alarm bells and make them question why bother reporting,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“It’s difficult to fathom just how traumatic and revictimising rape trials can be for survivors, many of whom experience post-traumatic stress and other forms of anxiety and harm as a consequence.

“And yet we know that, during the trial, the boys attempted to portray their victims as liars in court, with one suggesting she was apparently flirting with him and that she’d made the story up to explain why she had gone missing to her mum and dad.

“So, having had to listen to all of that and effectively be gaslit through a trial, heard the judge praise them, and then for them to be convicted – found to have raped these girls – and ultimately serve no time in prison, why would women and girls report?

“That really is the ultimate question. It shows that the criminal justice system is not fit for purpose, and it’s protecting the future of bullies, rather than the harm caused to girls.”