Sentence review for torture brothers
Two British brothers who were jailed for brutally torturing two young boys are to have their sentences reconsidered, it was announced yesterday.
UK Attorney General Baroness Scotland will look at the prison terms handed down to the 11- and 12-year-olds to see if they were "unduly lenient".
The brothers, who have not been named, were handed indefinite terms last week with a minimum tariff of five years over the "appalling" attack in Edlington, near Doncaster, South Yorkshire, last April.
If Lady Scotland decides the sentences were too soft, she will refer them to the Court of Appeal and ask the judges to consider upping the terms.
The attorney general is required to look at cases if asked to do so by a member of the public. A spokesman for the attorney general's office said: "We have called for the papers in the case following a request."
Both the attackers were handed indeterminate sentences for public protection, known as IPP sentences.
Although the minimum they will serve is five years, they cannot be released until the authorities are convinced they no longer pose a threat to society.
The mother of one of their victims said she believed the brothers were "evil".
"I believe they could do this again so people should know exactly who they are," she said.
"I understand they won't be released until the authorities believe they have been rehabilitated -- but they're evil."
During sentencing at Sheffield Crown Court details emerged of how the brothers lured the boys to woodland and subjected them to 90 minutes of violence and sexual humiliation.
The victims were strangled, hit with bricks, made to eat nettles, stripped and forced to sexually abuse each other.
The older boy was seriously injured when a piece of ceramic sink was dropped on his head.
Sentencing them, the judge described the crimes as "truly exceptional". They were carried out "for no reason other than that you got a real kick out of hurting and humiliating them".
Dr Michele Elliott, founder of charity Kidscape, said she was "delighted" by the decision.
She requested that the sentence be reviewed last week.
"We never felt it made sense to assess these boys at 15 and 16 for possible release," she said.
"Far better to give the victims and their families 10 clear years so those boys can grow up unthreatened."