Judge David Farrell QC, Roshane Channer & Ruben Monteiro

Judge David Farrell QC
Crimes: Injustice, Rape, Pedophilia

I remember a whole lot about when I was 11-years-old (that was over 4 decades ago). I remember my teacher and classroom, birthday parties, Hallowe’en and Christmas, field trips, playing with my friends, my toys, my collections. It is actually amazing how clear and vivid those childhood memories are. They are all good memories because my life was filled with happiness and love when I was 11.

The same cannot be said for a certain young girl in Luton Bedfordshire, UK. This poor girl had the awful misfortune of being raped by Roshane Channer, 20, and Ruben Monteiro, 20.

In July 2011 Ruben Monteiro took advantage of the 11-year-old girl in a block of flats in Luton. By “took advantage” I mean he stuck his penis in the young girl’s mouth and had oral sex. Simultaneously Roshane Channer was inserting his penis in the young girl’s vagina. This poor 11-year-old girl was raped by those adult men and an additional individual who was present videoed the assaults using a phone. The video was subsequently circulated I guess so those two pervs could boast about their prowess at raping little girls.

The young girl apparently did not put up a fight, but no matter because she was only 11-years-old! She cannot consent! Two adults were raping her front and back! She could not consent because she is a child!

I know I am stating the obvious here, but it appears that SOME people don’t understand the concepts of underage and consent. One person in particular who doesn’t understand is Judge David Farrell QC. Sadly, pathetically he is a person who should and must possess an in-depth understanding of those concepts because he is (a) a judge and (b) the judge who oversaw the trial of Ruben Monteiro and Roshane Channer.

See, Ruben Monteiro and Roshane Channer, the pieces of shit who raped that little girl, each pleaded guilty to a single charge of rape. Their defense? That this little girl looked all of 14, and she was willing!

A lot of very young girls are sprouting boobs at younger and younger ages and perhaps their victim was one of those. REGARDLESS, 14-years-old is still underage! She cannot consent to sex until she’s 16.

So whether or not the child looked 14, she should still have been off-limits to pedo creeps like Ruben Monteiro and Roshane Channer.

The British Guidelines in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 suggest that the penalty for raping a child under 13 should be 10 to 13 years in prison. And so it should be IMO because child rape is committed by pedophiles and all pedophiles should be sent to rot and fester in prison.

Now did Judge David Farrell QC follow the guidelines? Hell no! See, he accepted the POS pedophiles’ claims that the girl looked 14 and she was willing.

Judge David Farrell QC saw the rape video evidence himself and to him the victim appeared 14 and willing.

SO WHAT? The facts are she is 11 and she cannot consent! This little girl was raped by the two pedophiles Ruben Monteiro and Roshane Channer!

So totally overlooking the seriousness of the crime, Judge David Farrell QC sentenced those two pervs to an entire 40 months! For the mathematically challenged, that’s less than 3 1/2 years. They should have been given a minimum of 10 years but Judge David Farrell QC seemed to think it totally reasonable that an 11-year-old girl could CONSENT to being simultaneously raped by two men and filmed too.

BTW, doesn’t filming the rape of a child constitute child porn? They filmed it and they distributed it so why were no charges pressed relating to that crime? Why did those pervs get a pass on that?

And why is Judge David Farrell QC allowed to continue as judge?

I am going to quote Jo Wood, a Rape Crisis spokesman, who spoke so eloquently about the case. Jo Wood rightly said, ‘It is horrendous that any Judge can even begin to imagine that an 11 year old child is capable of consenting to being simultaneously raped by two men while being filmed…. This youngster was not capable of consenting to the horrors of what was being done to her.

“There are no excuses for these two young men who freely admit that they thought she was 14 years old. Fourteen is still below the age of consent and their actions would still have constituted rape, had she been 14.

“For a Judge to state that ‘Despite her age it is accepted she was a willing participant’ is a damning reflection on how far the judiciary still has to go to even start to understand the whole issue of rape – consent and criminality. We are reliably advised that Judges have to obtain a ‘Rape ticket’ to sit on rape cases but as yet we have no idea what constitutes such training – whatever it is – it isn’t working.

“This young girl has been raped by the two named perpetrators and has now been badly let down by the very system set up to protect her. What message does this send out to potential perpetrators when you can rape a child, plead guilty and get a sentence which is less than you might expect to get for a burglary or car crimes?

“Does this mean that destroying a child’s innocence has so little importance in today’s world – and does it mean that rape is such a trivial matter that it can so easily be brushed aside?

“The child will have received a life sentence for what has been done to her – and in less than two years her attackers will be free.

“Where is the deterrent and where is the incentive for anyone to report rape? We need to smarten up and Judges NEED to be accountable for their decisions.”

Yvonne Traynor, chief executive of the Rape Crisis charity, offered her opinion on the judge’s leniency. “Does he not understand the age of consent and the psychological impact this despicable act will have on this child? It’s about time the judiciary stopped blaming women and girls for being raped by despicably exploitative predatory men.”

I, for one, hope that Judge David Farrell QC does not rule on any more rape cases, ever. All the defendants have to do is claim the victim was willing and he is all sympathy and leniency.

Because of Judge David Farrell QC, the pedophiles Ruben Monteiro and Roshane Channer will be released into the unsuspecting public well before they are 25. True, they will be on the sex offenders register for life, but in all honesty does that stop any sex offender from reoffending?

Crown lawyers are considering appealing against the “unduly lenient” jail terms. I hope they follow through and ultimately succeed. And I hope the young victim will have a lifetime of happier memories to help blot out this trauma.

And I also hope Ruben Monteiro and Roshane Channer will truly suffer for their crimes now and in hell. If and when I find their photos I shall post them for all to see.

And lastly, I hope Judge David Farrell QC is removed from the bench for having such a criminally ignorant mindset when it comes to child rape. Disgusting.

There is a petition calling for the Crown Prosecution Service to discipline Judge Farrell and appeal the lenient rape sentences.

Click here and sign the petition now! Bring justice back into the justice system!

The Court of Appeal reviewing the sentencing for the two pedophiles determined that it was far too lenient and has more than doubled their sentences to 7 years. It is a start — now to “retrain” Judge Farrell QC about the law or better yet stick him in traffic court so he won’t ever have to rule on rape and molestation cases again.

Daily Mail article
The Sun article
BBC News article

23 Responses to Judge David Farrell QC, Roshane Channer & Ruben Monteiro

  1. Trace says:

    Those pedophiles should’ve been sent to prison for life! That judge should be stripped of his robes or demoted or whatever. He probably lets car thieves off easy if they claim the car was willing to go with them. Jackass.

  2. moodymagic says:

    What a sad and scary world we live in when child rape is more trivial than burglary. It makes me sad. I hope this poor girl is able to move on with a happy well lived life. She deserves this much. The pedo’s make me sick and need to have the crap beat out of them in general population. How did the judge get to the bench.

  3. Steve-O says:

    The law protects only criminals not the victims. If the girl would have been my daughter those two men would be in eternal sleep six feet under. Plus the third guy who was filming the rape.

  4. Eve says:

    Would this judge have given the same sentance if it had been his child or grandchild?? This judge should be fired!! He deserves to be disbarred at the least, plain and simple.

  5. dogwalker says:

    Just because she did not try and fight those men doesn’t mean she was willing to be raped! it is common in traumatic situations to be frozen in fear! Trying to fight them off could have got her worse injuries! I just hope that being on the sex offenders list means they will never get a job and they will be treated like scum for the rest of their lives!

  6. Tony Hastings says:

    Is this a situation where an E – petition is an appropriate course of action ? I have absolutely no doubt that any reasonable adult hearing of this travesty of justice would be prepared to network a sub petition – thus creating an enormous ground swell of pressure.
    I would personally pledge at least 1000 signatures.

  7. Johnny says:

    The definition of ‘rape’ is sex by force. If the participants want sex, regardless of age, it’s consensual and therefore not rape.

    We live in a society where most 11 year old girls have already had their first period. In fact 11 year olds have committed rape – an 11 year old raped a 9 year old in Sunderland recently. The fact is 11 year old’s aren’t ‘children’ (physically or mentally) like they were 50 years ago.

    This looks like a victimless crime.

    • Cleo says:

      Your definition of rape is, as you probably know, wrong. Rape is sex without consent. That is why you cannot have sex with an unconscious person, an incapacitated person, and an underaged person. Children cannot give consent regardless of whether or not they’ve reached puberty. But you know that already. I don’t know if you’re just a troll or a bona fide pedophile, but either way you are not welcome here to make asinine comments about how sex with children is a victimless crime. Pedophilia is a crime. And you are a waste of skin.

      • Johnny says:

        Hi Cleo, I’m sorry if I offended you. I can assure you it was not my intention and that I was just making an observation.

        I agree that consent is the issue here. However ages of consent are arbitrary and vary by nation. An 11 year old must know what they are doing as the age of criminal responsibility in England is 10.

        The judge must have had good reason to give lenient sentences.

        • scrappy says:

          While I appreciate your sincerity and your reasonable tone, you really are wrong about whether or not this was a vile act of rape.

          I work in a middle school, students ages are 10 – 15. Yes, many young people are far too knowledgeable about sex acts that in my early adolescence (even living in a large city, in the 70’s) would have shocked me. Yes, young people, and young girls especially, are sometimes far into puberty by the time they reach the middle grades.

          The fact remains, they are emotionally and experientially barely past a decade old.

          If this young girl has been abused sexually since her early childhood, even SHE may believe that she consented to this situation. Young girls like attention from older boys, and if she chose to engage in these acts and perhaps didn’t even mind the filming you might call that consent. What if she was never abused but is very sexually curious (which is usually not present without some inappropriate experience preceding it)? Does that make her not a victim? Absolutely not.

          There is a power imbalance in this “relationship” and there is a difference in legal culpability. If a 14 year old girl/woman propositions a grown man, no matter how attractive or willing, OR experienced she is, HE is supposed to be mature enough to recognize that it is not an appropriate relationship.

          These “men” are 20, nearly twice her age. If it was okay for them to behave as they did, how would you feel if it had been two 40 year olds doing this? Disgusting and inappropriate enough yet? I mean, if she is willing and she looks at least 14, well, hey, then I guess it’s not such a heinous crime after all…

          Besides, if these guys were all into filming themselves breaking a few boundaries and having wild sex, why didn’t they find a 19 or 20 year old female? Not so easy to manipulate I’d say. A young woman of 20, even though her judgement may not be at its best, can usually recognize that putting yourself in this situation could have some unpleasant repercussions. Hard for an 11 year old to predict…I’d expect she is only what, 5 or 6 years past kindergarten? I’d be nervous letting even the most mature and responsible 11 year old babysit my 6 and 8 year old for very long.

          I wonder, what kind of birth control was this 11 year old using? I mean, she does seem like she willingly engaged in this situation, right? Does she know how pregnancy occurs? Does she understand ovulation and how many STD’s one chances from unprotected sex? That is one sophisticated 11 year old.

        • scrappy says:

          The other thing is Johnny, you mentioned that age of consent varies with culture and country.

          Even so, even in places with arranged marriages, there are those who find it disgusting when a young teen becomes the 4th wife of a 50 year old man.

          Cultures that support relationships between very young women (Can you name one that would partner a 12 year old boy with a 40 year old woman?) and older men generally have very restrictive practices with regard to women’s rights and often very few opportunities for women’s education and employment outside the home.

          Modern society recognizes that a child (hey, wait, 11 is still a child, right?) will ideally complete an education and find a means of independent support if possible before taking on adult responsibilities.

          With regard to the criminal code, in the US, you CAN be charged as an adult for certain crimes, but it takes a legal action to determine that. We have developed juvenile court systems for very good reason. I’m pretty sure the UK is not so very different on that point.

          • 2cute says:

            Yay Scrappy! Johnny needed a kick in the ass or a slap upside his head for being such a dumbass, but your well articulated, thoughtful replies were much better.

  8. scrappy says:

    Thanks 2Cute, you are very kind to support me. I really think he/she believed without malice the foolish points made in the comment. I just couldn’t tolerate the ignorance without trying to change his/her mind.

    My larger point, working with young people this age I see so clearly- oh they seem so big, they seem so aware, but when you scratch the surface, sophisticated veneer or not, it turns out they really ARE just kids.

  9. Nemesis says:

    The judge is probably a damn pedo himself, hence the tiny sentences. He certainly looks like one.

    • Kiki Gtra says:

      Your making a good point, why on earth would he pass such a shitty sentance? Makes no damn sense to me!

    • Eve says:

      Yeah, that judge looks like he has had an underage girlfriend a few times in his life. Someone should be checking him out. Would not be surprised if a teen or preteen turns up to say he had sex with them.

  10. bengalpuss29 says:

    This is how fucked up british justice is. Jamie bulger’s killers, john venables and robert thompson were 11 years old when they murdered that little boy they only served seven years because they were children. Then in the next breath an 11 year old girl isn.t treated as a child because if she was then these two raping bastards would be getting a whopping sentence. And what about the cunt that was filming it, he’s just as culpable as those two bastards. Now on to that fuckbrain of a judge, what was he on drugs, if i saw 2 grown men raping an 11year old on a mobile phone video, i would sentence the sick bastards to penal servitude and have them breaking rocks 16 hours a day when judges are dishing out sentences like that no wonder only a small number of rape’s are reported, the poor woman gives evidence to be insulted with a pitiful sentence. But this poor child will probably be screwed up now, and those two things we haven.t heard the last of them pedo’s. probably read about them raping more children.

  11. Arch says:

    That fucking judge should be gang-raped. Also, this age of consent bullshit is too complex. The age of consent should be 16 everywhere under all circumstances, period.

  12. DecentPeopleOnly says:

    Age of Consent Needs to be 18 Years of Age to Protect the Innocence
    of Childhood

  13. DecentPeopleOnly says:

    The State of the UK is Worse than Silly

    People get Bullied over a Message on a Cake that goes against their
    Beliefs on Marriage in UK

    Paedophiles get Suspended ” Sentences ” Committers of Cruelty to
    Animals get Suspended ” Sentences ” Murderers Get Away with Murder
    as there is No Death Penalty For Murder

    Liberal Trendy Political Correctness Brigade gives Not two hoots about

  14. Jack McEntire says:

    I came to read this after being horrified about Judge David Farrell recently letting off a Cambridge Professor charged with possessing 2000 child porn images (with a high percentage being Category A the worse kind) plus sharing online fantasies (described as very graphic) regarding sex with young girls. Farrell gave him a suspended sentence and stated he was a very intelligent man with a low risk to children. Unbelievable. It’s only speculation but I think Farrell’s record on these types of cases indicate either a Masonic connection i.e. look after each other or else he has paedophiliac tendencies himself. I just can’t comprehend a decent moral person coming to the conclusions that Farrell has. Such a deep, deep shame that a hellish judge like him doesn’t get investigated as being unfit for purpose. So sad and wrong.

  15. Tom Daly says:

    If I had my way, I wouldn’t have pieces of subhuman crap like that sent to prison. I’d have them put to death. But, unfortunately, the UK doesn’t have the death penalty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *