The reasons given for yesterday's suspended sentence are surprising, writes Carol Coulter.
A suspended sentence following a conviction for rape is rare, but not unknown, and Mr Justice Carney yesterday pointed to a Court of Criminal Appeal judgment which specifically said it could be appropriate.
Nonetheless, the reasons given for this suspended sentence, apart from the fact that the accused pleaded guilty and expressed remorse, are surprising.
It is hard to see how the fact that the victim was 35 years older than the perpetrator, or of heavier build, was an extenuating circumstance.
The youth of the offender, the fact that this was a first offence, that he was now in a stable relationship and presumably not expected to commit a further such offence, are all factors taken into account in handing down a suspended sentence.
If he reoffends, he may be required to serve the suspended sentence. He also suffers from the restrictions on his movements imposed by being placed on the sex offenders' register, and from the fact that he has been publicly identified as a rapist.
The Rape Crisis Centre has asked the Director of Public Prosecutions to examine this case and consider whether he should appeal against the leniency of sentence.
It is open to the DPP to do so, but the courts are reluctant to overturn a sentence on the basis that it was unduly lenient where there was a guilty plea and the reasons for the sentence are spelled out in detail.
Ms Breda Allen, chairwoman of the Rape Crisis Centre, appealed to the centre's clients, and to other victims, not to allow this sentence to discourage them from reporting sexual assaults.
"A suspended sentence does not mean the convicted walks free," Ms Allen said.