High Court judge criticised as ‘vile rapist sympathiser’ after letting child sex attacker walk free
Fresh backlash over sentence came after 12-year-old girl told how she tried to kill herself after the student who raped her in Edinburgh party was given an absolute discharge
A judge who let a child sex attacker walk free has been branded a “vile rapist sympathiser” in an outburst over the sentence after the 12-year-old victim told how she has since tried to kill herself.
Daniel Cieslak, then 19, pleaded guilty to raping the girl at a house party in Edinburgh in July 2015 – but was given an absolute discharge because he said believed the victim was 16.
A taxi driver who had taken the pair to the flat had the “impression” she was about 20 and police who had spoken to her earlier had “no concern” she may have been a minor.
The judge also said it was “reasonable” to believe the victim was over 16, which is the age of consent, after viewing CCTV footage of her out with a 13-year-old friend that night.
And she took into account in her verdict that the girl had “willingly” had sex with Cieslak, saying there was “in fact, consent”.
The rape victim told how she tried to kill herself since her attacker was spared jail in an outpouring which triggered fresh outrage over the sentence, which allowed the man to walk free.
She said she had sex with Cieslak while she was unconscious on a sofa after drinking vodka and cherry cola during a night out with her 13-year-old friend.
Lady Maggie Scott, the senior judge who sentenced Cieslak, told the student in Glasgow High Court: “After about 4am you met the victim and her friend, in the nearby taxi queue. After a while you all agreed to travel to an impromptu party at the flat of your friend.
“You understood from chat in the taxi that the victim was 16 years old and her friend was 17 years old. The taxi driver had the impression that the victim was about 20 years old.
“Once at the flat, after some time, you paired off and you and the victim engaged in sexual intercourse.”
Judge Scott added: "The victim willingly participated in the sexual intercourse and there was, in fact, consent."
She added that police officers who spoke to the victim “for some length” earlier while looking for youths who were too young to be drinking on the streets had “no concern” she was a minor.
Judge Scott said: “For what it is worth my impression from viewing the victim on the CCTV footage on assessment by appearance that the victim was over 16 years of age would be a reasonable one.”
The 12-year-old girl’s outpouring of anger in an emotional letter over the judge who ruled Cieslak could walk free triggered an angry backlash on Facebook.
Sam Karam wrote: “He should have gone to prison for even attempting sex with an unconscious person.”
Maxine Elise posted: “This is sickeningly shockingly bad. The judge needs putting under investigation if that's her view. Vile rapist sympathiser.”
Sarah Jones complained: “Unbelievable that anyone, and in this case a female judge, would believe a child can consent to sex. Incredibly disappointing.”
Natalie Brian added: “She is a baby. Even if she wanted him to have sex with her, even if she was fully conscious, she was a child. This judge needs investigation.”
The girl wrote an emotional letter over her devastation since Cieslak was spared jail in the ruling on 17 March this year.
In her statement, published by the Daily Record, she wrote: "The guy Daniel said he didn’t know my age. I can barely remember that night.
“I have flashbacks, images ever since.
“I had passed out in the living room then I remember him picking me up, and then waking up in a bed."
Once a "confident, happy" youngster, she claims she now has to "fake a smile", and wrote: "I even tried to commit suicide because I was barely holding it together."
She said she had celebrated with her family when Cieslak pleaded guilty to the rape of a girl under the age of 13 years, but explained: “Then he walked free, nothing at all. I was devastated.”