The woman at the centre of the rape trial of Sean Hogg has spoken of her “devastation” and “no hope of closure” after his conviction was quashed on appeal.  

Speaking through her lawyer Aamer Anwar, she said that she had hoped to move on with her life following the initial guilty verdict.  

Hogg, 22, was convicted of raping the woman when she was 13-years-old on various occasions in 2018, when he was aged 17. 

He was spared jail by Judge Lord Lake at the High Court in Glasgow in April and was instead given 270 hours of unpaid work, although he said if Hogg was over 25, he would have been sentenced to four or five years behind bars. 

Hogg claimed he was wrongfully convicted of the attacks in Dalkeith Park, Midlothian, and appealed. 

READ MORE: Sean Hogg sentence appealed after rapist walks free from court

Judges at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh have now quashed his conviction after prosecutors admitted “mistakes were made” during his trial. 

Mr Anwar said: “She retains her anonymity. She states that when she went to the police, she had a hope for justice. When the jury returned a verdict of guilty, she thought that finally she could move on with her life. 

“Whilst she appreciates that senior judges have come to this decision after very careful consideration, nonetheless that does not take away from her feeling of devastation and knowing that there is no hope of closure. 

“My client will remain ever grateful to the police who carried out a robust investigation. My client wishes to thank the jury for doing their duty. My client has, however, a question for the judiciary, the Government, and the Lord Advocate.” 

The Herald: Aamer AnwarAamer Anwar (Image: free)

The lawyer said the woman was still waiting for an explanation of why sentencing guidelines were interpreted to allow under 25’s escape imprisonment after conviction for rape.  

He said: “My client’s grandmother has said that they have been left to pick up the shattered pieces of their granddaughter’s life.  

“They felt they were left in the dark by the Crown. Now they must protect their granddaughter whose life has been turned back six years to when she was 13.  

 “It is clear that the trial judge misdirected himself and in doing so, misdirected the jury. The appeal was grounded on procedural unfairness. It is always the responsibility of the trial judge to formulate the appropriate legal directions to give a jury.  

“In this case, the procedure adopted was manifestly unfair and prejudicial to the defence and, on this basis the appeal had to succeed.” 

READ MORE: Man has conviction for raping 13-year-old girl quashed

The lawyer added: “My client believes in jury trials for rape and serious crime. She feels that 15 ordinary men and women are best placed to decide innocence or guilt.   

“To conclude, it is important for my client that at court today and in my meeting after court with the Solicitor General Ruth Charteris KC, the Crown did not renounce the right to prosecute should new evidence become available.”