Crown court reporter Sean Axtell sits through sentencing hearings on a daily basis, and almost as regularly comes across KentOnline readers disagreeing with the decisions made.

He gives his take on the justice system and whether or not judges really are 'soft'.

Cantankerous, long in the tooth, authoritarian slave-drivers - Kent’s judges can rightly be called many things.

But one label bandied around in the comments sections of this website is entirely inaccurate: soft.

Under the cloak of anonymity, readers regularly blast the bench from below the line for some perceived leniency after a sentencing.

For some, convicts should only be jailed and, if a judge decides otherwise, then they too should be thrown in the dungeon.

But, like the rest of us, judges are not a law unto themselves otherwise the legal system would be a madhouse.

They must consider the facts of a case, the maximum penalty set by parliament, a convict’s circumstance and sentencing guidelines.

Did you know, a defendant who admits attempted murder could deserve - in the eyes of the law and not necessarily the judge - anything as low as a few years custody?

'Like the rest of us, judges are not a law unto themselves otherwise the legal system would be a madhouse...'

And a one-punch killer who accidentally takes the life of a friend on a night out could, sentencing guidelines say, be handed one year in custody.

Rather than inventing law on a whim it is the judge’s job to sentence while bearing in mind five crucial points - with punishment being just one.

Crime reduction, public protection, rehabilitation, and victim compensation also need to be factored in, to help ensure the sentence has a wholesale benefit to society.

Were the crown court to simply lock up every offender - costing taxpayers £50k a prisoner per year - many of those aspects would be lost.

There could be fewer chances for victims to be compensated and the background behind a person’s offending could go unaddressed inside a custodial setting.

And it’s no secret inmates mix with the more criminally minded while inside, where they often leave without a job or home, contributing to Kent’s revolving door of offending.

Everyone is right to form an opinion of Kent's judges, they have chosen to be in the public eye after all.

But it would be ill-informed to call their approach ‘soft.’

What do you think? Comment below or email opinion@thekmgroup.co.uk We're always looking for diverse views on the biggest issues. Get in touch if you'd like to contribute