The thorny issue of court sentencing has come under the spotlight once again.
Moors Murderer Ian Brady has been told he will remain in a secure mental hospital after losing his bid to be moved to a mainstream prison.
That decision came at the end of an extremely costly mental health tribunal which has run up a bill, at the very least, of hundreds of thousands of pounds.
On a more local level, there will surely be some questions raised over the decision not to impose a jail sentence on a woman hit and run driver who left a man critically injured in Milnsbridge.
Victim John Gibson is still having medical treatment for his injuries a year after the incident, but a judge has decided to suspend the sentence imposed on driver Rebecca Barber.
The judge himself described the decision not to jail Barber as "exceptional", after he had studied background reports.
And that is the nub; people will condemn or criticise sentences for being too lenient without being privy to all the facts.
Judges and magistrates are bound by strict sentencing guidelines and also have to take into account individual circumstances.
In very few cases are things clear-cut except where they concern a sadistic killer like Brady.
There will never be a day when the man who killed five children and young people will be allowed his freedom and certainly having to spend the rest of his days in a secure hospital will not allow him a cushy lifestyle.