IN this column yesterday, we bemoaned the lack of public confidence in the criminal justice system.

It was based on two cases featured on our front pages this week. The first was about Mark Hobson, who killed four people after being allowed his freedom despite stabbing a man to within an inch of his life.

The second involved Clifford Church who raped a married woman after being released early from a prison sentence imposed for raping a teenage girl. He was given a life sentence but the law allows him to apply for release in just four years.

Today, we report on another controversy thrown up by the justice system. Teenage driver Christopher Mitchell escaped with a fine of £500 after his speeding car knocked down and killed ten-year-old Laura Burrows-Schofield.

Is that a sentence which really reflects the magnitude of what happened?

Compare it to another case which came before the courts yesterday. Andrew Kitch steered his lorry with his elbows while eating a packet of crisps. It was undoubtedly an act of gross stupidity; reckless behaviour which could have had tragic consequences - but didn't.

So can it really be right that the difference in fines between the two cases amounts to just £250? We would argue that both drivers deserved more severe punishments but the loss of a life has to be taken into greater account.

Public confidence in justice depends on sentences fitting the crime and it depends on consistency.

It is our view that the week gone by has exposed too many alarming inconsistencies. It has been a week that has shamed justice.