The first report regarded raising public confidence in criminal justice as one of the core aims of the review of sentencing. The review commissioned a survey of public opinion that showed that levels of public confidence in the adequacy of punishment and awareness of the actual levels of punishment were low. There was evidence that fear of crime promoted the desire for more punitive sentencing. The other report undertook a broad review of the criminal courts and drew different conclusions. It was dismissive about public opinion on the grounds that people were mostly ignorant or inconsistent in their views. It agreed that public confidence in the working of the criminal courts was desirable, but did not consider expressions of public opinion to be the foundation on which to build that confidence. Generally, public attitudes are complex and multidimensional in nature. It shouldn’t be assumed that those doing the sentencing are aware of the nature of public attitudes. The judiciary needs educating about the range and complexity of community sentences. The relative cost of sanctions is an important consideration, but not a good selling point. Advancing community penalties requires a proactive media strategy. Public ignorance of criminal justice is unsurprising and unlikely to change. Increasing public knowledge may not always increase public confidence. 23 references