I believe that the general consensus of public opinion is that we are far too lenient on criminals, in that sentences are ridiculously short and ASBOs not worth the paper they are printed on.

I feel very strongly that there should be little or no opportunity for convicted criminals to be able to get their sentences reduced through appeal, and the case of Andrew Mayall (Paedophile fails in bid to cut sentence, The Press, May 24) is one where he has actually pleaded guilty to a rather nasty offence and should therefore be prepared to accept and serve the sentence he was given.

I get sick and tired of the way convicted murderers, killers by dangerous driving and others who cause serious harm to others, such as drug dealers and terrorists, can dare to appeal against sometimes pitifully short sentences and actually get someone to act on their behalf.

How can any solicitor encourage anyone to believe that they have been unfairly treated? I believe that whatever sentence is doled out, every day of that sentence should stand.

Also, cold-blooded killers should be punished by a life behind bars, meaning they should die in prison. Surely, where another person has been killed or maimed, this is a far worse crime than when fraud is committed; in that case a really hefty sum of money should be taken from the person concerned so as to affect his financial standing for many years to come.

I don't really believe that fraudsters should be imprisoned; why should the State keep them in comparative comfort, when prisons are overcrowded?

So, no appeals against sentences, life that really means life and crimes against the person punished far more severely than any financial misdeeds.

The money and time saved could be put to far better use, like building more much-needed prisons for REAL criminals!

Heather Causnett, Escrick Park Gardens, Escrick, York.