Child Rapist gets suspended sentence.

(I don't understand. How can a child rapist who breaks into a child's home, rapes the child and get a suspended sentence. What possible mitigating factors can justify this???? What can of moron of the sickest sort can give this sort of judgement???)

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) will appeal against a Sydney judge's decision to give a child rapist a suspended sentence.

The 24-year-old broke into the house where a four-year-old girl was sleeping at South Grafton, in the state's north, in November 2007 and sexually assaulted her.

Attorney-General John Hatzistergos said the man pleaded guilty to sexual intercourse with a child under 10 and was given a two-year suspended sentence in the Downing Centre District Court on February 6.

The opposition says the sentencing judge should have to explain his decision, given the maximum penalty is 25 years jail with a standard minimum of 15 years.

The DPP would appeal against the suspended sentence through the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal, Mr Hatzistergos said.

"Most people who are dealt with for offences of this kind go to prison and go to prison for lengthy periods," he told reporters on Tuesday.

"In this particular instance the Court of Criminal Appeal will ultimately make a decision in relation to the matter once it comes before them."

Opposition justice spokesman Greg Smith welcomed the DPP's decision, but said the community needed an explanation as to why a child sex offender walked free.

"It seems totally inappropriate for the court to impose such a light sentence," Mr Smith said.

"The severity of the crime speaks for itself and, on the face of it, the punishment is manifestly inadequate."

Hetty Johnston, from the child protection group Bravehearts, said she couldn't believe a judge had given the man a suspended sentence.

"He's probably among the most dangerous type of child sex offenders," Ms Johnston told AAP.

"It's beyond belief that a judge could give a fully suspended two-year sentence, so I'm pleased that the attorney-general sees it the same way."

Mr Hatzistergos said the opportunity to appeal should help ease community concern over the sentence.

"It is an abhorrent crime to sexually interfere with a child under the age 10, particularly because a child of that age is so vulnerable," he said.

"From time to time (judges) get their decisions wrong, that's why we have an appeals process which can review those cases."

(Maybe the bastard is into that sort of kinky stuff too, huh? Totally fubar. Definitely someone who ought to get a tar and feather drubbing.)