This study asked a representative sample from Victoria, Australia, to rate four cases of sexual assault on applicability of sentence type and recommended sentence. The four cases included male child sexual assault, female child sexual assault, opportunity rape and “blitz” rape. Participants’ responses were analysed as a whole and also by gender, victimization history and educational level. Results suggest that judges’ sentences in these cases are reflected rather well in public sentiment, irrespective of gender, educational level and victimization history. For child sex offences only, people were more inclined to advocate a criminogenic needs approach to offender treatment than a good lives model of treatment – although the differences were very small. In the case of “blitz” rape people displayed a small preference for a good lives model of treatment.