Comment by seabass-labrax

> In Finland sentence can be reduced if the case has been publicized widely, i.e. the "shame" is seen as a punishment itself.

This is to some extent true in the UK as well. Pubic figures are likely to lose their income if convicted of a crime, whereas someone in a less visible or responsible profession is more likely to be able to continue working immediately after serving their sentence (or during, if the sentence is non-custodial). This is therefore considered a mitigating factor during sentencing.

One result of this is that the law can sometimes appear to be more lenient on celebrities or other notable individuals, but it is really just making the system equitable so that the sentence has the same effect regardless of the criminal's personal situation.