North Haverhill — One recent morning, two families filed into Courtroom No. 1. Before them, a man on the verge of becoming a convicted sex offender. Between them, about a dozen seats — and a deep divide over what should happen to the defendant.

In the case of State v. Christopher Raymond, the victim's family described the defendant as an abusive man trusted by an innocent girl, as a man who needed to be locked up for a long time.

"He's going to screw up, and I think he'll be in the system until the day he dies," the victim's mother said in an interview.

The defendant's family, however, described Raymond as a remorseful man who fell into a sexual relationship with the girl because of his mental health problems — not the type of person who should be punished with a long prison sentence.

"We're not in denial," Raymond's sister, Angie, said in an interview. "But because of his mental disorders, he needs help."

The divide in this small courtroom illustrates a broader debate about what constitutes justice in cases involving sex crimes.

Joining politicians across the country, Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas and New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch have called for tougher sanctions against those convicted of sexual assaults.

"I think individuals that prey on children are among the worst criminals we face," Lynch said on a stop in Lebanon late last year. "I want to make sure they go to jail and go to jail for a long, long time." How tough are sentences in Vermont and New Hampshire? The question arose dramatically after a Vermont judge handed down a 60-day minimum sentence to an admitted child molester in January.

But sentencing is not straightforward, and toughness is subjective. Sentencing depends on many factors — from the severity of the crime and the attitudes of prosecutors to the desire of the community at large for retribution and the wishes of victims themselves. These and other factors lead to a wide disparity in punishment, from suspended sentences to decades in prison.

In the Raymond case, the judge handed down a 7½-year minimum prison term on one count and suspended prison sentences of 10 to 20 years on five other counts. Prosecutor Nancy Gray said the sentence struck a good balance between punishment and the potential for rehabilitation afforded by extended supervision once Raymond leaves prison and returns to the community.

Raymond's sentence represents a middle-length sentence for defendants convicted locally of sex crimes in recent years. But sentences vary widely.

At the lower end of the sentencing spectrum were the suspended prison term recently given to Frederick J. Stebbins, a 58-year-old Quechee man who sexually abused a girl he knew; the 60-day minimum originally handed down by Chittenden County Judge Edward Cashman for admitted child molester Mark Hulett; and the six-month sentence that Kenneth Harlow of Bradford, Vt. got for sexually assaulting a girl.

At the higher end of the scale are offenders such as Joel L. Lewis of Strafford, who received eight to 38 years in prison for sexually assaulting a child multiple times over a four-year period. Jerry Lee Ramos received 10 to 20 years for breaking into a neighbor's Lebanon apartment late one night and raping her. And Joseph W. Rogers was ordered to spend 20 to 40 years in prison for abducting and sexually assaulting a jogger in Lebanon.

These wide differences in sentencing trouble some public officials who would like to see more uniformity. The disparities lead "to concerns about the criminal justice system and how fair it is," said Vermont Sen. Richard Sears of Bennington County at a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Mandatory minimum sentences are gaining support among politicians advocating for tougher sentencing. Lynch, for instance, has proposed giving prosecutors the ability to seek 25-year minimum prison sentences against first-time offenders who sexually abuse children under the age of 13; if the offenders are convicted, judges would be required to impose the full 25 years. Douglas hasn't proposed mandatory minimums but has said he would sign such legislation.

Dozens of states have instituted mandatory minimum sentences or have sentencing guidelines recommending long terms for sex offenders. And many more states are considering mandatory minimums, said Barbara Tombs, director of the Center for Sentencing and Justice at the Vera Institute for Justice in New York.

In Oregon, for instance, voters passed a measure in 1994 that imposed long mandatory prison terms for 16 designated violent and sex-related offenses. The minimum terms range from 70 months to 300 months.

Studies examining the impact of long terms on states' crime rates have been inconclusive. Oregon did see a decline in violent crime after 1995 that was sharper than the national decline, but Rand Foundation researchers could not establish a direct link between the tougher sentencing structure and reduced crime rate.

Among prosecutors in the Upper Valley, however, mandatory minimum sentences are not universally popular.

Rick St. Hilaire, the Grafton County prosecutor, said he didn't see a need for legislatively mandated minimum prison terms in his jurisdiction. Recent sentences in Grafton County sex crime cases, he said, have included prison time of 10 to 20 years, which he finds acceptable.

"We've been receiving (from judges) the kinds of sentences that are fair and just," said St. Hilaire.

In Vermont, Windsor County State's Attorney Robert Sand said defendants would be unwilling to enter into plea agreements if long mandatory sentences were hanging over their heads. Plea deals, he said, are often crucial in resolving sex crime cases, which are difficult to prosecute.

Nationwide, the conviction rate on sex crime cases brought to trial is about 50 percent. Sand and other prosecutors say they need the flexibility to resolve a case through plea negotiation when a trial would involve painful testimony for a victim or when the verdict might hinge on he said/she said testimony.

Mandatory minimums provide consistency, he said. "But I really believe they are bad for the criminal justice system."

Tougher sentences aren't the only answer in dealing with sex offenders, say experts. In some cases, they say, long sentences would interfere with rehabilitation, an important goal before an offender returns to society. Neither New Hampshire nor Vermont begins in-prison treatment until the offender is nearing his release date; those with long prison sentences would have to wait years to get the rehabilitation that addresses the sort of distorted thinking that leads to sex crimes.

"Prison doesn't fix sexual aggression," said David Burton, a Smith College associate professor and clinical social worker who works with sex offenders. "Punishment only stops behavior. It doesn't change it."

Sentencing decisions turn not just on the severity of the crime, say prosecutors, but on many factors, including the strength of the evidence and the willingness of victims to testify.

Strong evidence can give prosecutors the upper hand in persuading a defendant and his lawyer to accept a plea bargain with a lengthier sentence. Strong evidence, in fact, allowed Grafton County prosecutors to win a longer sentence for Christopher Raymond than for a defendant in another, similar case.

In Raymond's case, police had evidence of computer instant messages between him and the victim detailing past sexual encounters and an encounter they planned to have, according to police records. Police had also recorded the girl's conversation with Raymond on the telephone.

By contrast, Michael Posnanski, a 35-year-old Enfield resident, got a lighter sentence — three to eight years — after pleading guilty last month to two counts of aggravated felonious sexual assault against a child.

The 4½-year difference in the minimum prison time between these two men came down to evidence, prosecutors said. In Posnanski's case, incriminating statements he made to the police appeared to be inadmissible, largely because his IQ scores turned out to be low, said Assistant County Attorney Laura Saffo.

Without Posnanski's statement, said St. Hilaire, the whole case was "riding on the shoulders of the child."

The Posnanski case illustrates the reason prosecutors often seek a plea bargain rather than try to take the matter to trial. Much, if not all, of the evidence might be based on the testimony of the victims, and in many cases, victims are reluctant to testify. The reasons for that vary: Abusers may be family members. The victims might be children intimidated by lawyers and courtrooms, or they may be adults disturbed by the prospect of having private details aired in public.

"It's the only crime I see on a regular basis where the victim is subject to scrutiny," said St. Hilaire.

Portsmouth defense lawyer Philip Desfosses said the desire to give all sex offenders long prison sentences ignores the reality that the victims are often family members. Those victims may have complicated feelings about sending relatives away.

Desfosses said he once represented a man convicted of molesting his stepdaughter. The victim wanted her stepfather sent to prison for a few years and to get treatment, he said. Instead, the defendant was ordered to spend at least 30 years in prison on multiple counts. The girl was so upset she tried unsuccessfully to get the convictions overturned by saying the molestation never happened.

"People need to distinguish between the people who are grabbing the kids in the park and these other situations," said Desfosses.

Indeed, victims' ideas of just punishment are "probably as diverse as the victims themselves," said Linda Griebsch, public policy director for the New Hampshire Coalition against Domestic and Sexual Violence.