In an exclusive interview with the Daily Liberal, Mr MacMahon has revealed the pain he feels for the Saul family, but has also slammed accusations he had been too soft on offenders.

"In the media it's been said that justice hasn't been provided - I reject that absolutely," he said.

In February, Mr MacMahon dismissed charges of dangerous driving and negligent driving occasioning death against a 17-year-old who had admitted to taking drugs on the same day he struck and killed nine-year-old Brendan Saul.

Last month, the teenager escaped a prison term altogether and was released on bail.

The tragic case has not only raised the hackles of some members of the community, but triggered legislative changes to hit-and-run penalties.

"Everyone is innocent until the prosecution has proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," Mr MacMahon said.

"If not, then it is unjust to find him guilty."

Mr MacMahon said the community furore was in part caused by the unrealistic case put forward by the prosecution.

"They prosecuted the case and built expectations of a sentence that had no chance of succeeding," he said.

"It wouldn't matter which magistrate heard the case, the outcome would have been exactly the same."

Mr MacMahon said he had "enormous empathy" for the Saul family.

"If any of my kids had died (in such circumstances) I would have been devastated," he said.

But he also questioned the vilification of the youth involved in the incident, who was 16 at the time.

"If it had have been a local businessman and not a 16-year-old Aboriginal kid who had an appalling upbringing ... I wonder if the community response would have been different," he said.

The local court magistrate also questioned the police investigation of the matter.

"Why did the police officer responsible wait roughly six-and-a-half hours to do a drug test?" he asked.

"There are two possibilities. Either he didn't think it was necessary, or else the police officer was incompetent."

Mr MacMahon said there was a similar problem in the case of the fire that burnt down the council chambers two years ago. The police had reduced the charges against one of the three youths involved so that he might testify against another.

Mr MacMahon said the lessening of charges against this youth, who in evidence had also admitted to lighting the fire, had damaged the prosecution's case.

Asked if police had made a deal with the wrong guy, Mr MacMahon said, "it's possible".

Mr MacMahon also used several court documents to demonstrate the sentences he's handed down had not been too light.

In the 16 months he has sat in the chair, there has only been one appeal to the District Court on the grounds the sentence had been too light.

"The appeal was dismissed by the District Court judge," he said. But in the same period, there had been "40 or 50" appeals on the grounds a sentence had been too hefty.

"In about half of these, the District Court agreed," he said.

But the bottom line for Mr MacMahon is that he needs to remain as objective as is humanly possible.

"I'm not trying to be too soft, or too hard," he said.

"My goal is to ensure that people appearing at Dubbo court are treated the same as at other local courts."