Source: Cambridge Evening News
Date: April 12 2007
Author: Antony Stringfellow
---
RE your article "Magistrates brand new fine surcharge immoral", (April 10).
I am writing in support of a decision by magistrate Alan Williams not to apply a £15 victim surcharge to a 19-year-old man, who pleaded guilty to possessing a small amount of cannabis.
Surely, common sense alone dictates that for such a surcharge to apply there has to be at least one victim?
Where is the victim in this case (besides the man charged with this offence)?
I suggest that this surcharge is no more than a tax on those who fall foul of the law. If it is any more than that, then I for one would be
interested in hearing the explanation.
Antony Stringfellow
Great Corby
Carlisle
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/