Sure, I accept the logistics of the number of offences times the max fine but the point that I make is that for his offences (okay they aren't offences as he hasn't been found guilty of them) he has repaid a sum of the amount that the train company missed out on and avoided a criminal record and also the public naming and shaming (I'm not an advocate of this but it's relevant to the level playing field discussion).
When you then compare that to matey boy who has evaded the fare between New St and Barnt Green (I have intentionally selected a midland journey that I have never undertaken!) and his subsequent fines and punishment then it would suggest that we are geared towards a situation where, if one can buy oneself out of a criminal situation (fare dodging is a criminal matter, no?), then you can do so at cost - if you don't have the means, however, you are prohibitively punished in financial terms and also handed a criminal sentence.
It may not be 'government' who is directing it but it is society that is allowing it. There is a problem with both (there always has been; let's hope there won't always be).
Edit: Apologies for the sly maths dig.
Anyone can do the buying out though....its just the level of £ required that's different. Be it £4.50 or £45k the opportunities to pay up and avoid prosecution are extended to all. I dont accept this argument that his wealth has meant he "got off"...its just more shocking because of the amount.
No worries about the dig. I can take. Just don't pretend it was sly.