IS graffiti art? Alan Crosby's conviction for vandalism sparked a debate on our letters page.

Some argued it was a valid form of artistic expression. Others felt that, while spray-painted walls may well enhance the New York urban landscape, they were wrong for a small English cathedral city.

Then there were those correspondents who said forget the aesthetic merit, daubing someone else's property is just plain wrong.

Now we have magistrate Joan Visick's contribution.

She appreciated the finer works of graffiti, she told Crosby. Alas, his efforts were not up to snuff.

It could be art, in the right places. But slapping his messy "tag" across York not only blighted the city but caused thousands of pounds of damage.

The magistrate decided against sending Crosby to jail, which would have been somewhat draconian - although the prospect certainly seems to have steered the young man off the streets.

Instead she ordered he clean up his graffiti.

Here is the sort of direct justice that has been demanded for so long. Crosby will literally erase his crime, while pondering the error of his ways.

Residents will see the law in action and other would-be vandals may well be deterred.

Together with the extra powers City of York Council can now use to hit taggers with instant fines, we might at last be getting anti-graffiti measures down to a fine art.

Updated: 10:10 Tuesday, April 12, 2005