Potentially both. Like he said, there's a dollar value that typically decides when it becomes criminal. Get it yet?
Yes, and he contented that the limit was met:
8% of 72 desktops amounts to greater than $1,000.
Get it yet?
No, I don't. First he claims it was a criminal offense, and repeats it when challenged. Now, he says:
We're not talking about criminal offenses here.
But, he was the first to claim that a criminal offense was committed.
If you feel the need to defend him, you are going to have to do a better job than this. Can you explain the inconsistency? Is there a secret code I don't understand?