Embezzlement, which is what this was [1], is a white-collar crime. Just like overcharging clients. In fact, there's nothing to even suggest that he was a "blue-collar worker", particularly if he was entrusted with making hundreds of thousands of dollars of purchases.

Not everything needs to be a socio-economic conspiracy theory. Justice prevailed here. If you have evidence that this law firm is fraudulently overcharging its clients, I suggest you present that evidence to the authorities. In the meantime, don't try to insinuate that this guy was somehow a victim.

[1] I know technically the conviction was for larceny. Looking at the 3rd paragraph of the following, it can be seen as a pretty blurry line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embezzlement#Embezzlement_versu.... Based on the example there, it seems like the charge could just have easily fit the definition of embezzlement.

" The building circular – A cage, glazed – a glass lantern about the Size of Ranelagh – The prisoners in their cells, occupying the circumference – The officers in the centre. By blinds and other contrivances, the inspectors concealed - from the observation of the prisoners: hence the sentiment of a sort of omnipresence – The whole circuit reviewable with little, or if necessary without any, change of place. One station in the inspection part affording the most perfect view of every cell. " [1]

[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

Two days of profits having to pay a single employee's wanton ink cartridge spending is pretty serious.