It totally makes no sense to me. Why fine him only $4,000 for stealing something that's worth over ten times? 
Why wasn't he charged the exact amount he stole? I read the article but I didn't see any clear reason.
Why wasn't he charged the exact amount he stole? I read the article but I didn't see any clear reason.
I usually see judges handing out smaller fines than the amount is commonly known to be stolen, because they calculate it from attorney's fees and the cost it took the detectives, investigators, police and law enforcement to examine the case. It also adds up if more offenses are charged, or if the defendant pleads guilty.
