The crucial thing is how the university have handled it. They've decided that a simple "restorative justice" process is in order, with a letter of apology to be written, and a replacement sim-card provided. The victim rejects this approach, but it was thrust upon him anyway. The letter of apology was basically a self-absorbed "poor me, I got caught".
While I think the victim is being a little precious in withdrawing from the university, he raises some valid issues about the university's approach to the issue. The culprit keeps his job (in a position of trust) on the basis of a pseudo-apology.
I wonder what part of the process was "restorative"?