Just b/c of the topic Im going to explain the "Deferred Prosecution Program"
Some call it Pre Trial Diversion Program.
All are not designed exactly the same and qualifiers vary by prosecuting office but, You are generally eligible for PDP if you don't have a lengthy criminal history and are young. Its designed to prevent young people from getting criminal records in their youth which eventually prevent them from being productive citizens in their "wiser" years.
PDP is offered, usually during an early stage hearing and IF ACCEPTED BY THE ACCUSED, the charges are held (NOT FILED) until the completion of the program (or not). The accused has to pay an entry fee and take some kind of educational class (in this case most likely an anti theft class), they also have to pay restitution to the victim. Once the conditions have been met on the front end, the accused has to stay out of trouble for a specified period or the charges can be reinstated (within the statute of limitations).
These programs were specifically developed for young people. It is factually accurate to say they don't have or weren't convicted but they agree to return the money or monetary value of the items stolen so it's a non official tacit admission of guilt in reality. The only difference between this program and a "no contest" plea is that the plea goes on your criminal history deferment doesn't.
The accused can claim innocence and make statements to that fact b/c they were never "convicted", an admission is not mandatory to get into the program BUT if you agree to repay the victim you are kinda admitting that you did take their stuff.
As far as this situation goes, I don't know this guys criminal record. If he has an extensive juvenile history deferment could be a problem if he has no other incidents at all then the program is made for him and others like him.
I personally think the best outcome for someone who takes the program is to just remain silent. They got a break. They did go through "the system" and the system gave them a break by not prosecuting. I would also point out that in most cases the victims are consulted before the accused actually enters this program. If victims don't want this application of "justice" then they usually object.
So my point,
We don't know his criminal history
We can assume the victim was agreeable with this approach
He paid the victim back
Tech is giving him a chance.
I have a feeling if he isn't worthy of the chances he is getting we will hear of more stupidity, if he is then it's over.
I don't think the true debate is about the kid, I think it's about the program itself, whether its applied equally, if it's a money grab by prosecutors and if there are set standards from community to community (which there aren't) are all factors as to the function of the deferment program .