~snip~
Let's face it, what the judge did was a miscarriage of justice. If that guy was sacked based on the subject matter, it would have been a different thing but he was emphatically sacked for crypto involvement despite not being illegal in his country, these are two different things and this guy was not involved in suspicious acts, neither did he err in his responsibilities as an employee, so we should not drag it far.
Also, desperation is a different context that never showed in the suit. Gambling or not, employees are desperate on a daily basis, it is now left to how the establishment tightens its security not to allow unsuspected/unscrupulous employees to take advantage of it.
It's really hard to know without having all the facts, which I'm sure the judge had...
I agree with you, this is not the case we are so privy to the right documents, so the complete facts are hidden to entirely judge anyone.
Also, yes, people do get frustrated, and desperate in many situations, but I guess you can know that it will potentially happen if you know that someone is a gambling addict.
Don't judge people on presumption. When a crime has never been committed, you don't pass a judgement believing "he can do it." Fine, anyone can be desperate or frustrated, but you will be shocked about how many gamblers have good jobs and even have them in sensitive places. Or should I say with the high percentage of gamblers in the world, should all of them be sacked simply because they gamble? C'mon, they are not criminals.