Target has a fearsome reputation on the internet regarding how far it goes to stop shoplifting. As is commonly told, it is supposed to track repeat small time shoplifters until they have one last theft that puts them over $1000 (or whatever the magic felony amount is) and only then does Target drop the net and get the shoplifter convicted on a felony for the total amount that has been stolen over weeks or months as one charge.

As the story is told, it smells strange to me and creates many, many followup questions in my mind. I think those questions would be answered by reading through a court case. As famous as Target is, I feel like more dedicated online crime news followers would know of the case and how it played out. Can anyone point me at it?

Edit: The tale told here.

  • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t think they want to publicize every aspect, since this would likely give a distasteful kind of vibe. Doesn’t mean they don’t do it. I’m not saying they do, but not including it in an exposé is not exactly conclusive that it’s false. Am I making sense?

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Perfect sense. I don’t think that’s any kind of official expose by Target, only one person talking about their experience. But you’re right that it’s not conclusive one way or another.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It also might make sense that they don’t want to give details about exactly when people are successfully prosecuted, so they don’t give a new guideline of how to skirt around the rules.

      I recall Valve has effectively acted the same way about anti-cheat; they tend not to go into detail about how some new release works, and will silently collect data on who they know to be cheaters for a long time.