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.

  • SatansMaggotyCumFart
    link
    639 days ago

    I’m not sure but this is why I stop at $999 at each Target and find a new target.

    • @scarabic
      link
      English
      27 days ago

      First thousand’s free. Yep, genius policy. (Which is why I doubt they do this).

      I have heard this same story except with employers tracking employees who steal money. That one makes a lot more sense to me because they know the identity of the person involved.

      Someone gonna tell me that the second I walk into Target their system is like “here comes Mr. Scara Bic, currently at $570.” ??

  • @DomeGuy
    link
    50
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    So, you’re asking if there is a shoplifter whose small-dollar.spree was stopped by target, who was then arrested by the police, who then refused an initial plea offer from the DA, who was then charged by a grand jury, refused a pre-trial plea offer, went to trial, refused the pre-verdict plea offer, and was then found guilty?

    Well, what about someone who hit 60k over 120 visits?

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/05/07/target-self-checkout-thief-aziza-graves-convicted/73599144007/

    (edit: shortened url.)

    • SSTFOP
      link
      239 days ago

      Yes, finally. This is exactly the kind of case I’m looking for. Now I can dig into the details of the court documents.

    • @AndrewZabar
      link
      English
      -58 days ago

      Jeez. In that case it wasn’t someone poor just trying to get by, she was running a business. She sold the merchandise.

      Does anyone else feel like 3 years is way too lenient? That kind of greedy shit should send the person away for like a decade.

      • @kerrigan778
        link
        26
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Lol, America has more legal slaves than it did before the civil war and has higher incarceration rate than anywhere and you want to lock someone up for a decade for non-violent property crime where the only victim is a multibillion dollar corporation that she stole less than 100k from.

        https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/target Here’s records of target having stolen 185 million dollars mostly from the American public, how long do you think anyone was in prison for that? Do you think any penalty there even meaningfully affected any executive or major shareholders life?

        • @AndrewZabar
          link
          English
          -88 days ago

          OK see maybe you need to go to school and learn how law works. You can’t have punishments vary based on the merit of the victim.

          Here it’s Target, a rich company, somewhere else it’s a private citizen being stolen from, or a small family business, or a charity. The punishment as a deterrent needs to be based on the act alone, and not your personal lack of sympathy for the victim.

          Sorry but the real world doesn’t treat law the way you seem to think.

          • @kerrigan778
            link
            4
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            What the fuck are you talking about? Stealing from a corporation and stealing from people is absolutely not the same. Corporations are not people I can’t believe we still have to argue this point.

            Also of course the law takes the merit of the victim into account. Half of all homicide victims are black but in 75% of executions for homicide the victim was white. And how many of those do you think were homeless or sex workers? Don’t be ridiculous, the law is not applied equally for victims or for defendants. Assaulting a cop, on duty or not is not treated the same as assaulting a BIPOC sex worker. Every goddamn time there’s a mass shooting or another cop kills another black person why is the first thing they do to try to find some evidence of dirt on the victims regardless of the relevance to the actual case. You are living in a dream world.

            Also… What the hell are you coming at me for about this? I never even argued the ACTUAL SENTENCING was unreasonable?!? (I think it’s unjust, but not unreasonable, but I said nothing of that in my comment). I just thought it was batshit insane that you were out for blood for this person and felt they should go away for half a fucking generation for “grand shoplifting”

            • @AndrewZabar
              link
              English
              -37 days ago

              You are arguing from an emotional perspective, and also bulldozing in a handful of unrelated topics that you clearly need to rant about. I am not saying I necessarily disagree with you on the specifics, but I was commenting purely from a legal reasoning standpoint. That is a very specific and distinctive principle, or I should say, set thereof. I have heard your type of argument a thousand times, and I am not saying you are WRONG, but I am saying you are not speaking in terms of law, but that of emotional reaction.

              It’s fine, I don’t want to argue with you… My initial comment was one kind of discussion, and you’re arguing an entirely different kind.

              • @11111one11111
                link
                -2
                edit-2
                7 days ago

                This one is for both Kerri and Drew: learn to fucking read so you understand what your even arguing about. Which really i don’t even care where you both stand because neither one of you read the link that sparked your argument. How the fuck do you get to the conclusion that Target has stolen $185 million from the American people?!?!

                Its honestly hilarious to me that both of you are so engaged in this whole shitshow accusation of ridiculous and emotionally arguing.

                I feel left out so ima yell the rest of this response to fit in lol RARARARA. NO RARARARARA. WTF ARE TALKING ABOUT. RARARARA YOUR EMOTIONAL. RARARARA NO YOUR EMOTIONAL

                NOTHING IN THE VERY SIMPLE, VERY LEAN, VERY INFORMATIVE INFOGRAPHIC DESIGNED TO GIVE POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE COMPANY THEYRE DEALING WITH.

                THE ENTIRE LINK THAT THAT IGNITED THIS GRADE A BITCHFIT BETWEEN YOU TWO DOESNT HAVE A SINGLE FIGURE THAT SHOWS ANYTHING CLOSE TO WHAT THE TWO OF YOU ARE GOING ON ABOUT. THE ENTIRE THING IS A LIST OF FUCKING FINES PAID FOR REGULATORY VIOLATIONS OVER THE ENTIRE DURATION TARGET HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS ACCROSS EVERY LOCATION. DO EITHER OF YOU EVEN KNOW WHERE $187 MILLION STANDS IN COMPARISON TO COMPARABLE COMPETITORS? COMPARED TO A AMOUNT PAID IN FINES PER EMPLOYEE?

                Thanks this has been truly fun. 🍻

                • @AndrewZabar
                  link
                  English
                  07 days ago

                  What meds have you just tossed back with a bourbon chaser? You are the one going off the deep end, fella. I merely stated my opinion about something from a purely legal-reasoning perspective and this person got all in a huff and ranted at me - not comprehending what I had said. And now you’re doubling down on that person’s incredulity and outrage. And the sad part is that evidently neither of you have grasped my one very distinct point, and instead have inferred some huge argument in which I never partook.

                  Really folks, please stay off the really heavy substances when conversing online. You’re both acting like screaming petulant children. I suspect I’m older than you both combined, no surprise there.

                  Please just let this die. Nobody is making the effort to read thoroughly and ASK to understand what I had been saying, instead you continue with your incorrect assumptions and attack those assumptions. That’s called a straw man argument, and you both could fill a scarecrow field.

  • @breetai
    link
    279 days ago

    Target has their own crime lab. No joke.

    • SSTFOP
      link
      -259 days ago

      Thanks, but not relevant to my question.

        • @AndrewZabar
          link
          English
          48 days ago

          Yea it contributes to widen the conversation so, yeah not a direct answer, but it has value in this kind of forum. I’m cool with it.

  • Rhynoplaz
    link
    149 days ago

    I think those would be multiple misdemeanors not one felony.

  • I'm back on my BS 🤪
    link
    fedilink
    English
    129 days ago

    I got all of you thieves. I think I might look shady or at least like someone that is going to steal. It’s prolly cause of my demeanor, behaviors, attire, and tattoos. I also act pretty weird when I’m by myself, so that’s when it usually happens. On a few occasions when I felt like I was being followed, I have tested it by going in directions that another shopper likely wouldn’t go in. Yep, I get followed. They send a stock person to the aisle to move shit around. Like the Publix macaroni really needed to be neatly replaced. Sometimes they make it evident that they are watching me at the self checkout scanner like a warning. They stand at the end. Why are they getting paid to stand there just as I showed up? Hmm. Now that I think about it, I have a good idea for a YT channel. I’d wear a discrete body camera every time I go shopping alone and post myself getting following or warned.

    If you see me in the store, I got their attention, so you can go at all the good stuff. If there is a Target security person in here, from what I’ve heard people confess to me, the ones that are stealing are the ones you would least profile: middle-class light-skin women that appear aloof. They’re only running half the shit thru the self checkout scanner. If you catch them, “Oops! I must have not been paying attention. Silly me.” I’m not stealing shit. I know I have eyes on me everywhere I go.

    • @AndrewZabar
      link
      English
      28 days ago

      Not for nuthin’ but I’d subscribe to that channel!

      • I'm back on my BS 🤪
        link
        fedilink
        English
        08 days ago

        Right‽ I think it’s a great idea. I am going to look into it. I need to figure out what kind of camera I can use, but also need to consider the ethics with it. I don’t think people would appreciate me posting them on the internet without their consent, especially if it is with negative connotation. The public can go on a manhunt and hurt people’s lives when they may have just been having a bad day, following orders, or their behaviors were misinterpreted. If anything, I’d likely blur out their faces to protect their identity.

        Thanks for the encouragement 🙂

        • @AndrewZabar
          link
          English
          18 days ago

          Most editing software can blur faces. Problem solved.

  • Boozilla
    link
    English
    99 days ago

    You could try court records in various states, but Florida has some of the most complete and easily accessible court records online. Try Miami-Dade or Orange county records and start searching.

    • SSTFOP
      link
      29 days ago

      As infamous as Target’s stoploss is, I figured people more plugged in would already know where to look.

    • @AndrewZabar
      link
      English
      38 days 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?

      • @Katana314
        link
        English
        15 days 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18 days 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.

    • SSTFOP
      link
      109 days ago

      my guess is that it happens sometimes

      I just want to see one case.

      • @atrielienz
        link
        English
        69 days ago

        I’ve been trying to Google it and haven’t come up with anything. It’s been literally article after article of “ex-target” employees making the claim. Might mean it’s an old wives tale they spread around to each other. Might be that it actually does happen infrequently (probably to repeat offenders who don’t get caught in the act but do get caught when footage is reviewed).

  • @DBT
    link
    49 days ago

    The internet can be extra silly sometimes lol