This has gotta be bait.

Did they literally take a photograph of the monitor? Take a screenshot ffs.

Wouldn't he have "turned it in to the employees" if he used it to pay for his purchase though?

Sorry, I am too stupid. So he dropped something on the floor and took it back? The issue is he took his own money and did not return it to the shop employee? Os is it some weird sentence structure…

Yeah I know him. Mitch McConnell is his name. Get him.

No, someone else dropped money and this person picked it up.

I'm happy for them to suck at this

I'm a hardened criminal, I pick up every penny I see.

must have stolen a total of a couple dollars though my criminal career.

The staff just takes it if you turn in it.

An anecdote: the first time I was in Spain as a kid (touristy reasons), I noticed a 20 EUR note someone dropped on the ground (this was in Madrid). I stood there for a second contemplating. My child brain went "I found something that someone lost => Need to put it in a prominent place so that the owner can find it and it doesn't get dirty" (I was a much kinder individual back then). So I picked up the bill and was about to put it on the window sill of a nearby building when a guy walked over to me and explained in broken english that I should keep it. I looked at him in total confusion, but then he flashed some kind of local police ID at me and explained to me that if I don't pick it up, someone else will, and there is no way to find the actual owner. I will probably remember this for the rest of my life (partly because 20 EUR was a huge chunk of cash for me back then).

ACAB but some are worse than others.

My son went to turn in $5 he found at Freddy's, the girl said " honey, you're so sweet, you just keep it."

ACAB but some are worse than others.

The institution is the enemy, way more than the individual.

There's a fair chance the Walmart CCTV is airgapped so there's no convenient way to get the image off. (It could even be ancient and analog - unlikely, but I could believe it.)

If cops get paid that muchs, then why is one abusing his powers to get his $30 back?

Is that even illegal?

Aside from having the ability to stand, he does favor good ol' Moscow Mitch!

Yes taking something that is not yours is theft. As stupid as this situation is it is still a crime.

Uh.. There are finders rights and reasonable doubt. There is no identifiable owner of money unless you saw someone drop it. And any employee is more likely to keep it themselves.

There's no such thing as a free and democratic nation that would prosecute people for this.

Nah; I got paid $23.10/hr for 42 hours a week (before taxes, of course).

Technically.

In theory (TM), you're supposed to turn it in and they're supposed to hold it until the owner comes back and reports they lost it there, at which point they'd go over the footage and find out what happened to it.

I suspect that this sequence of events is exactly what led to this investigation.

I'd bet 95% of the time it goes the way you suggest, though; who checks their wallet before and after every address they visit?

Yeah, the validity of that declaration is strongest the closer you are to the top. As you hit the bottom it's pretty weak, borderline useless.

I sincerely doubt it's fake/bait; I've made similarly silly "blotters" before.

In my experience, while bigger corporations are more likely to have the means, they're also more likely to have all kinds of corporate red tape forbidding providing footage when law enforcement arrives (gotta get every rung of the leadership ladder to sign off, maybe even Legal). I've had months between the reported incident and corporate approval to provide the footage, usually a CD.

In situations like those, Loss Prevention "pretends not to notice" when you take a photo of the CCTV freeze frame with your agency-issued camera, and something like this is the result.

When I was a kid, I found money on the floor in a supermarket. I showed my mother and she said to turn it in at the service desk. I did, and gave my name. Some time later, I checked in with them. Nobody had claimed the money and they gave it to me. I guess I just grew up in an honest area.

That and it wasn't a megacorp supermarket like Wal-Mart, who almost certainly would've disappeared the money in short order.

Honestly, mulling over this for a bit, I can't tell if you're saying it's dumb to have a shitty screenshot of CCTV, it's dumb for them to investigate a technical-but-clearly-petty Theft, or both.

For the former, as I said in another comment:

In my experience, while bigger corporations are more likely to have the means, they're also more likely to have all kinds of corporate red tape forbidding providing footage when law enforcement arrives (gotta get every rung of the leadership ladder to sign off, maybe even Legal). I've had months between the reported incident and corporate approval to provide the footage, usually a CD.

In situations like those, Loss Prevention "pretends not to notice" when you take a photo of the CCTV freeze frame with your agency-issued camera, and something like this is the result.

For the latter, despite what a lot of people believe, the police generally do respond to reported incidents and generally do follow up on all available leads. The disparity in response for some petty crap from a mega corporate location is due to the robust infrastructure they have in place to observe, record, and report incidents. Even in 2026, most people do not have extensive interior and exterior CCTV in their homes, for example.

"This investigation is kinda dumb and I don't feel like pursuing the available leads" isn't something a patrol supervisor would accept on your report.

The mega corp isn’t interested in disappearing money from people. The cash won’t balance if you inject new, and even with overages they are usually looked into and at a minimum need an explanation attached.

Employees will definitely disappear the money

That's a false dichotomy.

You highlight but simultaneously forget that "Found cash on the floor" is a full explanation attached.

I guess we're supposed to know that "an individual" and "this individual" are two different individuals?

I wasn’t commenting on that part, just the implication that a megacorp would steal money turned in. Megacorps are pretty evil, but that’s too much paperwork for them

Enthusiastically disagree.

I bet the guy didn't realize it was theft

This is... a crime?

Was a gift from God himself.

False. That guy has been dead for weeks.

Wait so he dropped his own money then picked it back up?

Cops insist on phrasing everything like they're trying their hardest to use every multisyllabic word they know. They cant just say that the guy picked up some money that another person dropped it wouldn't make them sound tactical and military enough.

I'd get the theft angle if you found a wallet or "found" a bike lying there, but when it's cash it's in the realm of criminalizing someone for picking up a quarter off the ground, or a penny even.

That looks like Mitch McConnell to me

If police wanted to improve society they would kill themselves

Uh.. There are finders rights and reasonable doubt.

Even under old English common law, finders rights would not have applied here. The finder can make a claim of ownership against anyone except the person who lost it. If the person who dropped the money is trying to recover it, then the finder has to return it. Even so, this isn't old England. Local laws apply and in most jurisdictions, found property must be turned over to the authorities to allow the original owner a chance to come claim it. After a certain time period, often thirty days, the finder can return and claim the item.

'Finders keepers' and the law

Much like many commenters, you might be thinking, if this man found a fairly small sum of abandoned cash on the ground, then it's no harm to keep it.

But, under Georgia Code § 16-8-6, "keeping property you know or learn is lost or mislaid without making reasonable efforts to return it to the owner is considered the criminal offense of theft of lost or mislaid property." In other words, Georgia does not take "finders keepers" as a sufficient answer to why someone might keep the money

This is a legal question and you are not making any legal arguments, just emotional ones.

Finders rights and reasonable doubt are legal arguments.

This is the US. It doesn't really work anything like Law & Order and CSI for anyone who doesn't have a whole lot of money.

Which I pointed to in my original statement. "Any free and democratic nation".

I don't think it needs to be said that the US is neither free or democratic.

But... you were the one arguing about the validity of your arguments knowing this happened in the US.

The legal system of Never Never Land doesn't really apply.

TIL that Canada is never never land.

Adding to this, as you mentioned with the infrastructure. Some businesses, especially big retailers have fantastic relationships with local LEO, they're likely not calling the emergency line or dispatch and requesting an officer. Their loss prevention calls their contact at the PD and the PD strolls over and takes custody of the suspect knowing the big retailers loss prevention has documented everything correctly, crossing all the T's and dotting the I's and is handing them a wrapped up case.

Wouldn't surprise me; nothing technically illegal about it and both parties benefit to a degree.