Merchandise Theft Case Study

Shoplifting is a major problem in today. The temptation of not paying for something, just hiding it away and saving your own money is a large factor for some people. The culprit just thinks he's getting a product for free and doesn't know what he's actually doing to himself and the community. Shoplifting effects everyone, yourself and the everyone in the local neighborhood.In this essay I'm going to explain some of the circumstances of stealing from local stores, or any store. After I've been caught stealing I found out how wrong it is and how it is a disadvantage to everyone.

Shoplifting is a major problem in today’s world. I myself was recently caught shoplifting and now I have to face the consequences for the bad mistake I made. The temptation of not paying for something is very big factor in why people steal. The shoplifter thinks he is getting a product for free and doesn't know what he's really doing to himself and the community. Shoplifting affects yourself, your local neighborhood and the world population.

On February 26, 2016, AP closed a markdown case at the Bay St-Bruno store for a value of $75.68. The associate was observed during live surveillance giving unauthorized discount to his friend. Further investigation and also an associate complaint revealed that that associate had forced another associate to give him 2 unauthorized discounts on his personal purchase. During the interview he admitted given and received those unauthorized

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at approximately 1459 hours, I responded to Dollar Tree, 1459 Iris Drive, in reference to a report of a shoplifting. When I arrived to the location, Sgt. Staton advised me that she had witness a shoplifting.

In April of 2013, a woman from Pinal County, Arizona named Rhonda Cox purchased a 2004 Chevrolet Colorado for $6,000 (Sibilla, 2015, p. 1 & ACLU, 2015). After the purchase, she lent her vehicle to her twenty-year-old son named Chris (Miriam, 2015). In August of 2013, Ms. Cox was contacted by the Pinal County Sheriff’s Department stating that her son was arrested after they suspected that he installed a stolen car hood on Ms. Cox’s vehicle (Sibilla, 2015, p. 1). When Ms. Cox arrived at the scene she observed a deputy sitting in her vehicle. Ms. Cox proceeded to inform the deputy that the vehicle belonged to her. The deputy responded by stating “…that she would never be getting her truck back,” because the sheriff’s office had “decided to seize

On April 10, 2017, AP closed an internal merchandise theft at the Bay Rockland for a value of $23.92. AP was alerted by exception reports that an associate had entered several times her rewards card number during customer purchases. The DVR showed that the associate entered her rewards card number manually at the end of several customer purchases. During the interview the associate admitted to using her rewards card for customer purchases and also to theft of Bay

in a purse, pocket or bag but can occur by a variety of methods. Most

According to the case study, Officer A was pursuing someone with a stolen vehicle. Therefore, it was not the suspect's vehicle that Officer A was following. The vehicle that officer A was following was in close proximity, therefore, he felt necessary to finish the pursue.

(a) The presence of the stolen car parts can be used as a basis to get a search warrant for Dan’s property because the officers had probable cause to believe the there was evidence of a crime to be found at Dan’s property. A search warrant may be issued for any of the following, the evidence was of a crime, the car parts are instruments of designed for use, intended for use, and used in committing the crime, they are also contraband, fruits of crime, and items illegally possessed. On the other hand, based on the exclusionary rule, a law that prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in a criminal trial, applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the 4th amendment also seen in Mapp v. Ohio 1961 case.

On 10/28/15 I contacted Robert Woller by telephone in reference to a theft call. Mr. Woller said sometime over the past two months he has had two watches go missing from his residence at 1916 Roderweis; one a man's gold and stainless Rolex Submariner with a blue face valued at $9500 the other a man's stainless steel Tag Heuer valued at $1000. Mr. Woller said over this time period he has had different contract workers at his residence working on various things. Mr. Woller said he has found nothing else missing and no evidence of forcible entry. Mr. Woller also stated that no one other than him has access to the residence. Mr. Woller could only provide a serial number for the Rolex, # Z860105, which also had the word "Kia" inscribed

On August 7, 2015, AP closed a rewards theft at the Hudson’s Bay Point Claire store for a value of $170.00. Exception reports alerted AP that the associate had issued and redeemed the same gift card. The investigation revealed that she had found a plastic rewards card into the cash desk drawer that it was belong to the customer. The associate changed the points for $50 gift card and used the gift card for personal purchases. During the interview she admitted have gift card theft and also giving out $120 in unauthorized markdowns.

On June 25, 2017, AP closed an internal fraud refund case at the Bay Fleur de Lys for a value of $699.40. AP was alerted by exception reports that an associate had issued and redeemed the same gift cards. Investigation revealed that the associate had issued and redeemed 3 different gift cards by doing no receipt returns. CCTV showed that on each transaction the associate used random merchandise from around the cash desk to process the transaction and also writing false information on the receipt. During the interview the associate admitted to the false refunds and gave a reason for the frauds to help her family who live in

On April 10, 2017, AP closed an internal gift card theft case at the Bay Montreal Downtown store for a value of $30.00. AP was alerted by exception reports that an associate had issued and redeemed the same GC. Investigation revealed that reward card belonged to a customer. The DVR showed the associate changing the points to the GC with no customer present. During the interview the associate admitted to theft of a GC that it was in the customer file. The associate also admitted to taking the rewards card number that it was in another customer file and changed them into a GC and used for a personal purchase.

Over a period of a year we have notice a rise in missing merchandise, which has had an impact on our quarterly sales. Because of our continued loss of profit due to the theft of in-store merchandise, the company will begin reasonable doubt searches and utilizing video surveillance in order to prosecute these criminals. ACME has continually been the target of in-store merchandise theft creating a profit loss and an increased safety risk to its employees due to its lack of video surveillance in and around its stores, and its unwillingness to prosecute the thieves who have been damaging to the company’s profit margin. In today’s climate we cant assume all of our employees are working for the good of the business (Laner, 2015). It may be a valued and trusted employee with many years of dedicated service, or it may be someone new or temporary. Either way, it’s the same end result: The employee, working for the good of themself, has stolen from the company. Employee theft isn’t easily discoverable. It can be broad and may involve company property, goods that are for sale to consumers, and cash or cash

I have spoken to settlement operators; they used to file the items in pocket 1 boxes.