6 Dumb Shoplifters Who Got Caught Stealing from Walmart

Quick Read

This episode details multiple Walmart shoplifting incidents, showcasing suspects' bizarre excuses, attempts to evade responsibility, and the legal consequences they face when confronted by law enforcement.
Suspects frequently invent elaborate stories or blame others when confronted.
Prior theft convictions and out-of-state residency significantly impact arrest decisions.
Police meticulously document evidence and criminal history to determine charges.

Summary

The episode presents raw police bodycam footage of multiple individuals caught shoplifting at Walmart. Each segment features a different suspect attempting to explain their actions, ranging from claiming to play a 'game' to blaming faulty self-checkout scanners or family members. Police officers methodically question the suspects, verify their identities, check for prior criminal histories, and ultimately make arrest decisions based on evidence and state policy, often leading to jail time rather than a notice to appear, especially for out-of-state residents or repeat offenders.
The episode provides a direct, unfiltered look into the realities of retail theft and the immediate consequences. It highlights common deceptive tactics used by shoplifters, the detailed investigative process undertaken by loss prevention and police, and the legal implications, such as lifetime trespass from stores and the impact of prior convictions or out-of-state residency on arrest decisions.

Takeaways

  • One suspect claimed to be playing a 'game' called '21' where the goal was to steal items and avoid capture.
  • Another suspect initially denied items were hers, then claimed they were unscanned due to a messy self-checkout lane and rushing.
  • Police discovered a suspect had a meth pipe and other contraband during a search before transport to jail.
  • Out-of-state residency often prevents officers from issuing a 'notice to appear' (NTA), requiring an arrest instead.
  • Suspects frequently offered to pay for stolen items only after being caught, which does not negate the crime.
  • A suspect with multiple prior theft convictions faced felony charges, making a ticket impossible.

Insights

1Suspect Amber's 'Game' and Deceptive Claims

Amber, a shoplifting suspect, initially claimed she was playing a 'game' called '21' where she stole items and put them in a 'random car' to avoid detection. She later admitted the car was a rental belonging to her boyfriend, who was unaware of her actions. She also had a prior lifetime trespass from Walmart.

Amber states, 'It's a game I was playing... it's called 21' (, ). She initially claims the car was 'random' () but later clarifies, 'It's my boyfriend's car. He ran in the car' (, ). An officer notes her prior trespass ().

2Suspect Jonathan's 'Pop Tag' Method and Prior Convictions

Jonathan admitted to 'pop tagging' shoes, a method of switching price tags, and also taking a trash can without paying, stating he was 'being stupid' and trying to save money despite having cash. His criminal history revealed three prior theft convictions, escalating his current charge to a felony.

Jonathan admits, 'I did the pop tag with the shoes, and I shouldn't have done it' (). He states, 'I got the money to pay for it. It just I was stupid' (). An officer confirms, 'it'll be three all together' for theft convictions () and 'with your priors, it makes it a felony' ().

3Suspect Kairah's Self-Checkout Blame and Out-of-State Residency Issue

Kairah claimed that unscanned items were due to a malfunctioning self-checkout, spilled milk on the scanner, and her rushing because someone was waiting. She repeatedly offered to pay for the items. However, her prior theft conviction from a mall in 2016 and her out-of-state residency (Ohio) meant officers could not issue a 'notice to appear' (NTA), requiring her arrest.

Kairah states, 'my shit not scanning this milk everywhere' () and 'I'll pay for it' (). An officer confirms a 2016 mall incident () and explains, 'my policy from my work right now with my agency doesn't allow me to give you an NTA if you out of even out of the county' ().

4Contraband Discovery During Arrests

During the processing of suspects, officers discovered various forms of contraband. One suspect was found with a meth pipe, and another had vapes and a 'poking stick' for a pipe, which were confiscated and discarded before transport to jail.

An officer notes, 'she does have a meth pipe on it' (). Another officer lists items to be discarded: 'vapees got to go in the trash. Lighter got can't go in the gel. Okay. The pipe definitely can't have that' ().

Lessons

  • Understand that offering to pay for stolen items after being caught does not absolve you of the crime, as the act of theft has already occurred.
  • Be aware that prior criminal history, especially for theft, significantly impacts the severity of charges and the options available to law enforcement (e.g., felony charges, mandatory arrest).
  • If you are from out of state, be prepared for immediate arrest rather than a 'notice to appear' for minor offenses, as agency policies often prevent NTAs for non-residents.

Notable Moments

Amber's initial composure and 'game' explanation quickly dissolve into confusion and admissions about her boyfriend's rental car.

Illustrates the common shift from denial/fabrication to reluctant honesty once confronted with escalating evidence.

Jonathan's boss remains on scene, willing to take the purchased trash can, but Jonathan is still arrested due to his prior felony theft record.

Highlights that even with some support, a significant criminal history dictates the legal outcome, overriding minor details of the current incident.

Kairah's repeated attempts to blame external factors (milk spills, rushing, son putting items in cart) and her persistent offers to pay.

Shows typical defensive tactics and the misunderstanding that post-theft payment can undo the criminal act.

Officers patiently explain Miranda rights multiple times to suspects who are agitated or seemingly not comprehending the situation.

Demonstrates the legal requirement for officers to ensure understanding of rights, even under stressful circumstances, and the challenges of communicating with uncooperative individuals.

Quotes

"

"It's a game I was playing. It's called 21. It's basically you go and steal all the shit that you can steal and then you get out without getting caught."

Amber
"

"Well, with your priors, it makes it a felony. So, I can't with felonies. It isn't I can't give you a ticket, you know."

Officer
"

"I did the pop tag with the shoes, and I shouldn't have done it."

Jonathan
"

"If you don't have no prior, I going to give you NTA. Even Even though I got a prior though, we you say that you have to take some class and maybe they... The issue is the crime was committed."

Officer
"

"If you don't show up to court date, they going to give you a warrant and we're going to go get you in in Ohio, Alaska, whatever place that you go to, right? But I'm not allowed. But my policy from my work right now with my agency doesn't allow me to give you an NTA if you out of even out of the county."

Officer

Q&A

Recent Questions

Related Episodes