By Erica C. Barnett
Last week, the Seattle Police Department announced it had completed a successful “Organized Retail Theft Operation” at the Westwood Village mall in West Seattle, arresting five shoplifting suspects at “retail store … which suffers a significant amount of theft.” That retail store is Marshall’s, which, according to police, is a frequent target for shoplifting.
The merchandise police recovered, which included warm clothing such as knit caps and sweatshirts, had a total value of $406. (SPD’s post, which calculates the total as $460, does not match with the amounts catalogued in the police reports.)
In addition to the five people arrested for theft, police arrested another man on outstanding warrants and booked him into SCORE jail in Des Moines.
It’s unclear why SPD described these arrests, which occurred individually throughout the day, as “organized retail theft.” The total amount of merchandise the officers recovered was well under the legal threshold for a charge of organized retail theft under state law, which defines that term as a theft by a group of people, or by just one person, of merchandise with a total value of more than $750.
Asked why SPD considers the Marshall’s arrests an example of organized retail theft, an SPD spokesperson responded, “Charges for cases are determined by prosecutors. While we arrest individuals for probable cause of a crime, that is where the process ends for us.”
Conservatively, the operation may have cost the city upward of $10,000, between the ten officers who played direct or peripheral roles in the one-day sting and the cost of jailing several people on misdemeanor theft charges, including two who remained in jail for almost a week.
Mayor Bruce Harrell and Police Chief Shon Barnes have frequently talked about the urgent need to hire more officers in order to address violent crime and other critical public safety issues. For many years, SPD has had a program that allows security officers to apprehend shoplifters themselves and file “security incident reports,” which have the same weight as a police report, saving the department the hassle and expense of going to stores in person, arresting people, and booking them in jail.
SPD would not provide copies of the incident reports for the arrests. Instead, they provided narrative summaries from which the identity of each officer involved in the operation was redacted, while the names of all but one of the suspects—a man in a wheelchair who allegedly stole several pairs of children’s shoes and was not booked into jail—were included in the narrative.
The narrative, and the three full police reports we were able to obtain by cross-referencing other publicly available records, said, “The mission of this operation is to disrupt shoplifting, the trafficking of stolen goods, criminal activity and other criminal activity that negatively impacts the public’s quality of life in the City of Seattle.”
When we asked for the reports, a representative for SPD’s public affairs office responded, “You will have to submit a PDR [public disclosure request] for the full police reports as SPD Policy prevents me from releasing them.” In fact, SPD’s policy manual says, “Media Representatives May Obtain Copies of Police Reports Through the Public Affairs Unit,” as opposed to through the public disclosure process. We have asked SPD to explain why they appear to be violating their own policy.
The three police reports we obtained, along with the summaries of two additional cases provided by SPD, show that SPD dedicated at least 10 officers and detectives to nabbing four people for stealing small, low-value items. The merchandise SPD recovered included three pairs of children’s shoes ($26 a pair), beanies ($7 each), cologne ($10), two sweatshirts (at $30 each, the highest-value items stolen), and a pet toy (price unknown).
At least ten officers were involved in the bust, including at least two sergeants; their salaries, according to publicly available records, range from $129,313 to $161,470, or between $62 and $78 an hour. An SPD spokesperson said it was too soon to know whether any of the officers received overtime pay for participating in the operation. During the sting, a detective sat in the security office along with Marshall’s security guards and directed officers to arrest people who appeared to be stealing, according to police reports.
The cost of arresting and jailing people isn’t minor. Booking a person into the King County Jail on misdemeanor theft charges costs the city a minimum of $665, a price that includes a one-time booking fee of $278.60 and a daily “maintenance fee” of $386.36 for every day a person remains in jail.
Three of the four people booked at the downtown jail have been released; one served a night in jail, while the other two were there for six days and seven days, respectively. The fourth person was initially arrested for shoplifting but was booked on two felony warrants and remains in jail; the city isn’t charged for felony bookings.
Asked what the police department hoped the Marshall’s operation and similar stings would accomplish, the SPD spokesman said, “The goal of retail theft enforcement is to encourage people to follow the law.”
Too bad these legions of justice didn’t consider the house cleaner who stole $6000 cash from me worthy of pursuit. Seattle needs to grow up.
I hope you NEVER leave SPD alone! Make ‘em squirm. I heart PubliCola!!
We need a huge, hard conversation about WHY people shoplift. (Hint: income inequality and extremely high cost of living). I’m hopeful Katie Wilson might usher some of that discussion into Seattle.
Punishment alone is not an effective crime deterrent – never has been and never will be.
Why do people shoplift? Greed. Easier than getting a real job. Hardly any consequences even if caught, just play victim. Repeat as necessary.
The honest people ‘just trying to survive’ as is implied in this article and by lisab and others go to these places called shelters, food banks, clothing banks, get EBT, rental assistance, free phones, discounted utilities, free bus passes, on and on and on.
Greed is a billionaire CEO who would rather fire employees/pay employees unlivable wages/close stores rather than reduce his own wage.
The fact that there are people who make more money than they could possibly spend in multiple lifetimes while there is so much poverty/homelessness is literally absurd – and immoral. It does not surprise me that the impoverished majority might turn to shoplifting: it’s a ‘fuck you’ to the absurdity of billionaires, and, honestly they may think ‘what do I have to lose?’
Okay so Marshalls, through its parent TJ Maxx (TJX) is publicly traded. The largest shareholders (per google) of marshalls are blackrock, state street and vanguard. These orgs are not individuals, they are investment firms that hold their shares in ETFs and Mutual funds that YOU can buy into, and many insurance companies, IRAs, Pension funds, and other retirement investment vehicles invest in these blue chip stocks. Nothing stops you from buying it directly either, though us little people are generally better off buying pre-diversified mutual funds and ETFS. But in other worlds, Marshalls (through its parent TJ Maxx) Is COLLECTIVELY OWNED BY THE PEOPLE. So which billionaires exactly are we harming by ignoring rampant shoplifting? Who is going to be hurt more if Marshalls closes a store? The nearest billionaire? Or the dozens/couple hundred people who work there and the thousands of locals who shopped there as the closest/most convenient store for that kind of goods?
Maybe think through these things a little and not just stoke the outrage machine?
I am writing in response to “Seattle Spent Thousands on ‘Organized Retail Theft’ Operation at Marshall’s, Arresting Five and Recovering $400 in Merchandise.”
Your piece frames this operation as a significant waste of public funds, an argument that hinges on the low monetary value of the recovered goods versus the high cost of police resources. While I understand the importance of fiscal accountability, your analysis feels hollow because it willfully ignores the complexities of crime and the fundamental purpose of proactive policing.
Your narrative seems to assume that these were simple, isolated acts of desperation. You highlight “a man in a wheelchair” stealing children’s shoes, a detail that feels less like objective reporting and more like a rhetorical tool to elicit sympathy and frame the police as bullies. This framing shuts down the very questions a journalist should be asking. Did you consider that the thief might not be a victim, but a professional? What if he is a reseller who keeps his daily thefts below the felony threshold as a business strategy? What if he was stealing those shoes to launder them for instant cash at a children’s resale shop? Or, to consider a darker possibility, what if the shoes were being used as bait for something far more sinister? Your article doesn’t explore any of these realities.
The most critical flaw in your argument, however, comes from your own reporting. You state: “The fourth person was initially arrested for shoplifting but was booked on two felony warrants and remains in jail; the city isn’t charged for felony bookings.”
You present this as a footnote, an inconvenient detail that complicates your financial calculation. In reality, this is the entire story. This is the “tip of the iceberg” made real. The operation was not a failure; it successfully and safely removed a wanted felon from the community.
This brings me to the financial dilemma you believe you’ve uncovered. You posed the question of whether this was a good use of $10,000. Allow me to solve it for you.
The $10,000 was not the cost to recover $406 in merchandise. It was the cost to safely apprehend a wanted felon.
When you compare that proactive, low-risk arrest to the potential cost and danger of a dedicated high-risk warrant service or a SWAT collection team deployed to a residence later, the $10,000 sting was not a waste. It was a public safety bargain.
I urge you to consider this perspective and the deeper realities of crime in your future reporting.
As someone who lives in the area and goes to the shops down there the shop lifting has become a problem. Most stores are now posting a security guard which has cut back on their cashiers, sales folks, etc. Most will have items like deodorant locked up. A few have closed exits and just have one door open. I never feel unsafe but at the same time, the stores do need to be able to exist without being robbed or they close up.
Folks do need winter gear but it isn’t a good long term plan to have that dispersed through continuous low level theft (you just end up with dead zones in the city).
The tone of this article is accusatory in such a way that it seems like the author is actually scolding the police for simply doing their jobs. Congrats to the police for being useful! The thing is, Seattle needs to spend even more money on enforcing the law, and less on other things.
So $400 was stolen in one day? That’s $2800 per week, $7200 per month and $86,000 per year. It increases the insurance required for the business, increases cost of goods and this increases prices for everyone. Almost every neighborhood has a food bank and our food bank used to accept donated clothes too. My point? No need for people to steal clothes or food.
Organized retail theft is what was described to me by someone who worked at the Lake City Fred Meyer (RIP) 10+ years ago. They said they lost about $1M in merchandise per year which works out to $20,000/week or close to $3000/day. They also said the theft rings would actually take orders for items that were in demand, and the thieves would fulfill orders like they were pickers at Amazon. Is/was this true and accurate? No idea. $3000/day seems like a lot of inventory shrinkage, especially if it’s constant.
Can the stores verify how much they are losing over time? I agree with the premise of the article, that this seems to be a disproportionate response with tax payer dollars, but can we quantify the actual problem?
It’s hard to quantify not because there is no data, it’s hard to quantify because there are so many bogus claims about retail theft. It is a political agenda that can’t be trusted, not a phenomena that needs the city to overspend in order to catch five people and recover $400:
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-12-14/column-retail-lobby-confesses-it-lied-about-organized-shoplifting-rings
I really wish people would come back to reality and put their feet firmly on the ground instead of their hysterical cries about nabbing “felons” and “cops doing their job.” One is left wondering if they are misguided fellow citizens, or maybe just more shills for the same political agenda.
I read the other day on this site that Seattle’s security apparatus now sucks of 40% of the city’s discretionary spending budget, and it’s clear this is not nearly enough for a particular section of the population to have the security they feel they require. But please don’t forget what old Ben Franklin taught us: “those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Franklin was right. Why is the loss of your freedom worth their “security?”
It’s good to enforce the law and we should do it more. There is no other group who enforces misdemeanor laws other than SPD. Try changing the law if you want to, but really tired of our commons being completely destroyed by people who think criminals are more important than the rest of us. Remarkable this is the only time we’re going to see a neoliberal style cost/benefit analysis on this website and it’s used to justify letting criminals off
“really tired of our commons being completely destroyed by people who think criminals are more important than the rest of us.”
I’m sure you suffer greatly in your posh Cherry Hill home. You are really out of touch with reality. Your posh Cherry Hill digs (where I lived for a decade and watched gentrify week after week) have never had it better than right now. As I mentioned directly above, I like what old Ben Franklin taught us: “those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Keep your police state yearnings to yourself.
@samm you sure make a lot of negative stereotype assumptions about other people to try and make your point. cherry hill dad could live in a basement apartment for all you know. He might work at marshals or a fred meyer and be worried about the store closing and losing his job due to the theft for example.
Now I am going to assume based on some of your arguments you don’t have a 401K or any kind of personal savings/investment, or you might have some teensy concern about theft affecting share prices of major publicly traded companies. Hopefully its because you are young and haven’t gotten to that life stage yet, but if not, hope your plan is something other than political revolution.
Nobody is losing their freedom in a police state because common sense laws (dont take stuff from other people) are enforced. Last I checked anyway it was not the police’s job – but that of a judge and jury – to figure out the proper consequeneces for those people who did lose their freedom – because they were caught red handed stealing in a town where being prosecuted for shoplifting is almost nonexistent. If these people are really desperate stealing diapers for their kid, I am sure that will be accounted for in our judicial system. But more likely, its greedy people stealing those daipers to sell to desperate or ignorant people. Not quite so noble.
“you sure make a lot of negative stereotype assumptions about other people to try and make your point. ”
“Now I am going to assume based on some of your arguments you don’t have a 401K or any kind of personal savings/investment”
Right. My assumptions are unfair, but yours are obviously a given. Got it.
“Nobody is losing their freedom in a police state because common sense laws (dont take stuff from other people) are enforced. ”
LOL. I can’t even improve the humor of that one.
more personal comebacks. Thanks for making my point for me.
Thank you, Brian T Hughes, for your standing ovation!
“Seattle Spent Thousands on “Organized Retail Theft” Operation at Marshall’s, Arresting Five and Recovering $400 in Merchandise” seems like a very one-sided story you wrote Erica. How many times had each of the four or five people who were arrested, done this same thing at other stores? How much merchandise did they steal each time? Seems like the sting could also be looked at as a successful preventative measure. The police did arrest an individual with multiple warrants. Shame on you for not looking at all angles of the operation.
Congratulations. You’ve just left accusatory impressions without actually making accusations. Impressive front loading. There’s no reason to believe this article wasn’t as thorough as SPD would allow. There are larger societal issues you’ve apparently completely missed that make your statement irrelevant.
It’s obvious from the way Ms Barnett writes this article that law enforcement must not cost more than the items stolen. How sad an argument stores like Marshalls have to endure crime of a thousand cuts for law enforcement/crime prevention becomes a thing.
“How sad an argument stores like Marshalls have to endure crime of a thousand cuts for law enforcement/crime prevention becomes a thing.”
Yes, what if this wave of organized retail theft caused Marshall’s to cancel their share buyback program, for instance? Imagine the horror. I mean, between 1996 and 2022 they have spent $28 billion on share buybacks, according to their own documentation:
https://www.tjx.com/docs/default-source/investor-docs/annual-reports/tjx-2022-annual-report-and-10-k.pdf
Why isn’t it considered terrorism to question the methods of spiking share prices? This is the issue we should be discussing, right old chap? What we must see is that those who steal a bag of diapers are not those who need diapers, but those who want to hurt the share prices (i.e. terrorists).
Thankfully we have the police force to act as our own private army (and let’s remove any bounds to their ability to enforce), and will spare no expense in order to save us from losing a few pennies from our precious share-buying profit margins.
Where can I sign up for more and more police, and frankly, how many dollars per officer can I expect? /s
I mean, the theft isn’t a problem of our cost of living crisis, where the basic necessities of living are unaffordable. No, no. If all the taxpayers get together and demand the city become ruthless towards those who steal the baby formula they can no longer afford, instead treating them like what they are: “nihilist violent extremists,” then we will at last achieve our utopia!!!!
/s (sorry, the material is just too rich, and the rhetoric seems to have lost so much touch with reality that it’s so fun to skewer.)
They only recovered $400 worth of merchandise, Michelle. Tens of thousands of dollars & god knows how many man hours of work, just to arrest someone over a couple of sweatshirts and some beanies. The fact that that is all that was recovered would strongly indicate that this was not, in fact, an organized ring of “professional” shoplifters.
“Preventative” means to stop something before it happens. SPD hasn’t prevented anything here, as there is no evidence that any potential shoplifting is ever deterred by these sorts of arrests. They’ve just wasted time & money to make puritanical pearl-clutchers like you feel superior.
big presumption here that this is the only loss marshalls (and other stores) ever had at the hands of these people. If its the first time each of these people ever stole something, I’ll eat my warm knit hat.
Three of of the hateful, punitive right-wing Darth Sidran corporate stooges in City Goverment – Sara Nelson, Ann Davison and Bruce Harrell – will be gone in a few weeks!