In Orenburg stole a wallet with 97 thousand: this is the third such case in a week

Now, how it all happened. The victim after the purchase in the network store of building materials left in the cart portfolio, which was 97 600 rubles. Later, the suspect found him and decided to appropriate him. The thief turned out to be a businessman: he explained to the police that he spent the money on buying building materials in the same store. On the fact of theft, a criminal case was opened, the man faces up to 5 years in prison. He is currently under a no-departure order.

Separately, it should be said that this is not an isolated case. Recently, a similar story occurred in the hypermarket “Lenta”: there the buyer forgot in the cart in the parking lot of the purse, where there was almost 400 000 rubles. While he realized and returned for the money, half of this amount managed to borrow an employee of the store information desk, which handed the find. And even earlier, the 66-year-old taxi passenger in the Orenburg district could not cope with the temptation - he grabbed a portfolio forgotten by the previous passenger with 130,000 rubles and 17,000 tenge, some of which managed to spend on an expensive phone.

All three stories have one thing in common: the owners themselves created the conditions for the theft, forgetting large sums in carts and taxis. And every time there is a person who decides not to return the find, but to appropriate it. At the same time, legally, this is precisely theft, and not “found – means mine”: for the appropriation of someone else’s property, a real term is threatened. But another thing that draws attention is the reaction of people to the find. Someone carries a wallet to the information desk, and someone leaves half to themselves. And in the case of an employee of the “Tape” is no longer a casual passer-by, but a person who was entrusted with the find for work.

And do you think that a person who finds someone else’s wallet with a large amount of money should be criminally liable, or should it be enough to oblige him to return the money?