If it costs more to pay a detective 10 minutes to think about the case than it would to just replace the lost property, the naive case-by-case accounting says to just let it go.
The victim probably doesn't care about a successful prosecution. They might just want to recover their property. They want their bike back. Or their catalytic converter. Or their phone. Or their laptop. Or their dog. Catching the crook is nice, but it isn't the victim's first priority. They just want to be made whole again. They feel that they have already paid for the police protection via taxes, and are frustrated when they can't collect.
But the cops don't want to dick around with solving petty crimes. And they don't want to spend $10000 to recover $200 worth of property, and possibly still not have enough evidence to convict. They certainly don't want to give their only physical evidence back to its rightful owner, and then not have it available for a trial later with clear chain of custody. They also feel that they have already allocated their entire budget, prioritizing more serious crimes first, and that focusing their limited resources elsewhere could reduce public safety.
I'm not judging the cops here, just saying the priorities are not aligned in the petty theft victim's favor, with reasonable arguments possible both for and against the rigorous pursuit of petty crimes.
As a general rule, an individual cannot count on the cops to help them. With anything. Especially if you're not white. So you don't even call them, unless someone is dead or about to die anyway, or you absolutely have to for your insurance claim. Handle your own vigilance, buy property insurance, and let the crooks choke on your glitter.
If it costs more to pay a detective 10 minutes to think about the case than it would to just replace the lost property, the naive case-by-case accounting says to just let it go.
The victim probably doesn't care about a successful prosecution. They might just want to recover their property. They want their bike back. Or their catalytic converter. Or their phone. Or their laptop. Or their dog. Catching the crook is nice, but it isn't the victim's first priority. They just want to be made whole again. They feel that they have already paid for the police protection via taxes, and are frustrated when they can't collect.
But the cops don't want to dick around with solving petty crimes. And they don't want to spend $10000 to recover $200 worth of property, and possibly still not have enough evidence to convict. They certainly don't want to give their only physical evidence back to its rightful owner, and then not have it available for a trial later with clear chain of custody. They also feel that they have already allocated their entire budget, prioritizing more serious crimes first, and that focusing their limited resources elsewhere could reduce public safety.
I'm not judging the cops here, just saying the priorities are not aligned in the petty theft victim's favor, with reasonable arguments possible both for and against the rigorous pursuit of petty crimes.
As a general rule, an individual cannot count on the cops to help them. With anything. Especially if you're not white. So you don't even call them, unless someone is dead or about to die anyway, or you absolutely have to for your insurance claim. Handle your own vigilance, buy property insurance, and let the crooks choke on your glitter.