Which is kind of weird, because it’s used as a “crime doesn’t pay, the good guys win” and on one hand, sure, Al Capone is a bad guy. On the other hand it highlights the power of the government to harass someone they don’t like, suspect of crime, and can’t prove via unrelated arms of the government. That they’ll just lawfully harass you on all possible ways until they either bankrupt you or find something you’ve done.

Yeah, but the post I'm replying to suggests that police are demoralized when the original charge is not what prosecutors actually bring in court. Ultimately, the prosecutor needs a charge that they can prosecute (get a plea bargain, or convince 12 peers of the defendant) and I think the cops understand that.

In the case of Capone, it was just easier to prosecute tax evasion; "here's his bank balance, here's the tax we think is due, here's the tax he paid". In the case of shoplifting, plea-ing out a misdemeanor is probably easier than convincing a jury of a felony charge.

Like, all they probably have is a grainy video of the suspect. Are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that that's the person sitting in the defendant's chair? If one juror thinks "no, I'm not sure", then everyone who commited the crime goes free.

Also, realistically, $950 shouldn't be the threshold between a felony and a misdemeanor. That can't be a number that was adjusted for inflation. $950 isn't much money these days.