the other day I told over the story that had been reported of someone who found a bag of 40,000nis in cash (plus some checks). the fellow seeked out the owner, discovered him as an Arab and returned the money to make a kiddush hashem by acting beyond the letter of the law.

Here is a story that is exactly the opposite.

A fellow from Kiryat Gat found a satchel of money. The bag contained 240,000nis in cash.

the finder decided to do a good deed with some of the money in order to celebrate his miracle, so he went out and ordered crates of food - sandwiches, pastries and drinks - and served it all up to a unit of Golani soldiers serving in the area. He also gave out some cash to the soldiers. After his little celebration he went back to his area and gave out some more money to needy people in the area.

Now that he had done his good deed to clear his conscience, he went out to buy stuff he and his family needed.


After all was said and done, he put away 132,000nis cash in his kids diaper bag for safekeeping.

Little did he know that the satchel of money had fallen off of a transport by armored vehicle (eg Brinks, etc). They were not too happy about the lost bag of money and used surveillance cameras to track it down. They got the police involved and Mr Finder was discovered relatively quickly and brought down to the station for questioning. In the meantime, officers found the rest of the money in his hiding place.

Poor shnook has 10 kids and was going to tell his wife and kids that he won some winnings in the lottery.
source: Actualic

Way to go. I wonder had he just kept it quiet and not gone out and spent so much if he would have gone undiscovered. I also wonder how he did not realize it would be looked for - don't these armored vehicles that transport money put the sacks of money into labeled bags, so he would have seen the name Brinks or the name of whatever company was being used? Regarding the halacha, as far as I know, loose cash is hefker when found, but if the cash is in a special bag or piled or packed in a  unique way, that is considered a siman of ownership and must be returned. So while the first guy had the halachic right to keep the money, he returned it, the second probably had a halachic oblogation to return it but kept it.