Even for outsiders this still makes sense. It’s not a good idea to be caught near the scene of the crime with proceeds so this won’t be the first time someone has stashed them with the aim of picking them up later.
It doesn’t even have to be this though. There’s no particular reason to assume anybody was going back for it. We don’t know how much was recovered, even less what proportion is cash. If it was connected to the original robbery it would be a fallacy to assume the amount stolen has anything to do with the amount they got away with. If someone 600k and say there was 100k in neat bundles of high denominational notes and a bunch of envelopes it makes sense to take the portable cash and inconspicuously ditch the rest at the first opportunity to maximize the opportunities to get away.
All of this of this is wild speculation, and much of clearly based on zero relevant knowledge or experience, but people still seem confident about their opinions. Something about the subject seems to encourage free range for this, that might not be extended to other areas. Largely harmless here, but it’s always a little amusing, when it’s not worrying, that no one seems to stop to consider that this gap might just be what someone with less than honest motivation relies on.
