>>I've also thought of another reason against the giveaway, liability. The supermarket would've had an insurance policy in place in case of tainted food or injury on property. The bank nor the police would not.

Almost certainly that's what motivated the bank in a distant city. Stuff left in the store? Trash it. You can't issue it to passers by because if somebody eats an out-of-date donut and gets sick, or grabs a heater with a torn power cord that electrocutes somebody etc etc then banks make attractive targets for ambulance-chasing lawyers. The bank doesn't know or care what the stuff is: get rid of it. The Police said they were concerned about a riot and actually had a duty to protect the contractors wanting to shift all the stuff out of the carpark in a lawful workmanlike fashion without swarms of rioters making it dangerous to proceed or trying to grab anything not bolted down. Seems to me the Choys could have given it away over the weekend if that was what they wanted but once they were evicted without clearing the premises, I'd expect that this is what the bank always does.