Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 2nd Sep 2011 21:47 UTC
Apple So, I kind of mocked this story yesterday, but today an interesting twist has emerged which puts the story in an entirely different light. This week, CNet reported a story about how Apple is working with the San Francisco Police Department to retrieve a lost iPhone 5 prototype. The police and Apple apparently traced the phone to someone's house, and showed up on his doorstep, threatening him and his family. The only problem - the SFPD has no record of any house search or of the case in general - raising the question whether Apple employees falsely impersonated the SFPD, which happens to be a serious crime in California. Update: While I was busy sleeping, the story changed a little bit, but it's still far too shady. After conferring with Apple, the SFPD now states four police officers were involved, and that only the two Apple employees entered Calderon's house. However, Calderon had no idea these two were private non-police people, since he claims they did not identify themselves as Apple employees. Had he known, he would not have let them search his house. So, update or no, Apple employees still impersonated police officers, and issued threats to intimidate Calderon into letting them search his house - without a warrant. I don't understand how people can just accept this sort of behaviour. Don't you have rights in the US? Update II: Perfect summary.
Thread beginning with comment 488487
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

You are a troll and losing respect as a news site daily.

Maybe, just maybe, that's because the police wouldn't come to the rescue for ordinary citizens as they are doing for Apple. Just a guess though.

The police assist victims retrieve stolen cars, laptops, phones all the time. University police helped me retrieve a stolen laptop just six months ago after I tracked it down and asked what to do. And we approached it the same way, confronting the person so they could return my "lost" property without having to file charges.

I sputter about this because it involves Apple? NO SHIT, SHERLOCK. Maybe that's because, you know, THIS IS A TECH WEBSITE?

Really is that why there has been no OSNews story about the utter incompetence shown by the Dutch certificate provider Diginotar and the corrupt Dutch officials that tried to cover up the extent of the damage and which has affected every operating system with a browser to issue patches? That story has no news value compared to some propaganda swipe at Apple? If you really want to use the "this is appropriate because Apple is a tech company" line you really need to grow some self-awareness.

Also, name calling in caps makes you seem like a bigger douche than hopefully you are irl. Beginning to doubt that too.

You apparently have no issues with living in a state where the police will trample all over your constitutional rights just to protect a company ... [some utterly unrelated nonsense about outsourcing]

A) The police did nothing but stand outside.

B) This guy apparently chose to let private citizens who accused him of theft into his house in order I suppose to prove his innocence.

C) If Apple employees pretended to be police, they are guilty of a serious crime. I have not seen any complaint made by this individual, have you? He was probably too busy trying to sell his story to engadget or gizmodo so they can take advantage of the foaming at the mouth fanboism of people like you to make a few bucks before people move on to the next bullshit story.

Please state which constitutional right was "trampled". Also, would you have rather Apple didn't call the police and instead raided the house with a gang in the middle of the night? Personally, I'm glad the police were there and not the opposite. By the way, do you ever let anything as simple as the facts stand in the way of your absurd grandstanding?

Luckily, most of the reactions to this issue on the web have been very negative and condemning of both the police and Apple, which at least means there are a lot of Americans out there who do have two braincells to rub together and realise that this is entirely unacceptable.

Yes it sure is a good thing that people who have no attention spans, apparently can't read, and have zero common sense or understanding of the law agree with you. Yay, for PR spin masquerading as critical thought! Maybe you could emigrate to the US and run for political office in the Tea Party.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Which right was trampled?
by fossil on Mon 5th Sep 2011 05:24 in reply to "RE[4]: So let me get this straight"
fossil Member since:

Fourth Amendment to U.S. Constitution:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

But maybe there was no iPh5 lost and it was all just a publicity stunt, with Apple figuring no one would care about a Latino. Probably go over big with the Limbaugh crowd.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Which right was trampled?
by Not2Sure on Mon 5th Sep 2011 06:38 in reply to "Which right was trampled?"
Not2Sure Member since:

Umm, not sure if you are trolling or are just as ignorant as Holwerda's two brain cells he "rubs together."

The protection against unreasonable/unwarranted search and seizure protects you from agents of the state not the actions of your fellow citizens.

The Constitution has pretty much nothing to say on the matter of Citizen Bob stealing Joe Citizen's phone. Evidence unlawfully obtained from any defendant by a private person is generally admissible. So if Apple people had found the prototype they could have handed it over to the police and it would be used as evidence.

However, almost universally in the US, citizens lack the authority to conduct searches and seizures of the property of other citizens. Depending on the jurisdiction and circumstances that would be trespassing, b&e, assault, and larceny. None of which applies in this instance given the so far undisputed facts.

Have they given up on teaching even basic civics in American high schools? Probably have replaced it with a class to read Facebook's privacy policy and terms of use. Or maybe they just watch a few episodes of Law & Order and call it good.

Reply Parent Score: 1