Law Enforcement Reportedly Looking Into Circumstances of Lost Next-Generation iPhone

[nookster]

From the sound of Jason's note, he hasn't yet obtained his own lawyer. Big mistake.

We'll find out soon enough, I'll eat popcorn for now & burn the carbs off later.

 

[Cartaphilus]

I wonder if the author of this letter is the same legal genius who had been advising Gawker/Gizmodo all along. If so, it explains a great deal.

It appears that the letter cites a provision of the penal code that deals with journalists who are sought to be held in contempt of court for refusing to comply with a subpoena, presumably for testimony regarding sources.

It doesn't appear that Chen is being asked to testify, that he refused to testify, or that anyone is seeking a contempt order against him.

How one gets from the cited section of the penal code to exempting a claimed journalist from the power of a judge to issue, and the power of law enforcement to execute, a search warrant is difficult to see. A press pass is not a license to steal, nor to receive stolen goods, nor to commit any other crime. Gizmodo and Chen are not suspected of meeting with Deep Throat in a garage to obtain information for an article exposing crime and corruption in the government; they are suspected of having actively participated in the commission of a crime. Trying to pass themselves off as heirs to the legacy of Neil Sheehan is as insulting as it is craven.

And congratulations to the San Mateo's Sheriff's Office and to the District Attorney for treating this incident with the seriousness it deserves.

 

[matticus008]

I still don't like the outcome and the apparent fact that anyone finding a purse/wallet/laptop/phone has the legal right to leave the restaurant with it, and the proprietor has no right to suggest otherwise, even though this decreases the chances the owner will ever get his/her property back

That presumes that the proprietor is aware of the property being misplaced in their establishment. Most people will turn it in to the bar or restaurant. But in California, they are not required to. They can also make independent attempts to return it or they can turn it over to the police. If they ever hope to obtain legal ownership of the item, it must be turned over to the police.

This is from People v. Stay, where defendant was attempting to use lost v. mislaid as a defense to theft:
[...]
The court acknowledged the distinction and the policy behind it.

The court acknowledged the distinction in out of state locations and law before rejecting the argument on an "either/or" basis because the distinction does not exist in California. The effect of the dicta paragraph you quote is, "Even under the defendant's own argument, which is not based in California law, he loses." But because the authority isn't of California law to begin with, it's invalid anyway.

Lost property, as they say at the top, is used in the ordinarily sense in California (i.e., as distinguished from abandoned property). Mislaid property is a subset of lost property, and some states make distinctions for subtypes of lost property, but California isn't one of them.

 

[brbubba]

I wonder if this story will make it into the "Dumb Crooks" files?

Party A steals a prototype phone (let's just call it what it is and stop all the BS legal wrangling) and sells it to Party B who then publishes a step-by-step account of the theft and their purchase of stolen property in their popular tech blog, which is then read by millions. That's just like the guys who rob a convenience store right after writing a personal check.

I also think that Gizmodo was horribly wrong in identifying the poor guy who lost his phone. How come we don't know the identity of the thief? Why are they protecting him and making the victim a laughingstock? I really hope Gizmodo and the thief are punished for their crimes (and stupidity).

One more thing . . . let's get real. All this legal mumbo-jumbo is nice and idealistic, but it does not reflect what really happens. People lose phones everyday and never get them back because the finders become keepers. These incidents aren't even reported to the police for the most part and even if they are, most items are never recovered. It doesn't matter if you leave it at a bar or if it's stolen from your pocket, the fact is that the vast majority of these losses result in theft and nothing is ever done about it. We only know about this case because Gizmodo was stupid enough to publish it.

What I find amazing is that there are easy technological solutions to recover stolen phones or at the least, prevent stolen phones from being used, but none of these easy solutions are being implemented. 1)Every phone has a serial # - why don't carriers have databases with stolen serials that can be matched to people bringing in phones for activation or used on their network? 2)With GPS in just about every phone, why can't that data be used to find the phone? If I could report it stolen and have the carrier search for that phone's serial # . . . case closed. That way it's tied to serial number, not something temporary like a mobile me account. Hell, all you have to do is tie phone accounts into serial numbers and not just sim cards, which can be removed. It should be easy for a carrier to look up calls made on a phone with a certain serial #.

It's not theft until proven in a court of law, which will pretty much never happen. Gizmodo might be subpoenaed to reveal the name of the seller and they will just claim shield law protection.

You're making a big assumption here, that Gizmodo is some garage outlet that doesn't even know what a lawyer looks like. You can be assured that they consulted multiple lawyers before this went down. I would also be more than willing to bet that they have taped telephone conversations of them trying to return the device to apple and being denied. If you call the only presumed owner of the device and they claim it's not their device then I think that's a fair assumption that the property is lost/unclaimed. Warranted I still think they should have paid the money for "access" to the device, as opposed to outright sale. Showing someone unclaimed property, while trying to contact the owner, isn't a crime.

Agreed that identifying the engineer responsible was in bad taste and did more harm than good.

ATT could have probably identified the phone and eventually tracked it down. However, Apple obviously made the decision to remotely kill it as to prevent any trade secrets from being revealed regarding the OS/functionality.

 

[matticus008]

It's not theft until proven in a court of law

No, it's theft. There is no scenario under which the series of events that has taken place is lawful. Whether charges or convictions result from the crime is, as always, simply a question of practicality and evidence gathering.

When someone steals your wallet, even if you never see the wallet again, they never identify who stole it, and they never charge and convict anyone, your wallet nevertheless remains stolen.

The sale is absolutely prohibited by law, which sets out a series of steps to take, should a finder of valuable property wish to keep it as his own. Under no circumstances can this process be completed in fewer than three and a half months.

Gizmodo might be subpoenaed to reveal the name of the seller and they will just claim shield law protection.

The police already have the name.

You're making a big assumption here, that Gizmodo is some garage outlet that doesn't even know what a lawyer looks like. You can be assured that they consulted multiple lawyers before this went down.

Your assumption is far more egregious than his. Everything about this smacks of no one stopping to speak to a lawyer. Gizmodo has totally mismanaged the situation. They'd have been in the same position to report, and actually had a plausible shield argument, had they purchased photos.

If you call the only presumed owner of the device and they claim it's not their device then I think that's a fair assumption that the property is lost/unclaimed.

They never called that person, nor did they contact Apple's corporate offices, by their own admission. Moreover, "lost/unclaimed" property is not subject to a fictional "finders, keepers" rule.

Showing someone unclaimed property, while trying to contact the owner, isn't a crime.

(A) It wasn't unclaimed and (B) selling something that does not belong to you is a crime.

 

[wovel]

I am tired of these holier than thou people who think they are the best thing since sliced bread just because they have been on a forum longer than someone else.

He was essentially correct, and you should try and pay a little more attention to the thread you are replying to. Your exact same argument has been made 45 times in this thread and each time it is been easily and completely refuted. It would be nice if people would try to keep up Please note I have not been here all that long myself and have no holier than though attitude

 

[LagunaSol]

You're making a big assumption here, that Gizmodo is some garage outlet that doesn't even know what a lawyer looks like. You can be assured that they consulted multiple lawyers before this went down.

Yeah, and lawyers never give bad legal advice or miscalculate the results of their actions.

("Hey, let's make OJ try the glove on in court!")

 

[reactions]

Considering I would be legally liable? Yes. It's also the decent thing to do (and I say it as a person who does not own a Mac or iPhone).

I *may* have taken it from the bar (Assuming I used the guy's facebook to tell him I found the lost phone). People lie about **** all the time, and I'd want to give the device back personally.

If it bricked before I got in touch with the guy, in what actually happened, I had his name. I could have searched him publicly on Facebook - and I don't need to be his friend to send him a message through Facebook.

Let's say his Facebook was private. At the point where I removed the case and saw the Apple branding on a device I knew wasn't on the market, I'd contact Apple.

He did that, you say. Not in any reasonable way. I have a friend-of-a-friend who knows somebody at Apple who is above AppleCare support (not anything like a CxO, but up the food chain). And if I didn't know her, Steve Jobs' email is public. With a company as secretive as Apple, you bet Jobs was told about the lost phone immediately.

Failing all of that- I'd give it to the cops. People file missing items reports all the time.

i apreciate your honestly and integrity to apple.

i for one wouldn't feel right selling something i found either.

but alas it's out there and i'm tired of apple fanboys who are sad that their "surprise" is ruined.

awe fanboy - there there - there is always next year