New Report Details Inside Look at San Francisco Police Department Undercover Stolen iPhone Sting

[evansls]

What really transpired

This is the transcript from the 'Undercover Stolen iPhone Sting Operation', but law enforcement used Chris Hansen of Dateline's "How to Catch a Predator" on NBC to catch the criminal in action. This is how it all happened...

Hansen: My name is Chris Hansen of Dateline NBC. We're doing a story on Men who try encourage the sell of stolen iPhones.

Criminal: Oh, you think this is an iPhone? This is a Samsung GS3

Hansen: That looks like an iPhone to me. It looks like this in my hand. [Pulls out plastic/brittle cell phone]

Criminal: That's actually a Samsung GS3. Our most profitable model mirrored from an iPhone.

Hansen: But I was told this was an iPhone

Criminal: Sorry, you fell for our new marketing campaign. So are you going upgrade to our latest model? We're now selling GS4.

Hansen: I don't understand. Where am I?

Criminal: You're actually in Best Buy, our new Samsung store front in about 200 locations across the nation.

Hansen: But this is my film crew. There's law enforcement outside who plan to bring you to justice for selling stolen iphones.

Criminal: I'm sorry to disappoint you, but we can market our devices any way we choose and build our designs off the inspired R&D of competitors of whoever is popular this decade.

Hansen: You can do that? And there's no repercussions for such unethical practice? How do you sleep at night?

Criminal: Lets just say, anyone can try to bring us to court. we'll play along and pay our fines, but the goal is to keep our competitors trapped in litigation and to tarnish their brand name.

Hansen: I knew there was something wrong with my phone. All these gimmicks like trying to change a photo by swiping in the air. It doesn't work half the time. Am I holding it wrong?

Criminal: Oh, no, you're holding it correctly. Wait, yes, it's upside down. There... [fixes phone] But we only put in about 2 weeks of development and 1 week of QA. It's actually meant to track eyes of specific ethnicity. This is why this feature doesn't work as well for everyone, but for you it was upside down. You should try again now.

Hansen: So, this phone is racist?

Criminal: I'm not sure I'm following.

Hansen: This phone doesn't operate for everyone, since I'm clearly not of any korean descent.

Criminal: This is possible, but I'm not a liberty to disclose such details.

Hansen: But you just sai....

Criminal: I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be able to help you any more.

Hansen: That's fine. I didn't even like this phone anyway.

Criminal: This is to be expected as well, which is why we now have the store fronts at Best Buy next to the Apple store fronts here [points to the Apple store booth next to him] to discourage people from buying iPhones.

Hansen: You clearly know what you're doing.

Criminal: Yes, we've been doing this a long time even before Apple's iphone/ipad days.

Hansen: Well you're very good at it.

Criminal: We pride ourself as being #1 in consumer dissatisfaction.

 

[tatonka]

This is surprising to me that they are going after the buyers. I would assume that a large amount of buyers would be seeking a phone for themselves from this market meaning they are a one time buyer.

Wouldn't it be much more efficient to arrest those selling? You know the people who are probably involved in the organised crime of stealing and fleecing the phones? Where stopping one person would remove more than just one transaction from the black market?

I guess the ones selling them are crooks no matter what ... but provided a good oportunity even an otherwise good citizen may be tempted to buy. So shaking the trust and fear in those people is more effective as they actually are law-abiding in their everyday lives.
A crooks is a crook and will be released after a moderate slap on the hand.

 

[ptb42]

The buyers have no way of knowing whether or not the phone is stolen.

According to the article, potential buyers ARE informed that the phone is stolen. The undercover cop claims he just stole them from the Apple store.

The MacRumors article should have made this clear in the excerpt. I thought it was entrapment as well, until I took the time to read the cited article.

Whatever you think about the police tactics, the buyer cannot claim he didn't know it was stolen, when the seller told him that up front.

 

[needfx]

This is the transcript from the 'Undercover Stolen iPhone Sting Operation', but law enforcement used Chris Hansen of Dateline's "How to Catch a Predator" on NBC to catch the criminal in action. This is how it all happened...

so much fun reading that

 

[MrXiro]

As someone who has never had his phone stolen nor ever bought an iPhone off of the street (always through At&t actually) I still feel this is terrible. For one it completely IS entrapment, not entitlement. The average citizen is more "not wealthy" vs wealthy and is going to be looking for a deal. I know wealthy people who at times are looking for a good deal. The arrogance of some of the people of this site (especially THOSE calling less wealthy people ENTITLED) is outrageous.

I'm not one of those people who think we should be governed less but this kind of thing doesn't prevent the iPhone thieves from stealing your phone (to then sell overseas for a even bigger profit) but puts fear in the average citizen who has never before committed a crime.

Even with the knowledge that the police are now doing undercover stings is still scary.

Think of it this way, you're walking down the street armed with the knowledge of this article and a person comes up to you and asks if you want to buy his stolen iphone. Do you A. assume he's a cop and want to entrap you? or B. Think this guy might just rob you. It could be either scenario at this point. What do you say to the guy? Either of these scenarios leave you feeling uneasy. Why did this cop target you? Do you look like a "criminal".

This kind of operation is terrible and unnecessary. There are plenty of crimes out there that the police should be taking care of. Not striking fear in the every day man.

 

[Terrin]

I'm glad everyone knows this is entrapment without knowing the circumstances of the sting. If it were entrapment, in California no less, these charges wouldn't stand up for two seconds. Just like prostitution stings, I'm sure they make the "customers" aware that they are purchasing stolen goods.

If you have ever had your iPhone stolen, then you should feel no sympathy for the crooks on the other end who buy your iPhone and make the theft worthwhile. These police officers are trying to cut down on the theft, I think we can give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they know how to do their jobs.

LOL. Give police officers the benefit of the doubt. Good one.

----------

According to the article, potential buyers ARE informed that the phone is stolen. The undercover cop claims he just stole them from the Apple store.

The MacRumors article should have made this clear in the excerpt. I thought it was entrapment as well, until I took the time to read the cited article.

Whatever you think about the police tactics, the buyer cannot claim he didn't know it was stolen, when the seller told him that up front.

I would not believe it without a recording. Nonetheless, this type of thing, even if the person buying is told it is stolen turns people who likely would not have committed a crime into a criminal. Moreover, how are they approached, and when are they told it is stolen? If a meeting was arranged via the phone, but the person was told it was stolen at the meeting, people could feel intimidated into making the purchase.

 

[rtdunham]

LOL. Give police officers the benefit of the doubt. Good one..

One saved my life. I say get rid of the bad ones, pay the good ones more.

 

[3282868]

Reading comprehension must not be your strong suit. Also, you clearly don't know what entrapment is. Entrapment is when law enforcement cajole or otherwise convince a person to commit a criminal act. Providing opportunity is NOT entrapment.

News flash: uk law differs from us law. You can't say what it is or isn't based on semantics. It is not entrapment under US law, nor by my common sense.

Whether right or wrong, you could offer advice/information without the derogatory tone. Not meaning to be rude myself, it just irks me a bit.

 

[Xenomorph]

If an iPhone is stolen, it should be DEACTIVATED.

A stolen iPhone should become worthless. The end.

If you want a fail-safe, then the only way to re-activate a stolen iPhone is if the *original owner* petitions to have it re-activated (if the police recover it for them).

If a stolen iPhone becomes unusable, that would get rid of iPhone theft immediately.

 

[Squilly]

How is it entrapment? Why should apple be ashamed

Honest sellers wouldn't have hassles with the law

Yet how are the buyers supposed to know they're stolen? Not their fault.

----------

If an iPhone is stolen, it should be DEACTIVATED.

A stolen iPhone should become worthless. The end.

If you want a fail-safe, then the only way to re-activate a stolen iPhone is if the *original owner* petitions to have it re-activated (if the police recover it for them).

If a stolen iPhone becomes unusable, that would get rid of iPhone theft immediately.

Not necessarily. Someone is still out of a phone (being the victim).

 

[CEmajr]

If an iPhone is stolen, it should be DEACTIVATED.

A stolen iPhone should become worthless. The end.

If you want a fail-safe, then the only way to re-activate a stolen iPhone is if the *original owner* petitions to have it re-activated (if the police recover it for them).

If a stolen iPhone becomes unusable, that would get rid of iPhone theft immediately.

Can't and won't ever happen because even if they get deactivated in the USA, it wouldn't stop the massive overseas market where most of these phones end up. Apple would never be able to legally have a deactivate feature implemented on a worldwide scale.

As for the article, I would never buy a phone from someone who outright says their device is stolen. Any sane criminal will never say that they stole the device. The people who bought even after being informed its stolen deserve to be caught.

I've bought and sold literally hundreds of smartphones on Craigslist and have never had a person outright tell me they stole the device they were selling me, even if it might have been. Who knows. The people they caught aren't using common sense.

 

[larrybeo]

The Provider and Manufacturer Should Be Liable

How can this be? The biggest thing criminal about this is that a cell phone service provider would activate and profit off of a stolen device. Even with an iPad, you can't use it until you connect it to a WiFi network, thus Apple would be able to tell if the device is reported stolen. It's a shame that these companies put profit over people's safety.

 

[somethingelsefl]

This is bound for PRSI for sure.

Entrapment all the way. Apple should be ashamed for participating.

You clearly don't know the definition of "entrapment": a defense that claims the defendant would not have broken the law if not tricked into doing it by law enforcement officials.

These were criminals that were knowingly buying stolen iPhones, and therefore clearly "likely" to commit the crime whether or not the police had setup the sting operation.

Read the original HuffPost article before you start spouting off things that simply aren't true.

 

[larrybeo]

Can't and won't ever happen because even if they get deactivated in the USA, it wouldn't stop the massive overseas market where most of these phones end up. Apple would never be able to legally have a deactivate feature implemented on a worldwide scale.

As for the article, I would never buy a phone from someone who outright says their device is stolen. Any sane criminal will never say that they stole the device. The people who bought even after being informed its stolen deserve to be caught.

I've bought and sold literally hundreds of smartphones on Craigslist and have never had a person outright tell me they stole the device they were selling me, even if it might have been. Who knows. The people they caught aren't using common sense.

I believe that if you put as much effort into helping people as you do hurting them you would be much better off. Our world isn't built on profit and creed, it's built on Karma and modesty.

 

[spb3]

that could be me in handcuffs, buying an iphone off of the craigslist.

 

[Ryth]

How is it entrapment? Why should apple be ashamed

Honest sellers wouldn't have hassles with the law

Exactly.

Always cracks me up when people use some back---wards logic to defend illegal behavior.

 

[tdiaz]

I can see it now, Bait Phone.

Using the cameras inside the phone, it films what's happening with it, where it's going, who has it and what they say.

 

[Gulo]

You clearly don't know the definition of "entrapment": a defense that claims the defendant would not have broken the law if not tricked into doing it by law enforcement officials.

These were criminals that were knowingly buying stolen iPhones, and therefore clearly "likely" to commit the crime whether or not the police had setup the sting operation.

Read the original HuffPost article before you start spouting off things that simply aren't true.

Thank you. It's boggling my mind the inane comments on this story. While I'm not a lawyer, they teach this basic concept in College Law 101: if you were not induced to do something illegal AND you would likely have committed the crime anyway, then it's not entrapment.

Also, how many of you thief-coddlers have ever had something stolen? I have, a lot. In fact, my window just got busted out last week because I was naive enough to leave my charger cable plugged in overnight so some jerk suspected I had an iPhone inside. $350 for repairs later...

 

[joeip77]

ATT And Apple allowing stollen iPhones to to put back on the network

ATT And Apple allowing stollen iPhones to to put back on the network

Whats really sad is that 99.9% of the cellphone users that have an iPhone stolen doesn't know that there stollen phone can be put back on the network, activated and is being used by someone else (ATT and Apple are making money off of your stollen phone) This happened to me, I filed a police report and spoke to Apple and ATT both and was told that the stollen iPhone
Was Not put on the Blacklist so it could not be used on the network anymore. The detective said that they could easily idetify if the the phone was back on the network from its imei#, but that they could not do so unless there was an investigation and that the iPhone could be used to solve a more serious crime. It seems that what ATT and Apple are allowing to happen is definatly a crime.
I even had an person at ATT tell me that when she first went to work for ATT that in one of her first staff meetings this stolen phone blacklist was brought up and they were told that this blacklist is no longer used. She has worked in other cell companys for years and the blacklist was always used to keep stollen phones from ever being used on the network again.What I think is Really insane is that when anyone activates an iPhone on iTunes or a person does this in the store, why doesn't ATT or Apples system see the
imei# as stollen and stop it from being used. I will tell you why more$$$$

Sad Stuff

This is how it Suppose to work
This is from Wiki site

The IMEI number is used by the GSM network to identify valid devices and therefore can be used for stopping a stolen phone from accessing the network in that country. For example, if a mobile phone is stolen, the owner can call his or her network provider and instruct them to "blacklist" the phone using its IMEI number. This renders the phone useless on that network and sometimes other networks too, whether or not the phone's SIM is changed.


So many people still don't no this has been going on.

 

[NakedPaulToast]

You clearly don't know the definition of "entrapment": a defense that claims the defendant would not have broken the law if not tricked into doing it by law enforcement officials.

These were criminals that were knowingly buying stolen iPhones, and therefore clearly "likely" to commit the crime whether or not the police had setup the sting operation.

Read the original HuffPost article before you start spouting off things that simply aren't true.

From the article:

But the police find a problem with their bust: Lee never told the man in the suit that the iPhone he was buying was stolen. They have to let him go.

So clearly they aren't telling everybody that the iPhones are stolen.

 

[Shrink]

Thank you. It's boggling my mind the inane comments on this story. While I'm not a lawyer, they teach this basic concept in College Law 101: if you were not induced to do something illegal AND you would likely have committed the crime anyway, then it's not entrapment.

Also, how many of you thief-coddlers have ever had something stolen? I have, a lot. In fact, my window just got busted out last week because I was naive enough to leave my charger cable plugged in overnight so some jerk suspected I had an iPhone inside. $350 for repairs later...

What's a "thief-coddler"??

I've had my home burgled, my car broken into, and been robbed at knifepoint. Am I a "thief-coddler"?

New concept to me...please explain the interesting category of folks.

Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[acslater017]

1) Does anyone think it would be a cool to have a show about a cop/part-time Apple Store Expert? More realistic than "Chuck". I'd watch that.

2) The article's first paragraph states that the officer tells the buyer that the products are stolen. People will have different legal opinions (including an SF public defender in the article), but can we assume that the police department of a major American city knows how to do a sting operation (+decent conviction rate) without wasting hundreds of hours?

3) "They'll just sell the phones elsewhere". The article states as much. But this location being targeted was a hub for international illicit trade. It's one piece of the puzzle. If you were a seller, wouldn't you rather get quick cash on the street than cross international borders to commit your crime?

Come off it, people! No one says this is the magic solution to 100% of theft. But in this particular city where 50% of robberies involve smartphones, the local police are targeting the local market for these things. Makes sense.

 

[legioxi]

According to the article, potential buyers ARE informed that the phone is stolen. The undercover cop claims he just stole them from the Apple store.

The MacRumors article should have made this clear in the excerpt. I thought it was entrapment as well, until I took the time to read the cited article.

Whatever you think about the police tactics, the buyer cannot claim he didn't know it was stolen, when the seller told him that up front.

I was always under the impression that the buyer had to initiate things for it to not be entrapment. If some cop comes up to me and says, "Hey, want to buy a stolen iPhone?" that would be entrapment... or so I thought.

 

[2298754]

This is ridiculous. They shouldn't be arresting buyers, they need to be arresting sellers. Two of my friends ended up with Note 2s that were reported "lost" so the POS seller can claim insurance.

 

[legioxi]

Also, how many of you thief-coddlers have ever had something stolen? I have, a lot. In fact, my window just got busted out last week because I was naive enough to leave my charger cable plugged in overnight so some jerk suspected I had an iPhone inside. $350 for repairs later...

I've had my car broken into 3 times, twice for $2000 worth of stuff (Wrangler, no damage) and once with $6000 worth of equipment (Saab, picked lock, no damage). All three times I paid out $500 for the deductibles (homeowners). I still think this is a ****** way to do police work.