New York Student Sues Apple for False Arrest After Being Mistakenly Identified as Store Thief [Updated]

[Defthand]

Because his name and address are on the learner's permit?

The insane thing about this is Apple can't get the receipt printers at the register/Genius Bar to work most of the time, but people think they've invested millions into putting some kind of Skynet facial recognition system into their retail outlets? As opposed to... just using CCTV and asking for ID? Does that really make any kind of sense?

The kid thinks he can squeeze Apple for money and his lawyer's probably hoping they'll settle rather than divert lawyer hours to a court case. I guarantee both of them are full of it.

I's be surprised if Apple had such a system but the security outfit they hired advertises that they use "sophisticated electronic and on-location operatives to monitor, analyze and predict thousands of data points." Could be describing facial recognition tools.

I imagine the Plaintiff was told that they were able to identify him from visual evidence captured during the thefts. Who knows, they have bluffed and told him they used a high tech tool to ID him, hoping he'd confess.

 

[Abraxa]

Seems Apple will have to answer some questions on the provenience of the inflicted photo ...

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Just as you said, mistakes happen, and sometimes human beings need to grow a pair and just get over it cuz, ya know, mistakes happen.

So....send the police over to your house then, and have your reputation tarnished? Somehow I think you’d have more than a “mistakes happen” response to that if it were you.

In addition to a damaged reputation, you could also have a missed work shift. Maybe even get fired once your employer learns that you didn’t show up because you were being arrested. So there are real world implications here that someone cannot necessarily “just get over”.

 

[pweicks]

So....send the police over to your house then, and have your reputation tarnished? Somehow I think you’d have more than a “mistakes happen” response to that if it were you.

In addition to a damaged reputation, you could also have a missed work shift. Maybe even get fired once your employer learns that you didn’t show up because you were being arrested. So there are real world implications here that someone cannot necessarily “just get over”.

Yes and let’s sue Apple for $1,000,000,000 while we’re at it cuz that’s how much it’ll cost to fix my hurt feelings.

 

[Defthand]

Might be worth your time to actually read the article and acquaint yourself with the facts.
[doublepost=1556064719][/doublepost]

You too.

Yeh, not only did I read the article, I visited the website of the security firm used by Apple before MR and yourself considered its role and abilities. Seems I was right that some form of FID was used.

 

[Glockworkorange]

$1 billion. Nothing like shooting for the moon, kid.

 

[PickUrPoison]

There may be a disconnect between Apple and their security partner. Bah's lawyers (including the first from his arraignment in the Boston case) were told info that contradicts Apple's statement about facial recognition tech. Point 22 from the lawsuit:

"At that point, Detective Reinhold also explained that Defendant’s security technology
identifies suspects of theft using facial recognition technology."

The lawyers would be careful to not make intentionally misleading statements in a court filing. There would serious repercussions and any untrue statements would be fatal to a suit.

The detective could very well have been deliberately lying to Bah, in an attempt to trick him into confessing. There’s nothing morally, ethically or legally wrong with that, and cops do it all the time. You might be surprised at how many criminals fall for it, too.

 

[0947347]

He was falsely arrested for crimes he didn’t commit, through measures that are not promoted and conflict their “privacy” marketing campaign. He needs no other reasons to sue.

So, if Apple advertises on privacy, does it mean they should have no camera system in store to catch thieves? Every other store has got cameras.

He was arrested by police, not Apple. Or did Apple send some Apple store staff to hunt him down, investigate and frame him?
If Apple provided pictures of thief, the police department does the a investigation and arrest, not Apple.

What is the reason he should sue Apple and not the police department?

 

[Krizoitz]

Hope he wins a boatload of money. Apple has no right to be filming and recording without the consent of the second party.

Um, actually they do. Most stores, banks, etc. have surveillance cameras. You are in public, you have given up the right to not be filmed by choosing to be in public, at least in the US (and many other places). Expectation of privacy is a long established body of law, in public your expectation of privacy is MUCH lower than in say, your home. Some jurisdictions MIGHT require postage signage indicating you are being filmed, but thats about it.

Further, the fact that you hope he wins a boatload of money is rather sad. Not only because you base that on perfectly legal behavior on Apple's part, but you base it on the claims of the lawsuit backed by exactly zero provided evidence so far. Unless/until evidence is provided its ridiculous to simply accept his claims at face value. He can claim anything he wants, that doesn't make it true.

How would you feel if someone sued you, provided no evidence, but everyone believed them anyway?

Everyone rushing to judgement here is being utterly ridiculous. All the "but Apple is all about privacy" and "shame on Apple for doing this" are basing that on the claims of the guy suing! Thats nuts! At least wait til there is a shred of evidence before jumping to conclusions, then you at least lower the risk of making an ass of yourself when it turns out the whole thing is garbage or something.

 

[Shadowcatz]

Um, actually they do. Most stores, banks, etc. have surveillance cameras. You are in public, you have given up the right to not be filmed by choosing to be in public, at least in the US (and many other places). Expectation of privacy is a long established body of law, in public your expectation of privacy is MUCH lower than in say, your home. Some jurisdictions MIGHT require postage signage indicating you are being filmed, but thats about it.

Further, the fact that you hope he wins a boatload of money is rather sad. Not only because you base that on perfectly legal behavior on Apple's part, but you base it on the claims of the lawsuit backed by exactly zero provided evidence so far. Unless/until evidence is provided its ridiculous to simply accept his claims at face value. He can claim anything he wants, that doesn't make it true.

How would you feel if someone sued you, provided no evidence, but everyone believed them anyway?

Everyone rushing to judgement here is being utterly ridiculous. All the "but Apple is all about privacy" and "shame on Apple for doing this" are basing that on the claims of the guy suing! Thats nuts! At least wait til there is a shred of evidence before jumping to conclusions, then you at least lower the risk of making an ass of yourself when it turns out the whole thing is garbage or something.

This is exactly what needed to be said. Sadly the comments here are what is wrong with the internet and people today. Believe anything that is said with no backing evidence to prove the point.

 

[charlituna]

When i worked retail it was not uncommon for our security company (it was outsourced like apple does) to pull screen caps off our security cameras when a theft was discovered and they could pinpoint the moment it occurred) and they would share them with other stores so if another location caught someone stealing they could check and see if their thief was a possible repeat offender. But rarely did they stand around with headshots hoping someone would walk in

I rather wonder if there’s part of the story we aren’t being told. Like he was acting shady and that’s why they grabbed him. It’s hard to believe that they would just grab him off a photo when shoplifting etc generally requires catching someone with the goods as they pass the last possible point to pay.
[doublepost=1556226948][/doublepost]

Come on, just meet in the middle...

(would he’d made it into the news without that sum?)

It’s apple. Anything that makes them look like lying sacks of **** gets page hits. So yeah

 

[tamaralig]

I highly doubt anything was used other than video and stills but.....I don’t think that’s how he was identified..he was likely named by someone else that’s also a suspect or something so small as signing into one of those stolen devices with an Apple ID or IP address...I can go on and on about the possibilities of how he was likely named...this is a case worth following. I think if recognition software was used it was law enforcement and they are throwing Apple under the bus

 

[charlituna]

Since the article states he was arrested, that leads me to believe that the police (along with the DA) believed there was sufficient probable cause (and evidence) for arrest.

Which in the case of theft is generally either a fake AF ID and stolen credit cards or the stuff he took off the shelves and tried to walk out with.
[doublepost=1556227308][/doublepost]

Why aren’t the news outlets highlighting the fact that Apple is tracking people’s faces without their knowledge in their retail stores?

Perhaps they aren’t reporting it because there’s no proof of the claim. As a retail store yes they have cameras and that footage would be stored for a period of time. But that’s standard form for retail stores. It doesn’t prove they track faces, they link to names etc
[doublepost=1556227541][/doublepost]

How can one not know they have misplaced their Learner's Permit/ Driver's License? You cannot blame Apple(or anyone else) if you cannot take care of your belongings.

He’s not saying that he didn’t know it was missing. It was more “My leaner’s permit was stolen and I don’t know I guess the thief used it as id at an apple store and that’s why my name is on the warrant”
But that doesn’t hold up because he said there was no photo and anyone that does business with Apple knows they are militant about all ids have to be photo ids
[doublepost=1556227829][/doublepost]

Given Apple's willingness to engage in litigation over amounts much smaller than that, they should be happy to throw lawyers at this guy until he and his legal team cry uncle and offer to pay Apple to just go away.

This one will likely go to court. Why? Because they are being accused of using tracking etc which goes against everything they say in public. They likely don’t because if they did they wouldn’t have so many cases of repeat shoplifters. Their software would have told them a prior thief was in the store, called the cops etc. and they’ll want the true to be out there and on record as more than just them saying it. And if they settle then all the blogs will say that there was something to hide.

 

[0947347]

Yep let’s berate him for losing his license. The issue here isn’t that he was arrested and falsely accused of a crime he didn’t commit. Let’s blame the victim.

His story (as presented in articles) is very fishy.

How does lost non-picture learners get you arrested?
Was the thief waving it on camera? “Hey I am thief, look, here is my ID.”?

The said “facial recognition system” AKA camera, cannot record you when you haven’t been there.

As a response staff, if you have footage of somebody stealing you give it to police.

If the police receives pictures of the person stealing and they arrest some completely different looking guy, how is this Apple’s fault?
[doublepost=1556228421][/doublepost]

I'm curious ... with all that is provided publicly thus far ... how did you determine that law enforcement used all available to them to "investigate a crime"?
A picture?

He was charged based on a picture and potentially ID.

What "investigation" was done before laying charges?
- Location and proximity in the date/time of the crime occurred? He wasn't in the same state, lol.
Fingerprints (anywhere in any of the stores he's allegedly stolen from)?
Eye witnesses (as vague as this is, so far no reports about this)?
Products within his possession by any means?

I'm no expert of the law (in my country of Canada, and definitely not in the USA) ... however the word "investigate" clearly was not even done correctly here ... else how on Earth can they charge this guy when he's not anywhere near the scene of the crime and with a proper alibi ? At best they'd "observe" him or "investigate" proper details to prove he was there - in this case he was not ... as the statement of facts state; "wrongfully charged".

So he should sue the investigators AKA police.

Or did Apple store clerks do the investigation themselves and then handcuffed him and brought him to an APPLE STATION?

 

[Abraxa]

The amount of gree is absurde for sure, but i would like to hear of the provenience of the inflicted pic, for i really wouldn't like to be cuffed and held captive on a doubtful and smeary story.

 

[Shanghaichica]

His story (as presented in articles) is very fishy.

How does lost non-picture learners get you arrested?
Was the thief waving it on camera? “Hey I am thief, look, here is my ID.”?

The said “facial recognition system” AKA camera, cannot record you when you haven’t been there.

As a response staff, if you have footage of somebody stealing you give it to police.

If the police receives pictures of the person stealing and they arrest some completely different looking guy, how is this Apple’s fault?
[doublepost=1556228421][/doublepost]

So he should sue the investigators AKA police.

Or did Apple store clerks do the investigation themselves and then handcuffed him and brought him to an APPLE STATION?

I didn’t say it was Apple’s fault as we don’t have the full details. However I said that he shouldn’t be blamed if he’s been the victim of a false arrest.

 

[0947347]

I didn’t say it was Apple’s fault as we don’t have the full details. However I said that he shouldn’t be blamed if he’s been the victim of a false arrest.

Yes, I understand that you don’t, but he is playing it that way.

That is the whole point of why he sues Apple for a billion.

I would dismiss this in notime.
Sue the police department (but then he couldn’t try for billon and make himself famous

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Yes and let’s sue Apple for $1,000,000,000 while we’re at it cuz that’s how much it’ll cost to fix my hurt feelings.

Way to miss the point (and not even address it) and focus on something that was already explained about why lawyers do outrageous high numbers they know they’ll never get.

 

[charlituna]

His story (as presented in articles) is very fishy.

How does lost non-picture learners get you arrested?

it sounds like we are supposed to believe that this kid lost his no photo permit, which some nefarious thief type found and took into an Apple store to make a purchase of some kind. something he was paying for with cash or the permit was lost with a credit card in the same name. and whatever the purchase was it required the staffer to take down a full address. and then the Apple Facial Recognition System recognized this nefarious fellow as a prior thief and called in the calvary including matching time stamps off the camera to transactions to find said address.

here's my issues with his story.
1. i have been an apple customer for quite some time and I have only had to give my address in one transaction -- when i was paying for something in store but it was being shipped.
2. i've never seen Apple take an id that didn't have a photo. in fact I've witnessed several cases of them refusing to do a sale or release a repair because of a lack of photo id or the only one the person had was a work id or school id. they were quite militant about it being an officially issued photo id like a state id card or passport.
3. if the system was so good it could match this face why did the police have a grainy photo.

 

[DeepIn2U]

His story (as presented in articles) is very fishy.

How does lost non-picture learners get you arrested?
Was the thief waving it on camera? “Hey I am thief, look, here is my ID.”?

The said “facial recognition system” AKA camera, cannot record you when you haven’t been there.

As a response staff, if you have footage of somebody stealing you give it to police.

If the police receives pictures of the person stealing and they arrest some completely different looking guy, how is this Apple’s fault?
[doublepost=1556228421][/doublepost]

So he should sue the investigators AKA police.

Or did Apple store clerks do the investigation themselves and then handcuffed him and brought him to an APPLE STATION?

If you’re seriously asking that last question then you either did NOT read the update to the facts sourced from Bloomberg on whom is being sued. Also Apple security footage was supplied leading to this kids arrest.

If I have your birth certificate, and used it to get a license in another state (very quite possible because in the USA not even death records are fully shared state to state, nor even you drivers license (I’m unsure about drivers license); Kevin Mitnick has shown us all of that being on America’s most wants list for months before finally being arrested.

If that ID is left at the scene of a crime and an overhead camera pic or video is taken the likely accuracy of someone’s face looking similar to you is more likely vs a very accurate pic of you from your employers security pass with your face pic from less than 5ft away point blank.

If this is difficult to comprehend as a viable potential for wrongful prosecution that’s fine. But come at me reasonably not just cause you don’t like the kid wanting a billion dollars which we all think is very accessible but not completely stupid.

We’ll get to see more facts as more information is released and what level of participation Apple was in. Please read before attacking cheers

 

[0947347]

If you’re seriously asking that last question then you either did NOT read the update to the facts sourced from Bloomberg on whom is being sued. Also Apple security footage was supplied leading to this kids arrest.

If I have your birth certificate, and used it to get a license in another state (very quite possible because in the USA not even death records are fully shared state to state, nor even you drivers license (I’m unsure about drivers license); Kevin Mitnick has shown us all of that being on America’s most wants list for months before finally being arrested.

If that ID is left at the scene of a crime and an overhead camera pic or video is taken the likely accuracy of someone’s face looking similar to you is more likely vs a very accurate pic of you from your employers security pass with your face pic from less than 5ft away point blank.

If this is difficult to comprehend as a viable potential for wrongful prosecution that’s fine. But come at me reasonably not just cause you don’t like the kid wanting a billion dollars which we all think is very accessible but not completely stupid.

We’ll get to see more facts as more information is released and what level of participation Apple was in. Please read before attacking cheers

Thanks for a reply
And in the same spirit, I will ask you if you are serious.

If you would be provided with an incriminating security footage, you would investigate.

What if I would tell you that I am arresting you for finding your ID In Walmart after it was robbed?
(And you didn’t rob it)
You would provide your whereabouts to the police. They would verify. You just lost your ID. If they have some sort of footage, somebody similar to you, it is somebody similar to you but you were not there.

So, you sue Walmart for 1 billion for providing a security footage, proving theft?Any civil citizen would provide the footage, if anything was stolen on their watch, wouldn’t you?

So, again, the evidence is irrelevant to you, because you were not there and you can prove it. Still with me?

Police ignores the fact that you were not there and arrest you and make hell to you. Is that Apple store’s fault? Do they investigate themselves and frame obviously a person who was not there?
Makes 0 sense. Agree or disagree?

Now, who arrested him without proper investigation? Apple store?

ID has got a diddly squat to do with it. If he had a proof he was not there, then POLICE seriously screwed up, not Apple store (providing they didn’t falsify the footage)

With your logic, all the people who were mistakenly identified by police, should sue the places that provides security footages. Basically, police screws up and company (which may have been robbed) gets sued on top of it. Very nice

 

[DeepIn2U]

Thanks for a reply
And in the same spirit, I will ask you if you are serious.

If you would be provided with an incriminating security footage, you would investigate.

What if I would tell you that I am arresting you for finding your ID In Walmart after it was robbed?
(And you didn’t rob it)
You would provide your whereabouts to the police. They would verify. You just lost your ID. If they have some sort of footage, somebody similar to you, it is somebody similar to you but you were not there.

So, you sue Walmart for 1 billion for providing a security footage, proving theft.

Any civil citizen would provide the footage, if anything was stolen on their watch, wouldn’t you?

ID has got a diddly squat to do with it. If he had a proof he was not there, then POLICE seriously screwed up, not Apple store (providing they didn’t falsify the footage)

This whole issue is around the lack of “investigation”! If the investigators (said company also listed as a plaintiff) and the police did their investigation they’d have found this kid was elsewhere. Hence my stance on this situation.


Others in this thread have alluded to profiling of some kind and although possible we don’t know.

That’s just to offer similarity of “investigation” which probably wasn’t much for this case - we don’t know!

The key part you left out of your argument is the kid was elsewhere and yet still charged! You’re not grasping that ... again the pure facts will com out.

You’re reaching now about other people providing footage and wouldn’t I and such. I’m sticking to the details publicly available about the case not my prior experience or personal point of view which you’re seemingly pushing heavily on. I guess we’re done debating because. You’re pushing your personal feelings against 1 of my posts because you didn’t like it and attacked without looking st my other post in this thread. It’s set and debate is just going to get worse. I’m not trying to convince you of any view is better or worse right or wrong if this case to take Apple and the security company to court is/not just wants odd and fishy with the facts given.

 

[0947347]

This whole issue is around the lack of “investigation”! If the investigators (said company also listed as a plaintiff) and the police did their investigation they’d have found this kid was elsewhere. Hence my stance on this situation.


Others in this thread have alluded to profiling of some kind and although possible we don’t know.

That’s just to offer similarity of “investigation” which probably wasn’t much for this case - we don’t know!

The key part you left out of your argument is the kid was elsewhere and yet still charged! You’re not grasping that ... again the pure facts will com out.

You’re reaching now about other people providing footage and wouldn’t I and such. I’m sticking to the details publicly available about the case not my prior experience or personal point of view which you’re seemingly pushing heavily on. I guess we’re done debating because. You’re pushing your personal feelings against 1 of my posts because you didn’t like it and attacked without looking st my other post in this thread. It’s set and debate is just going to get worse. I’m not trying to convince you of any view is better or worse right or wrong if this case to take Apple and the security company to court is/not just wants odd and fishy with the facts given.

Sorry I am not that nice to have personal feeling to your post.

Also how did you manage read, that I don’t think he was wrongfully arrested?

He was. But not by Apple. By police. I am saying this the whole time. I have said he should sue the Police Department (if you look back on my posts)

Emotions towards my post without understanding and backtracking my previous posts comes from your side and is your problem.

Edit: I have nothing against you and your views.
Have a lovely night

 

[pweicks]

Way to miss the point (and not even address it) and focus on something that was already explained about why lawyers do outrageous high numbers they know they’ll never get.

I’ve been making the same point all along. Not sure what thin air you’re trying to grab at here.

Yes, as an 18 year old who, at best, has a part time, minimum-wage job, it’s gonna require 1 billion bucks to fix that lost job. For crying out loud! My own father has been breaking his back working for 30 years with a bachelors degree and his lifetime salary wouldn’t match a hundredth of that!!

If the kid had the composure and audacity to agree, “Yes... *sniffle* ...lets sue Apple for one billion dollars... *sniffle* ... cuz that will make me feel better,” then the kid obviously couldn’t care less about “damages” caused by this occurrence.

Was it wrong to begin with? Yes. Has the occurrence been wrongly taken advantage of? Absolutely! That is the point I have been making all along. Again, idk why you’re trying to argue with my opinion. You’re trying to take it down a completely different path.

 

[ronntaylor]

This whole issue is around the lack of “investigation”! If the investigators (said company also listed as a plaintiff) and the police did their investigation they’d have found this kid was elsewhere. Hence my stance on this situation.

Others in this thread have alluded to profiling of some kind and although possible we don’t know.

That’s just to offer similarity of “investigation” which probably wasn’t much for this case - we don’t know!

The key part you left out of your argument is the kid was elsewhere and yet still charged! You’re not grasping that ... again the pure facts will com out.

Exactly! His original lawyer got the Boston case at end of June, with it ultimately being dismissed due to proving he was not in Boston on the date of the theft. Yet months later SIS and Apple sent info to the NYPD to have him arrested for a theft in NYC. The Apple+SIS video supplied from the Boston theft also shows someone that looks nothing like Bah. The suspect from the NYC theft (from both the photo and surveillance video supplied by Apple+SIS) is supposedly a different height and looks nothing like Bah according to Det. Reinhold. Apple should have dropped all complaints against Bah after the Boston case that proved he wasn't the thief in Boston. How and why Apple continued to pursue Bah is ridiculous and the reason for the lawsuit.

From commentary on law blogs, the theory is that Bah's lawyer is asking for $1B to punish Apple and SIS to make sure something like this doesn't happen again. The large amount is to hurt Apple as a small amount would be negligible. Remember, he had to appear in three other states (Massachusetts, Delaware and New Jersey where a case is still open) and was arrested in NYC. He missed several days of classes and his grades suffered. He may have to fight get all charges and allegations expunged as it could hurt his future prospects should a prospective employer or school perform a background check on him.