So since you feel you can offer a "better" theory you must be right?
And how one earth did you draw any conclusions about what I believe from three words?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
San Francisco Police Did Assist Apple in House Search of iPhone 5
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So since you feel you can offer a "better" theory you must be right?
And how one earth did you draw any conclusions about what I believe from three words?
I might be wrong, but my theory is indeed better than yours (that is if you even have one).
Your theory being better has nothing to do with its truth value, its completely irrelevant.
Your theory is incredibly lame and stupid.
Not Apple's fault that he gave them permission to enter his house. Apple did not do this on there own, they had the POLICE with them. *Granted we don't know the circumstances yet of police involvement, but you are ASSUMING Apple did something wrong. Now if a company was going to do something ILLEGAL .WHY WOULD THEY BRING THE POLICE WITH THEM? If there is fault here, its definitely more likely a Police lapse in judgement, not Apple's.
Apple has no history of some massive campaign of lying. You are making this up or exaggerating some other insignificant claims to fit your theory. I missed the part about Apple refusing to file a report .perhaps you could point me to where you found this, or did you make that up too?
When you get pulled over and the Police ask to search your car, they also do this without a warrant if YOU GRANT THEM PERMISSION, just LIKE THIS GUY DID. It is too early to know what the facts are in this case .we have already seen how much has flipped flopped regarding the events of this case, so you don't actually know if there was enough facts or not.
You are pulling another assumption into your lame theory out of thin air. What do you know about this Phones GPS technology and why would you assume it was never turned on? If you were to assume anything, one would be inclined to believe it was turned on incase it did go missing. Your assumption lacks common sense.
Assumptions and speculations and just adding more spices to your theory out of thin air.
Your theory is incredibly lame and stupid and open to many problems.
Ooooo! Trespassing!!! Horror of horrors!!!! How will this fellow ever be able to resume a normal life after having Apple security searching for an iPhone in his house instead of the police officers he was perfectly fine with having search his house! Oh, the humanity! Only millions and millions of dollars will give him any chance of putting back the pieces of his shattered life.
The truth is that even in the unlikely event a jury one day finds that the man didn't validly give his consent for the non-police personnel to enter his home because his consent was dependent on their being police officers , all he will be due is damages for trespass--that's all. And no meaningful damages are assessed for trespassing.
Also there's no law against asking anyone if he is in the country illegally, just as there is no law against anyone--civilian or law enforcement officer--asking if you've been drinking or taken drugs. You can say "yes", "no", or "it's none of your business". If the occupant were legally in the country all he had to do was say so. And if he wants to say that he refuses to answer the question, that's his right too.
Failure to follow some bureaucratic administrative procedure might get you a demerit but it isn't a crime, and it is certainly no violation of any citizen's rights. Otherwise there would be lines around the courthouse of lawyers filing lawsuits any time some government employee failed to file in quadruplicate because he overlooked the salmon copy.
The published reports say that at no time did the Apple representatives tell anyone they were police officers. The occupant apparently assumed that everyone was a police officer, but he voluntarily gave his consent for his house to be searched by people who had the power to charge him with a crime and throw him in jail, and who had to go away if he just said "no". He said "yes".
Remember that the occupant was asked permission to have his house searched because Apple traced the prototype to his house. Remember that when they asked him if he'd been at the very bar where and when the prototype was stolen, he admitted that he was. Something the size of an iPhone could be hidden or disposed of quickly, and time was of the essence. The police and the Apple reps acted perfectly appropriately under the circumstances, and since nothing came of the visit, or the search, there was nothing material to report--other than Apple had lost a prototype. I'm pretty sure that the purpose of the filing requirement was not to make sure that news of Apple losing a prototype made it to the police blotter so geeks like us could find out about it. The occupant wasn't harmed because an official report of the search wasn't filed, and so he can't claim money damages for it.
So while this fellow may find some publicity-hungry lawyer to file a vituperative complaint, no real money is ever going to be paid to either of them.
come on! Really? next you are telling me that America is written with a "k", AmeriKa.
Not Apple's fault? Then whose fault is it? They did lie to this guy pretending to be police and asking for POLICE to search the house. Guy gave permission to police not to Apple. Apple have to be held responsible for this.
Really? Have you seen their Mac vs PC commercials? This was the second biggest public campaign of lying that I am aware of (after the claims of WMD in Iraq).
Alleged here. We do know that police do not have any records of such report, don't we? So, what's more probable: police lost the records or Apple did not file a report?
I hope we live in a country where corporations are not allowed to pull us over (or raid out homes to that matter).
Common sense tells us the following: GPS is turned off by default, GPS draw a lot of power and people generally keep it off unless they really need it, in big cities many people do not drive the cars (no need for navigation), in general people rarely need to use GPS near the place where they live because they know the area well anyways.
Not to be a dick... but if he consented without a warrant, it's his problem.
And lilo777-- it was previously reported that they had tracked the phone to his local vicinity... it doesn't take a genius to correlate a bar visit and an address, especially if the SFPD assisted Apple... after all, we all know prototype phones now have location tracking, remote wipe, etc on it after the last fiasco...
And lilo777-- it was previously reported that they had tracked the phone to his local vicinity... it doesn't take a genius to correlate a bar visit and an address, especially if the SFPD assisted Apple... after all, we all know prototype phones now have location tracking, remote wipe, etc on it after the last fiasco...
You are. The guy allowed POLICE to search his apartment but not Apple. There are too many problem in this story. First, Apple did not file a crime report. Without such report, police had no business to get involved. No report - no crime - no grounds to ask for any search.
Because someone is confused does not imply lying or an intent to confuse. YOU HAVE ZERO PROOF that APPLE LIED other then this MANS CLAIM, which has not been substantiated.
No idea how this is relevant and perhaps you can list ALL the lies they told via this campaign and then spell out the relevancy to this case.
We don't have enough info to claim either. You are wrong to claim Apple REFUSED to file any type of report. *edit- Refusing would imply they were required too and did not, they simply DECLINED too...
More smoke for your theory. NO HOME WAS RAIDED, PERMISSION WAS GIVEN. THE POLICE WERE PRESENT, NOT A CORPORATION.
Mirrors for your theory! This MIGHT be TRUE for THE AVERAGE USER. This is a UNRELEASED PHONE used for FIELD TESTING. COMMON SENSE would be GPS would be ON incase of it being LOST.
Last edited:
He didn't let Apple. He let SFPD. Big difference.
Doesn't matter. Let them sort it out.
To think he isn't going to get any money for what happened is silly. He will we are in the city of SF.
The most liberal city in the bay area.
They protect the rights of pan handlers before they do the residents of whom pan handlers lay and threaten on their property.
I would love for some of you to have 6 men come to your door and then ask if you're a citizen. Then say you are all in a lot of trouble and see what you would do.
It's easy to criticize Mr Calderon and be arm chair quarterbacks is easy. Wait till it happens to you.
So yeah. We will see.
This is actually a good thing to have happened. It's good for the Proletariat to see how the Bourgeoisie act when we mess with their "property." They will bury you and they won't lose any sleep over it. They don't care about you. Repeat after me everyone on Macrumors ok, APPLE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT YOU. Repeat again, APPLE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT YOU. You are a dollar sign, that's all.
They "declined" to file a report yet they "agreed" to help police in searching the guy's house. I am not claiming that there is necessarily something criminally wrong here but there is definitely something seriously wrong with Apple ethics.
Apple had no way of knowing that the guy visited a bar (unless they installed video cameras all over San Francisco/Silicon Valley). They had to obtain credit card record somehow and I do not think corporations are allowed to do this without some cooperation from authorities. And I do not think the authorities could/should provide this information without a formal crime report.
Given that this is MacRumors, not "Forum of Ethics, politics, and the Law", isn't the real question, where is the phone, what did it look like, what was it's specs and iOS?
If they tracked it, then it disappeared did they remote wipe it or did someone just remove the SIM.
Surely someone out there is holding it their hands wondering what to do next!
If they tracked it, then it disappeared did they remote wipe it or did someone just remove the SIM.
Surely someone out there is holding it their hands wondering what to do next!
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Reading the comments in this forum has done 2 things for me.
1) Made me lose most of my faith that humanity was generally intelligent.
2) Made me realize that we deserve the outcome that this world is headed towards.
Reading the comments in this forum has done 2 things for me.
1) Made me lose most of my faith that humanity was generally intelligent.
2) Made me realize that we deserve the outcome that this world is headed towards.
Have you ever needed the help of the police? They do not have you fill out forms before acting - especially if the situation is time critical.
Here's some crazy rules.
1. Don't brandish a prototype
2. Don't talk about a prototype
3. Don't take the prototype in environments of risk
4. Clearly educate employee that their career at Apple will be terminated if they violate any of the rules above.
I understand they need to take the prototypes off Apples campus (for real world testing)...but are the test engineers really that irresponsible? They should treat unreleased products like classified materials.
1. Don't brandish a prototype
2. Don't talk about a prototype
3. Don't take the prototype in environments of risk
4. Clearly educate employee that their career at Apple will be terminated if they violate any of the rules above.
I understand they need to take the prototypes off Apples campus (for real world testing)...but are the test engineers really that irresponsible? They should treat unreleased products like classified materials.
It was not time critical. I suggest you take a look at the bird eye view of Anderson Street, San Francisco, CA in maps.bing.com. You'll see that the houses there stand right next to each other (no gaps). Even GPS accuracy (that is if they even got GPS readings) simply is not good enough to point exactly to the suspect house. Apple police would have to consider at least three...five houses. So they had to have additional information to rectify their search. It appears that they used credit card information which takes time. So it's not like they were in "hot pursuit" situation.
Maybe it went this way:
A guy stole an iPhone and took it to his house.
Apple + police traced to his house (he admitted to being at the bar).
He figured that he can't sell the stole iPhone, and that he might eventually get ousted by someone at the house, so he preemptively sold his version of the story.
OMG Arn is changing his story. OMG poser!
A guy stole an iPhone and took it to his house.
Apple + police traced to his house (he admitted to being at the bar).
He figured that he can't sell the stole iPhone, and that he might eventually get ousted by someone at the house, so he preemptively sold his version of the story.
OMG Arn is changing his story. OMG poser!
But don't you realize that most of the people here don't care that Apple doesn't care about them? They follow blindly no matter what. All they care about is Apple, not themselves.
I wasn't implying a "hot pursuit" situation - just one that wouldn't have done well taking the time for official reports to be filed and completed.
I was in agreement Apple had the help of the police. If they [the police] had enough information that a crime was possibly being committed, especially if the value of the property put the crime into the felony category (the criteria easily met), I would be surprised if they wouldn't have come up with that additional information.
GPS can be accurate to within 30 feet, which, depending on lot size, can easily narrow it down to couple of houses. So, even without bar receipts (if they indeed had them - there's no direct indication they did), it doesn't take much time to ask a couple of residents whether they'd been at the bar. That would have solved that accuracy problem. In fact, it seems the owner of one of those houses did admit being there.
I have no idea what all the facts are, anymore than anyone else here. I am doing what should be done - waiting for all the facts to come in. We might never be privy to all of those anyway - don't expect Apple to be very public about this for obvious reasons. When the SFPD complete their documentation of the incident (which they will, at some point), I'm sure anything that's in the public record will become known.
The amount of misinformation here about citizen rights, police procedures, corporate policies and procedures, is scary. The assumptions of wrongdoing on anyone's part is equally so. There needs to be a good dose of something called common sense injected into this/these threads - though I fully expect some immunity...
Last edited:
Man, I could really go for some of that Cava 22 Seafood Paella right about now. Dishes always made from the finest ingredients. Delicious.
That's Cava 22, folks. A live and festive Mexican experience. Let them guide your pallet to a flavorful Mexican vacation. Ay yi yi yi!!
That's Cava 22, folks. A live and festive Mexican experience. Let them guide your pallet to a flavorful Mexican vacation. Ay yi yi yi!!