[QUOTE=anamardoll;1735329]Wait, that doesn't make any sense. You say you can't get a search warrant to search for an item that isn't connected with a crime -- would not the theft of the iPhone be a crime? (If I understand the story, this isn't just an iPhone, it's a prototype for their next line and therefore extremely valuable to the corporation.) And if Apple
didn't file it as a crime, why would the police show up? And if they DID have a GPS trace, why didn't they show up with a warrant instead of showing up and questioning him about his immigration status?
[quote]
The iPhone was lost, but it may not have been stolen. It may have just been left behind, and then picked up by someone who planned to return it the next day. Or maybe Apple didn't want to file theft charges if they could get the phone back more easily.
Quote:
If there actually was a unique GPS trace, this should have been a simple warrant and search situation. A warrant and search would have been better -- they wouldn't have needed permission, and they could have done a more thorough search. (Considering that they searched the house with permission and didn't find anything, this would be pertinent.)
http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news...weekly-updated
According to this article:
1. The police accompanied the Apple employees to the man's house, and questioned him, but stayed outside while the Apple employees searched the man's house. The police officers were not involved in the search -- which I actually consider to be highly suspicious.
2. The police didn't file a report, due to Apple's request that a report not be filed.
IANAL, and gods know if this is legal. But it stinks to me. I would NOT be okay with police officers showing civilians to my door and hassling me about my immigration status until I agree to let them in my house and search my belongings.
And I don't see anything about GPS in the SF Weekly article I could find:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/...ple_police.php
Where's your link? Looks like this may not be the only one they wrote. However, if the only mention of GPS is from the Apple detective trying to talk his way into the house, there's no reason to believe that's not a lie. Detectives do that from time to time. 
|
Here's the link:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/...ne_5_apple.php The quote is the first sentence.
And while the Apple detective could have lied about the GPS to police, and to the guy, that would be more plausible if there were something else connecting this guy to the iPhone. I.e., they didn't ask to search everyone's house at random; they asked to search this one particular guy's house.
The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking that Apple didn't want theft charges filed. They, presumably, didn't anticipate any publicity - they probably thought that their detective and and police would show up at the guy's house, he'd turn over the phone, and no one would hear anything about a missing iPhone prototype. Which was, of course, completely not what happened.