Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Apple instigates Police Raid over lost/stolen iPhone 4G
Stoic Joker:
I can't help but think that if something valuable to me were found/stolen and I told the police who I thought had the item that I'd get not much more than a cop knocking on that person's door as an investigation. I guess that I'm just jealous that Apple gets a full blown bash-the-door-in raid.-mwb1100 (May 04, 2010, 04:23 PM)
--- End quote ---
Two things come to mind:
1. Been there, done that, and can attest to the fact that they won't do squat.
2. That's just one of the advantages of being in the PD's (over) REACT(ion) comitty...
Renegade:
Here's another legal opinion from a lawyer: Missing iPhone case led to 'virtual strip-search'
--- SUMMARY: The DA should have issued a subpoena and not a warrant.
Excerpts with highlights for easier skimming:
The DA could have, and should have, served Chen with a subpoena for records relating to the iPhone story. Use of a subpoena, unlike a warrant, gives the recipient an opportunity to hire a lawyer, to consider his options, and to assert any defenses or privileges that might be available.
...
For these reasons, two laws, one federal and the other a California statute, require prosecutors' use of subpoenas, rather than warrants, to obtain information from journalists in criminal investigations.
Less clear, however, is whether this prohibition applies if Chen or Gizmodo are targets of the criminal probe, as some bloggers speculate they may be (although the DA has given no clues about their status, and criminal charges would seem to be a stretch under the circumstances).
The federal law, The Privacy Protection Act, may bar search warrants in this type of investigation even if the prosecutor is planning to charge journalists with crimes. That application, however, may be vulnerable to the constitutional argument that the privacy law exceeds federal power to dictate state judicial proceedings.
Perhaps there is a more mundane explanation for the failure to use a subpoena in this case: The DA may have been under intense pressure (from whom? Apple, which reported the phone was stolen?) to act even before he could convene a grand jury to issue a subpoena.
If so, the DA may come to regret his haste: If a court rules he shouldn't have used a warrant, the DA's possession of evidence seized from Chen's home may undermine any possible prosecution of other, more culpable, parties.
--- End quote ---
The case is in a very grey area.
40hz:
The case is in a very grey area.
-Renegade (May 04, 2010, 07:26 PM)
--- End quote ---
True. But maybe not as much as some might think.
Privacy and shield laws offer a degree of protection to journalists. But they don't provide protection if a journalist becomes accessory to a criminal act.
If Dave Chen and Gizmodo were merely investigating and reporting, they wouldn't have a problem. And to be perfectly honest, they probably wouldn't have had much of a story either. Unfortunately, they were also a significant part of what actually made up the story itself. So rather than just reporting the news - they became the news.
That's where it gets dicey for the journalistic shield argument.
There's a degree of professional distance reporters need to maintain if they're going to claim constitutional protections in order to do their job. Much as I dislike Apple (and personally feel the police behaved in an overzealous manner) I still think there's a very good chance Gizmodo might have stepped over the line on this one. One indication this may be the case is that all the usual legal advocacy groups (ACLU et al) don't seem to be an any rush to defend Gizmodo's actions. Since these groups are experts in cases such as this, it doesn't bode well they have yet to step forward on Gizmodo's behalf.
:tellme:
JavaJones:
Good points again 40hz (re ACLU, etc.). I'm not an Apple fan or apologist either, and I agree the police didn't have to break down doors, etc.; that's going too far. But as far as the actual legal consequences of what Gizmodo did, well I honestly don't feel that great about seeing the journalist shield laws coming up for argument with possible criminal complications in the mix when the root of the story is a mere tech gadget. It would be a lot different and more worth serious court time if this was a journalist who had paid a fence $5000 for some stolen documents from a dirty dealing company or something, thus helping expose a corporate scandal in the works for example. In that case the strict legalities might be the same (dealing in stolen property), but the potential for actual public benefit is much higher and more worth defending based on journalistic shield laws IMHO.
- Oshyan
Stoic Joker:
Let say there's this cat called Bookie Jim who runs an illegal gambling operation. Now Jim's a slick one, and doesn't trust technology - He keeps all on his betting info in a small notebook (and every knows Jims notebook - 'cause he's always got it with him).
Now the fuzz got a tip line 1-800-Report-D-Crimnal - and they'll pay anybody $400 for information that will land them a solid collar (prosecutable arrest). And being that they're so tired of old Jim, they up the anti to $4,000 if sombody can give them a way (any way) of putting O'l Jim behind bars!
Jim gets hammered one fine evening (what is a special occasion) and passes out at the bar - leaving the notebook on the seat beside him...
Sleasy Pete is a snitch - Who has (he feels) a hankering need for that $4,000... So be bumps into Jims table (a few times), fetches the notebook from the floor (when it falls), and then beats feet down to the local PD to turn in the notebook (of Jims) what he'd "found"...
The Fuzz happily pay Sleasy Pete the $4,000 for the notebook, because it has everything they need to bring down Jim's opperation and be rid of him for good.
Now do you really think that anybody in the DA's office is gonna give a rats ass about Jims complaint that his notebook was stolen?!?
Do you really think Sleasy Pete is going to get arrested for stealing Jims Notebook?!?
Hell No - He'll be way to busy posing for photos with his shiny new Key-to-the-City...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version