4 ms·

He granted permission for the Apple employees to enter his residence to search. Nothing in the article indicates any civil liberties were violated. Ask yoursel

by jquery 15y ago

He granted permission for the Apple employees to enter his residence to search. Nothing in the article indicates any civil liberties were violated. Ask yourself: would an iPhone 5 would get $500 on the open market? More likely it would be worth $100,000 or more. And if someone stole a $100,000 device of mine with a GPS device that was tracked to a residence, I would hope the SFPD would help me. Anything less would be a miscarriage of justice. Now onto guilt, this person admitted he was at the bar from which the iPhone was allegedly stolen. Now while this might not be enough to convict someone in a court of law, it's certainly enough to investigate further. I do not understand why this story is getting any traction except the standard internet hatreds for police and corporations.

RexRollman 15y ago
The main problem, as I see it, is that he didn't know the two men who searched their home were not police officers. Worse, the cops allowed the man to have the impression that they were. And the fact that the cops themselves didn't go inside shows me that they knew what they were doing was questionable.
- ajays 15y ago
  "And the fact that the cops themselves didn't go inside shows me that they knew what they were doing was questionable." EXACTLY! Have you ever, ever known the cops to back off from doing something, and let a civilian handle it? In my few observations of such situations, I've always seen the cops take charge, and shoo the civilians away. For them to just stand at the boundary line and watch the Apple goons go in and search, to me, is clear evidence that the cops knew fully well what they were doing.
mgcross 15y ago
He granted SFPD permission, not Apple employees. $100k? That sounds like a stretch. Are you saying the residences of everyone present at the bar that night should be subject to search?
ajays 15y ago
He granted what he assumed were the SFPD to enter his house. And just because he doesn't know the law, it does NOT mean that it doesn't apply to him. The laws still apply. The cops knew that they had absolutely no evidence or reason to search his house; which is why they wisely stayed outside. But they also knew that they had created a false impression that the Apple goons were also SFPD, which allowed them to enter the guy's house. As far as the value is concerned: so what? If I put a value of $1000000 on my Bic pen, does that mean I'm allowed to break the laws in finding out who took it?? If it really was that valuable, then what the heck was an Apple employee doing with it getting drunk in a sleazy bar? Will the Apple employee be docked $100,000 from his paycheck if the phone is not found? Get real!
dhughes 15y ago
If Sergio Calderón did steal the iPhone5 and if Calderón did give permission for them to search his home and if the Apple employees found it not an San Francisco Police Department officer would that not make the evidence inadmissible since an SFPD officer didn't find it? Calderón could easily say in court he never had it and the Apple employees planted it there.
goombastic 15y ago
"I do not understand why this story is getting any traction except the standard internet hatreds for police and corporations." I am going to setup a company and then turn up demanding to search your home for my property. See the problem now? That's a scary incursion of your home by a corporation. Tell me you are happy with it especially since the guys you paid with your taxes stand outside waiting for me to complete searching your home. Now assume that I plant an ounce of some green stuff under the mattress while I am at it. Now what?

by jquery 15y ago

RexRollman 15y ago

The main problem, as I see it, is that he didn't know the two men who searched their home were not police officers. Worse, the cops allowed the man to have the impression that they were. And the fact that the cops themselves didn't go inside shows me that they knew what they were doing was questionable.

ajays 15y ago
"And the fact that the cops themselves didn't go inside shows me that they knew what they were doing was questionable." EXACTLY! Have you ever, ever known the cops to back off from doing something, and let a civilian handle it? In my few observations of such situations, I've always seen the cops take charge, and shoo the civilians away. For them to just stand at the boundary line and watch the Apple goons go in and search, to me, is clear evidence that the cops knew fully well what they were doing.

mgcross 15y ago

He granted SFPD permission, not Apple employees. $100k? That sounds like a stretch. Are you saying the residences of everyone present at the bar that night should be subject to search?

ajays 15y ago

He granted what he assumed were the SFPD to enter his house. And just because he doesn't know the law, it does NOT mean that it doesn't apply to him. The laws still apply. The cops knew that they had absolutely no evidence or reason to search his house; which is why they wisely stayed outside. But they also knew that they had created a false impression that the Apple goons were also SFPD, which allowed them to enter the guy's house. As far as the value is concerned: so what? If I put a value of $1000000 on my Bic pen, does that mean I'm allowed to break the laws in finding out who took it?? If it really was that valuable, then what the heck was an Apple employee doing with it getting drunk in a sleazy bar? Will the Apple employee be docked $100,000 from his paycheck if the phone is not found? Get real!

dhughes 15y ago

If Sergio Calderón did steal the iPhone5 and if Calderón did give permission for them to search his home and if the Apple employees found it not an San Francisco Police Department officer would that not make the evidence inadmissible since an SFPD officer didn't find it? Calderón could easily say in court he never had it and the Apple employees planted it there.

goombastic 15y ago

"I do not understand why this story is getting any traction except the standard internet hatreds for police and corporations." I am going to setup a company and then turn up demanding to search your home for my property. See the problem now? That's a scary incursion of your home by a corporation. Tell me you are happy with it especially since the guys you paid with your taxes stand outside waiting for me to complete searching your home. Now assume that I plant an ounce of some green stuff under the mattress while I am at it. Now what?