Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by squeezy View Post
    Then Chen needs to sue the police dept. for raiding his home with an unlawful means.

    The more I read the more I wonder why people are giving Apple the hard time, the police are the one's who obviously f'd up.
    Wait.... does Chen have, you know, papers?
    Last edited by Micael; 04/29/2010 at 03:23 PM.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  2. rfceo's Avatar
    Posts
    114 Posts
    Global Posts
    117 Global Posts
    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by squeezy View Post
    Then Chen needs to sue the police dept. for raiding his home with an unlawful means.

    The more I read the more I wonder why people are giving Apple the hard time, the police are the one's who obviously f'd up.
    BUT were they influenced by someone?
    Apple is on the steering committee for the REACT task force that raided Chen’s house. Formed in 1997, REACT is a partnership of 17 local, state and federal agencies tasked with investigating computer- and internet-related crimes.

    Read More Expert: Invalid Warrant Used in Raid on iPhone Reporter’s Home | Threat Level | Wired.com
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Wait.... does Chen have, you know, papers?
    Because his name is "Chen" you are assuming that he could possibly be an illegal?!?!?!?


    RACIST!!!!!


    LOL
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  4. #24  
    After reading more of everyone's post, reading the articles and putting together the time line, it seems to me that Apple was steering the investigation and pushing the police into the warrant. It looks like Apple was not being as forthcoming with all the information and attempting to make an example/statement with this raid. When I attempt to look into the motive of Steve Jobs and Apple I would not hesitate to say that they are hoping that this limits others in the future in exposing or getting involve with uncovering Apple.
    I look forward to the day when there is a civil suit brought against Apple & Jobs to expose the giant and bring them down a notch. One thing that we seem to have little of these days is a press that uncovers the truth anymore.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by squeezy View Post
    So Apple tried to defuse the situation before involving the police. Good for them. Unfortunately it didn't work in their favor, so they had to involve the police. Please elaborate on what Apple is doing wrong here, they are doing a very good job playing to good guys imo.
    Actually, they wanted to search the house. The police wanted to ask some questions - and weren't coming with a warrant. Apple wanted to do things that the police wouldn't be able to do...

    It was a pre-emptive strike.

    Apple is showing themselves to be really sleazy.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by squeezy View Post
    Then Chen needs to sue the police dept. for raiding his home with an unlawful means.

    The more I read the more I wonder why people are giving Apple the hard time, the police are the one's who obviously f'd up.
    I haven't really followed the details of all this, but it is undoubtedly the Appholes that are being the Appholes here.

    If there was a warrant, the police were only doing their job in restoring property to its rightful owner. Police are typically under the impression that where there's one person's stolen property, there's usually a "ring" of stolen property... and the police actually get to be the good guys in those situations.

    If there was no warrant, then yea... what they did was unlawful. Unless, of course, the guy consented to his door being kicked in, which I don't see as very likely.

    So, then you come back to this "lawful warrant". Somebody had to testify, as the accuser, with a formal affidavit... and there you will find the giant apphole of them all.

    EDIT: Looking back thru the comments, it appears that, yes, there was a warrant issued. Who is going to testify, under penalty of perjury, that the guy from Gizmodo, beyond all reasonable doubt, has the iPhone 3Gs+?!? Hmm... I wonder...
  7. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    Actually, they wanted to search the house. The police wanted to ask some questions - and weren't coming with a warrant. Apple wanted to do things that the police wouldn't be able to do...

    It was a pre-emptive strike.

    Apple is showing themselves to be really sleazy.
    What spin. They're the ones that got ripped off and are trying to protect themselves. Amazing.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  8. #28  
    protecting is what police do, not private goons that show up before the police.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions