Gizmodo affidavit says roommate's tip led police to iPhone - Page 3

Originally Posted by kellya74u

As acknowledged by others, the roommate was THE only one who had honor & character in this whole thing. She probably didn't FEEL like reporting this, but when her loser friend, takes advantage of her by using her computer where Apple, or any similar company, can trace the IP address of where the phone was syncing up at, the loser friend screwed himself. People who, in their young life, have already decided that they would 'never call the cops,' have probably surrounded themselves with Hogans their whole (brief) life, & have the resulting tweaked view of life. For the rest of us, who surround ourselves with good people, those kind of thoughts aren't part of our existence. Shame on Hogan for not having personal integrity, & for even bringing stolen stuff into where someone else lives. We should all hope that no one brings home a suitcase of mafia money or a stolen duffle bag of dope from some cartel, 'cause the owners won't be far behind!

Originally Posted by MacApfel

I think we agree. But please don't forget that a prototype iPhone is not an illegal item. Drugs or money in a Mafia suitcase (as compared to by someone else) are illegal items. So the guys were not playing with an illegal item (like e.g. drugs). Also they were probably quite excited what they are playing with. I am also not sure that at this moment they realised the scale of what they were doing. For example, if at that point they had turned to Apple to return the phone - all would have been happy. Something that would not have been possible with e.g. drugs. That's why I meant she could have told them to call the cops, so they have the chance to think about it again.

Originally Posted by Wil

If it was an elaborate hoax, Gizmodo would not be foolish enough to pay 5000 dollars unseen. I will hazard a bet that a member of Gizmodo saw the device, held the device before the sale was made.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Intellectually I say he should have held out for about 20 grand, or don't sell it to anyone, take pictures, return it properly, then post pictures anonymously.

Originally Posted by mesomorphicman

His female roommate was smart to call in and let them know she had nothing to do with it, smart enough to know this could turn into a big issue and didn't want to risk any arrest, major fine, or possible jail time. Very smart of her.

Originally Posted by applebook

I would be stunned if he did not ask around $20K from Engadget, Wired, etc. before being turned down and forced to the lowest of blogs with cash: Giz.

Originally Posted by applebook

BTW, has AI or Macrumors said officially whether or not they were approached by Hogan/Warner? If I were a thief, I would try to sell to...um...Apple rumors websites. DUH!

Originally Posted by highdough

If you've been following this case at all, you'd have read that the law in California is that if you find a piece of lost property, you are lawfully bound to make an effort to return it to the owner, if possible. In this case, no effort was made to return the iPhone despite the finder having the owners name and workplace. In other words, he broke the law. To make matters worse, he then sold property which did not rightly belong to him.

Irregardless of the law, the moral thing he should have done was to return the phone. Plain and simple.

And as has been written, the iPhone owner might have been out testing it in the field, as has been the case with previous iPhones.

Originally Posted by SaltWater

What's going on with Apple these days? They don't update OS, they don't bring a phone with the very very late video conference, but they waste huge amounts of time, blaming and pursuing people about an hypothetical iPhone prototype. WHO CARES? As if Apple would do this on purpose! They get huge publicity and stupid thousands of comments of people blaming unknown people with unknown facts.

There's more comments in this Apple Hitler pursuit than in the fact that Apple rejected a very useful app that would iPhone owners sync iPhone by Wifi.


Who cares about what Apple Phone will have if it is never out!!!

Who cares about how fast Snow Leopard supposed to be as the 10.6.3 just hang it damn slow, with too long startup and shutdown!

Are you listen Apple, or now, these days you just pay your consumer contact employees to give fire on online rumors?

I want my OS X to be faster please! Why does Ubuntu 10.04 in My Mac startup in less than half the time!???? This is your own machine Apple, just do your WORK!!!

Originally Posted by harleighquinn

If your boss tell you: Be thorough, do your job. You'r gonna do it. Period. It's on him to figure out the legalities.

Originally Posted by harleighquinn

Chen committed, nothing, as all of you have pointed out via the facts available.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Fair enough. Maybe she was just scared. It may not have been like drugs but she had an instinct that something wasn't right. Could she have persuaded the guys to stop and think about what they're doing? Maybe...

Originally Posted by juggernaut30

And here I thought Gizmodo LOVED iPhone stories. I searched their page and didn't see any mention of this story today. I thought they would be all over anything iPhone 4g. What a bunch of D-Bags. So much for journalistic integrity.

Originally Posted by applebook

Chen is a journalist = untouchable. Al Capone never had nothing on Chen, baby!

Originally Posted by gmcalpin

Yes, Gizmodo is in trouble and did all kinds of things wrong, but: why would Gizmodo "return" a phone to Apple if it was not Apple's in the first place?! Of course Lam needed to have it confirmed that it was Apple's property.

For all they knew, it was an elaborate hoax; the only indication they had that it was actually Apple's and not, say, a knock-off with some clever screen printing on the back, was Gray Powell's Facebook page — which in and of itself could have been a hoax, because no one at Gizmodo ever saw the device while it was still functioning, and they did not dismantle it until AFTER Apple confirmed it. Which was fucking stupid, frankly.

Originally Posted by harleighquinn

It's like a drug case: Bust the little fish to get the big fish. In this case the big fish is Chen's BOSS. Cut and dry, Chen isn't the bad guy here, which I have said all along, therefore you are wrong. He did what he was told and he was told to to be thorough.

Can't blame the man for doing his job. He was left to swing in the wind by his superiors and the affidavit proves this.

In the end, the main mess falls on Apple and Hogan and Brian Lamb.

I am a shareholder. I have apple stock in my 401K . I chose the selection specifically for apple stock. I also have individual shares outside that, but I will be the first to admit they are guilty of vanity in this case just as much as Gizmodo's EDITORS are.

The way it will play out is Chen will be let go. I am willing to bet on it. Hogan and Warner will be hit with he brunt of the charges. Lamb MAY also be hit, but in the end they didn't "steal' the item, Hogan and Warner did. They just took the opportunity and reported on it.

What the police did in apple's favor is similar to the Latvia hacker case, wherein they raided the reporter's house to get info on the hacker. In the end they let the hacker go because he was no threat to the common good and actually revealed information everyone should know.

It's similar but not the same, but Chen did what he was told, did his job.

If your boss tell you: Be thorough, do your job. You'r gonna do it. Period. It's on him to figure out the legalities.

No one looked at that and instead persecuted Chen.

Wrong move.

Originally Posted by podlife

I don't get it. If I lose something, no matter how valuable it might be, it is my mistake.

Why did Apple ever let such a valuable proto out of their labs... and why was this pretty little gem left on a bar stool?

Yep, Gizmodo acted unprofessional in leaking the story- potentially damaging existing sales of iPhones.

But again, how could Apple let this valuable iPhone proto get out of sight (in public) for even one minute?

If I find something I try to find the rightful owner... but if I just decide to keep said article, when does that become a criminal act?

Originally Posted by MacApfel

I think we agree. But please don't forget that a prototype iPhone is not an illegal item. Drugs or money in a Mafia suitcase (as compared to by someone else) are illegal items.

Originally Posted by dan2236

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Originally Posted by jragosta

Why is it her responsibility to persuade the criminals not to do something illegal? And why are you blaming the victim?

Originally Posted by Macadamias

Even if your roommate involved you in the crime and you believed it was traceable to you? The main reason Hogan's roommate called Apple was because he used Zetter's laptop to try to restore the iPhone and she was convinced that her IP address was now traceable and she would be accused of being directly involved.

So firstly, there was no mention that they were friends, only roommates. Secondly, if Zetter was a friend, Hogan was getting his friend involved in his dirty activities which she may have wanted no part in. Thirdly, if YOUR friend was doing something shady which would likely get them in more trouble that it was worth, wouldn't your duty be to try your best to dissuade them? If you know about a crime being committed and do nothing you ARE involved.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Chill dude. I was responding to an earlier post where the poster was saying the roommate could have tried to discuss/ warn Hogan etc. instead of very quickly calling the police. In other words, that poster was trying to say, the roommate should have just you know, "tried to be cool about it".

Was the roommate just a nasty snitch? In light of what I now think, probably not. Hogan and Warner seem like dodgy guys and she just didn't want to be involved in what was happening, particularly seeing that they wanted to use her computer.

"The documents allege that when [the female roommate] Martinson tried to talk Hogan out of selling the iPhone because it would ruin the carer of Robert Gray Powell, Hogan responded Sucks for him. He lost his phone. Shouldnt have lost his phone.
http://www.brunotrani.info/blog/2010...hide-evidence/

Originally Posted by jragosta

You're contradicting yourself. In your first paragraph, you claim that she didn't try to talk him out of it - and instead ran straight to the police.

In the last paragraph, it is clear that she DID try to discuss it with him - to no avail.

Your own evidence supports the fact that she tried and when he wouldn't listen, she went to the police. So, once again, why are you trying to blame her?

Originally Posted by dan2236

Are you all too much of Apple fanboys to realize what a damn snitch that roommate is? Seriously, I would NEVER call the cops on my roommate unless he killed someone. Capital crimes are NO crimes to betray your friends for.

Originally Posted by MacApfel

I think everyone rightly critises this comment and view as rubbish. For some reason Dan fears to be betrayed by a friend. It is rightly pointed out that she was betrayed, although I would argue that her roomates did not deliberately betray her, but sloppily put her in a dangerous position. What I think she could (not must, just could!) have done is, to yell at them what kind of idiots they are and that she will call the cops. Then call the cops. In this she would gave her roomates a head start which is all a friend can ask for in this situation, and she is out of trouble. She is not helping them as long as she is not delaying the call, all she does is telling them what she is doing this very moment.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

...Bottom line, you gotta draw the line somewhere. In this case, the roommate was smart. The writing was on the wall. She knew she could get into some major shit.

Originally Posted by MacApfel

I think we agree. But please don't forget that a prototype iPhone is not an illegal item...That's why I meant she could have told them to call the cops, so they have the chance to think about it again.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Fair enough. Maybe she was just scared. It may not have been like drugs but she had an instinct that something wasn't right. Could she have persuaded the guys to stop and think about what they're doing? Maybe...

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

...Was the roommate just a nasty snitch? In light of what I now think, probably not. Hogan and Warner seem like dodgy guys and she just didn't want to be involved in what was happening, particularly seeing that they wanted to use her computer.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Guys, this is the transcript of the actual email Brian Lam sent to Steve Jobs when contacted about the phone... If you haven't seen it yet. Original is on Scribd at http://www.scribd.com/documents/3137...do-iPhoneOrder

-----------------------------

From: brian lam <blam@brianlam.net>
Date: April 19, 2010 4:08:07 PM PDT
To: Steve Jobs <sjobs@apple.com>
Subject: Let's see if this goes through

Hey Steve, this email chain is off the record on my side.

I understand the position you're in, and I want to help, but it conflicts with my own responsibilities to give the phone back without any confirmation that its real, from apple, officially.

Something like that -- from you or apple legal -- is a big story, that would make up for giving the phone back right away. If the phone disappears without a story to explain why it went away, and the proof it went to apple, it hurts our business. And our reputation. People will say this is a coordinated leak, etc.

I get that it would hurt sales to say this is the next iphone. I have no interest in hurting sales. That does nothing to help Gizmodo or me.

Maybe Apple can say it's a lost phone, but not one that you've confirmed for production - that it is merely a test unit of sorts. Otherwise it just falls to apple legal, which serves the same purpose of confirmation. I don't want that, either.

Gizmodo lives and dies like many small companies do. We don't have access, or when we do, we get it taken away. When we get a chance to break a story, we have to go with it, or we perish. I know you like walt and pogue, and like working with them, but I think Gizmodo has more in common with old Apple than those guys do. So I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

Right now, we have nothing to lose. The thing is, Apple PR has been cold to us lately. It affected my ability to do my job right at iPad launch. So we had to go outside and find our stories like this one, very aggressively.

I want to get this phone back to you ASAP. And I want to not hurt your sales when the products themselves deserve love. But I have to get this story of the missing prototype out, and how it was returned to apple, with some acknowledgement it is Apple's.

And I want to work closer with Apple, too. I'm not asking for more access-we can do our jobs with or without it-but again, this is the only way we can survive while being cut out of things. That's my position on things.

B

Originally Posted by taylorlightfoot

...she contacted contacted Apple...

Originally Posted by John.B

Reread the AI ToS.

First, you don't get to make public attacks on people like that. Second, you don't get to publicly call out who you are putting on your ignore list. You agreed to those terms when you signed up for AI forums, and I -- for one -- would appreciate the added civility that abiding by the ToS would bring to this discussion.

Originally Posted by jragosta

All the facts available indicate that Chen knowingly purchased stolen property. In what state would that NOT be a crime?

Originally Posted by tawilson

Only if you ignore the FACT that Chen initiated (or was at least integral) to brokering a deal that resulted in the purchase of stolen goods.

And as the law says, knowledge that something is stolen is not required, it is assumed if the circumstances surrounding the current ownership of the device can be considered questionable, unexpected etc.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Being a typical male bast*rd I also have to ask, is the roommate hot?

Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody

I don't know what the legal implications of these statements are, but finally! ... confirmed proof of what a colossal dick-head Brian Lam is.

I wouldn't talk like this to my worst client, let alone Steve Jobs.

Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody

I don't know what the legal implications of these statements are, but finally! ... confirmed proof of what a colossal dick-head Brian Lam is.

I wouldn't talk like this to my worst client, let alone Steve Jobs.

Originally Posted by jragosta


Second, no one accused Chen of stealing the item. They are being accused of purchasing stolen property - and there's absolutely no question that they did. The admitted it publicly.

Originally Posted by justflybob

Not as hot as she would have been, had she not made the call to Apple.

Originally Posted by mobycat

If Domino's tells it's drivers that they have to have the pizza delivered in 30 minutes no matter what and the driver ends up runs red lights... who gets the ticket? If he hits a pedestrian, who's going to suffer the criminal charges?

Does the driver get to argue, "I was just doing my job. Let Domino's figure out the legalities."?

Of course not.

If my boss tells me, "Be thorough, do your job," then I will... but I'm not going to break any laws to do that.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Well, maybe she's the librarian type. Mmm... Baby, I've been a bad boy and sold trade secrets... punish me

Originally Posted by christopher126

Well the good news is Chen and Hogan are headed to a place where they will have a roof over their heads, 3 square meals a day and all the sex they could possibly want! Me personally, I like the circumference of my anus just the way it is...thank you very much!

Originally Posted by Stevie

Prison time is extremely unlikely. Extremely. This is white collar corporate stuff, and petty at that.

Originally Posted by Mac Voyer

Seems that Giz and Engadget have gone completely silent on the subject. I'm guessing there is something about these revelations that are so bad from a legal perspective, the attorneys have stepped in. They are probably at the stage of trying to figure out who is going to take the fall for this.

Originally Posted by justflybob

Two that I can think of:

State of Denial

and

State of Delusion