It is taking a big chance, yet they asked anyway. What good could have come of it for them? The story was already out. Them, just searching, would make anything found on the premises then or later questionable at trial.
Edit: also, they might be very convincing to a young adult, with claims of them investigating a possible crime, even without a warrant.
There's nothing against asking. If they hadn't yet gone to the police, they wouldn't be impeding an investigation, so it wouldn't matter. They just wanted to get the phone back.
When I was 18, I wouldn't be fooled by that. Maybe some would, but my own daughter wouldn't.
There's nothing against asking. If they hadn't yet gone to the police, they wouldn't be impeding an investigation, so it wouldn't matter. They just wanted to get the phone back.
When I was 18, I wouldn't be fooled by that. Maybe some would, but my own daughter wouldn't.
I am not sure if they had gone to the police formally yet, but the wired story claimed that it was after the Gizmodo story broke that they showed up at his house. They knew it was no longer there, so they weren't looking for the phone. They may already have had it returned by then. If then, they were searching for evidence for a criminal or civil case, that has got to be a problem once it went to trial.
I am not sure if they had gone to the police formally yet, but the wired story claimed that it was after the Gizmodo story broke that they showed up at his house. They knew it was no longer there, so they weren't looking for the phone. They may already have had it returned by then. If then, they were searching for evidence for a criminal or civil case, that has got to be a problem once it went to trial.
I don't know. We don't know where the phone was at any particular date in time. Apple could have thought that he might have been given the phone back. Who knew the details of the deal at that point? Who knows it now? It's speculation still, as to the details. What would be the point of searching for something that's not there? What other evidence could possibly have been there?
They didn't have it back by then. That's clear. It was returned later, according to Gizmodo's time frame. Apple didn't know they had it until, at least, the Engadget article came out. And why would they have known who took it until after? While it was thought that this guy had called Apple, he clearly lied about that, so they didn't have any info on him early on.
Comments
It is taking a big chance, yet they asked anyway. What good could have come of it for them? The story was already out. Them, just searching, would make anything found on the premises then or later questionable at trial.
Edit: also, they might be very convincing to a young adult, with claims of them investigating a possible crime, even without a warrant.
There's nothing against asking. If they hadn't yet gone to the police, they wouldn't be impeding an investigation, so it wouldn't matter. They just wanted to get the phone back.
When I was 18, I wouldn't be fooled by that. Maybe some would, but my own daughter wouldn't.
There's nothing against asking. If they hadn't yet gone to the police, they wouldn't be impeding an investigation, so it wouldn't matter. They just wanted to get the phone back.
When I was 18, I wouldn't be fooled by that. Maybe some would, but my own daughter wouldn't.
I am not sure if they had gone to the police formally yet, but the wired story claimed that it was after the Gizmodo story broke that they showed up at his house. They knew it was no longer there, so they weren't looking for the phone. They may already have had it returned by then. If then, they were searching for evidence for a criminal or civil case, that has got to be a problem once it went to trial.
I am not sure if they had gone to the police formally yet, but the wired story claimed that it was after the Gizmodo story broke that they showed up at his house. They knew it was no longer there, so they weren't looking for the phone. They may already have had it returned by then. If then, they were searching for evidence for a criminal or civil case, that has got to be a problem once it went to trial.
I don't know. We don't know where the phone was at any particular date in time. Apple could have thought that he might have been given the phone back. Who knew the details of the deal at that point? Who knows it now? It's speculation still, as to the details. What would be the point of searching for something that's not there? What other evidence could possibly have been there?
They didn't have it back by then. That's clear. It was returned later, according to Gizmodo's time frame. Apple didn't know they had it until, at least, the Engadget article came out. And why would they have known who took it until after? While it was thought that this guy had called Apple, he clearly lied about that, so they didn't have any info on him early on.