French Apple iPhone, iMac bludgeoner given six-month suspended jail sentence, fined

Posted:
in General Discussion
The man who smashed at least 17 demo stations at the Dijon, France Apple store on Sept. 29 had his day in court, and in addition to a six-month suspended jail sentence, he must pay Apple 17,548 euros for the damage -- far short of the company's own estimate.




At his sentencing hearing, Le Figaro reports that the assailant claimed to be in "in a monster state of anger" over Apple's refusal to refund him for what he called a defective iPhone. Specifics of the man's service claims beyond his declaration that the phone was not damaged by him are still not known.

The judge sentenced the man to a six-month suspended jail sentence, a two-year probationary period where he is barred from the mall, and must repay Apple ?17,548 ($19,186) while on probation.

Apple estimated the damage to the store and equipment was closer to ?60,000 ($65,600). The judge declined to award that amount, as the equipment was judged to be for display and not resale, and the police had claimed to not have had sufficient time to inspect the destroyed gear prior to the display's replacement by Apple.





Wearing Apple earbuds the whole time, on Sept. 29 an unnamed customer took a steel ball used in French game Petanque (similar to Bocce), and destroyed 12 iPhones, four iMac displays, and a MacBook Air on video -- but the rampage had started before the video capture had begun.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 27
    sricesrice Posts: 114member
    Damnit judge. We all know the expectations if we go in and destroy stuff -- you broke it, you bought it.  Judge should have hit him with full MSRP and demanded Apple hand over the destroyed product to him once the bill is payed.
    schlackjbdragonmagman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 27
    lymflymf Posts: 65member
    Well the insurance will cover the rest. In the mean time that is a lot to pay for his defect iPhone.
    also the funny part is according to French media that the phone was purchased at a French service provider store such as ATT. So as per law the seller is responsible for the coverage and has to then de with apple for the details, not Apple straight with the customer...
  • Reply 3 of 27
    French Socialists and Commies.
    edited October 2016 monstrosityrazorpitgilly33badmonk
  • Reply 4 of 27
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 875member
    Let's do some math here -- 12 iPhones, 4 iMacs, and 1 MBA were damaged. Going by Apple's estimate of $65600 that works out to $3859 per unit. Granted, there might be some damage to the three tables that might have been dented (video does not show any damage nor is it 100% inclusive of the rampage), but it sounds like the $65600 is quite inflated. I doubt even in France those items are priced that high.
    sflagelargonautjony0
  • Reply 5 of 27
    schlackschlack Posts: 679member
    Something is wrong here, Apple should have been able to show evidence of those damages, either as repair/replacement/labor invoices, insurance claims, etc. Perhaps Apple's insurance company will go after this guy separately for what ever damages they cover.
  • Reply 6 of 27
    linkman said:
    Let's do some math here -- 12 iPhones, 4 iMacs, and 1 MBA were damaged. Going by Apple's estimate of $65600 that works out to $3859 per unit. Granted, there might be some damage to the three tables that might have been dented (video does not show any damage nor is it 100% inclusive of the rampage), but it sounds like the $65600 is quite inflated. I doubt even in France those items are priced that high.
    Those tables are very expensive and completely custom made. There was coverage here previously on just what is involved.
  • Reply 7 of 27
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 1,964member
    I think the guy should have been put in JAIL for at least 6 months!!! The fine he got I think is more then enough.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 8 of 27
    sflagelsflagel Posts: 580member
    sog35 said:
    "The judge declined to award that amount, as the equipment was judged to be for display and not resale"

    That's friken ridiculous.

    Apple still needs to replace those units with units that would be for resale. Idiotic 
    I would think that the damage assessment is based on cost of production, rather than resale value. That would make sense to me, as iPhones are not a finite resource.
  • Reply 9 of 27
    schlack said:
    Something is wrong here, Apple should have been able to show evidence of those damages, either as repair/replacement/labor invoices, insurance claims, etc. Perhaps Apple's insurance company will go after this guy separately for what ever damages they cover.
    I think the judges point is that Apple claimed retail prices even though the systems were not for retail. Apple's internal costs for replacing the systems is what should be deemed fair value since he didn't destroy stock on the shelves so to speak. That makes sense for the most part. Would have liked to see him get some jail time though since it was totally pre-meditated taking that ball in there with the protective glove. He knew what he was doing was wrong, but managed to plan it out and go through with it. So being "in a monster state of anger" wasn't something that just happened in a blink of an eye that he couldn't save himself from.
    lightknightrobin hubergilly33stantheman
  • Reply 10 of 27
    sflagelsflagel Posts: 580member
    The man who smashed at least 17 demo stations at the Dijon, France Apple store on Sept. 29 had his day in court....

    The judge sentenced the man to a six-month suspended jail sentence, a two-year probationary period where he is barred from the mall, and must repay Apple ?17,548 ($19,186) while on probation.

    Seems appropriate for a bit of civil disobedience with limited property damage,insignificant personal loss, and no physical harm.
    edited October 2016 franklinjackconlightknightargonaut
  • Reply 11 of 27
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,494member
    French Socialists and Commies.
    You really are unhinged, and an embarrassment here.
    nolamacguyronnlightknightfracargonautmontrosemacsP-DogNC
  • Reply 12 of 27
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    French Socialists and Commies.
    do you even know the difference? doubt it. 
    ronnfracargonautmontrosemacsP-DogNCAirunJae
  • Reply 13 of 27
    I'm really glad he chose not to do this in the States. In Los Angeles, this cracker would have been shot dead almost immediately. They then would have sent the bill (perhaps upwards of a million dollars) to his family. 
  • Reply 14 of 27
    I'm really glad he chose not to do this in the States. In Los Angeles, this cracker would have been shot dead almost immediately. They then would have sent the bill (perhaps upwards of a million dollars) to his family. 
    LOL, ya right. What universe are you living in?

    Sadly here in the States the little snowflake would have gotten his new phone then sued Apple for mental anguish. The judge would have then sided with him and fined Apple for causing mental anguish.
    gilly33
  • Reply 15 of 27
    sog35 said:
    "The judge declined to award that amount, as the equipment was judged to be for display and not resale"

    That's friken ridiculous.

    Apple still needs to replace those units with units that would be for resale. Idiotic 
    Well, it is France. One of, if not the most socialist country in Europe. They're not pro-profit or pro-capitalism so why would they award Apple full damages? It's wrong, but until people stand up and cry foul nothing will change.
    gilly33
  • Reply 16 of 27
    gilly33gilly33 Posts: 219member
    Two things. Like someone said it's France so not surprised. Also typical of western judicial system all over. Let's pat the perpetrator on the back. Who gives a **** about the victim. Folk can get away with almost anything these days. Let's see what they will do with the mall crew that made off with the display units here at home if and when they catch them. Nice going bro. 
  • Reply 17 of 27
    croprcropr Posts: 882member
    srice said:
    Damnit judge. We all know the expectations if we go in and destroy stuff -- you broke it, you bought it.  Judge should have hit him with full MSRP and demanded Apple hand over the destroyed product to him once the bill is payed.
    He destroyed something owned by Apple that was not for sale.  So it seems pretty logic that he must pay the  cost for Apple to replace the items and not the selling price of the equipment.  And we all know the margins that Apple makes on its equipment. 

    airbubbleAirunJae
  • Reply 18 of 27
    sflagelsflagel Posts: 580member
    razorpit said:
    I'm really glad he chose not to do this in the States. In Los Angeles, this cracker would have been shot dead almost immediately. They then would have sent the bill (perhaps upwards of a million dollars) to his family. 
    LOL, ya right. What universe are you living in?

    Sadly here in the States the little snowflake would have gotten his new phone then sued Apple for mental anguish. The judge would have then sided with him and fined Apple for causing mental anguish.
    I cannot imagine that there is literally even one case where anything even remotely similar to what you describe has happened in the US in the past 30 years. The US does not even have trials anymore: over 90% of all criminal trials are settled by plea bargaining where the prosecutor threatens with 20 years in jail (essentially, threatening torture) or 5 years if he confesses; that is, if he is lucky enough not to be one of the 22 people killed by the death squads called police every week (people that do THAT should be put in jail). The US "justice" system is not lenient.

    Even on this site, which is presumably read by people with a certain education, people are asking for this guy to be put in jail for six months and to award ridiculously inflated sums to Apple.

    The reality is, the guy destroyed a few gadgets and has to repay Apple the replacement value. That is absolutely adequate: if you go and break your neighbour's windows, you pay him the replacement cost. It is inappropriate to ask him to refund the retail costs, because iPhones are not a finite product, i.e. Apple does not lose the sale of these phones, they can just get new ones to sell with the money this guy will give them. He did not impact the ability of Apple to sell even a single phone.

    And jail? Really, for simple property destruction, where the damage to the victim is 0.003% of the "victim's" daily revenue, and the property is a commodity item? That is the equivalent of 1 penny for someone that earns $ 150,000. 1 penny is the value of the dirt under your shoes. Furthermore, the guy apparently did not even mean to cause harm, as he stayed behind, presumably to be caught and repay the damage. The smallness of this "crime" can barely be put in words: it's like egging someone's house, or TP'ing their trees, or kick their tires, or charging your phone at your friend's house.

    Now, a crime is a crime, no matter how little the victim was hurt, so on top of refunding the company,  he should be punished. And he did: 6 months suspended. seems totally appropriate; maybe even a bit too strict and only given to deter copycats. 
    edited October 2016 willcropointAirunJae
  • Reply 19 of 27
    I think you meant to reply to another post. I could have made it a little clearer that he would have gotten the phone right away before causing the damage and then sued Apple. This is certainly more realistic than being shot to death as my response was about.
  • Reply 20 of 27
    dewmedewme Posts: 1,894member
    I guess this shows that adults acting out as infantile douchebags is not restricted to the US. This dude got off easy with a monetary slap on the wrist but as an adult he's a total loser and disgrace to himself. As a teachable moment for real children - don't end up like this guy, be a man. 
    sflagel
Sign In or Register to comment.