Apple staffer posing as police allegedly searched home for missing iPhone prototype

1235710

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Sounds like a bunch of BS to me.



    Apple knows better than impersonating the police.




    Yep. This is most likely all made up or someone was having some fun with this guy after seeing him at the bar and following him home. Someone not connected to Apple.



    Consider the claim that this was a day or two later. Apple would have acted within two hours. And they have enough clout they would have been able to get the police involved, no need to pretend
  • Reply 81 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Sure, because it's entirely plausible and even likely that one of the biggest corporations on earth behaves like a Tijuana loan shark and sends its security apparatus forth with instructions to claim to be the police so as to get access to people's homes. Because they know that there's no way that could ever come back to bite them in the ass. Let me guess, because of the "arrogance"?



    But, you know, "fanboys", so case closed.



    I never said I believe that Tim Cook ordered these people to try and apprehend the phone by breaking the law. if this is true I believe they acted above what apple expected of them to apple's dismay.



    if true they were probably a security team sent to secure the phone.



    like another poster said they probably only implied being cops and Sergio assumed they were. they probably also said something along the lines of "if we find out you lied such and such bad things can happen. it's in your best interest to cooperate." and he freaked. All of that is legal.



    I don't think Apple is strong arming citizens...necessarily...in fact I think if Sergio was smarter the six of them would've left with suspicions but nothing more.



    what I don't think is happening at all is some convoluted mess of an anti Apple conspiracy.
  • Reply 83 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    No, it comes from a guy that claims he never had it. He admits he was at the bar, he lets them search his home. He even lets them search his PC (you think he knows how to forensically cleanse his PC to remove any trace of the iPhone?). Anyone he was at the bar with that night could have accompanied him home and had the phone without him knowing.



    It's worth noting that some of this recent info comes from a guy whose home was violated.





    probably stupid enough to have connected to his PC and too stupid to have known how to wipe all traces of it before the investigators showed up unannounced.





    Not just wrong. It would be illegal. If they have knocked his door down and handcuffed everyone in the house at gun point, that would also be illegal. Not just wrong.





    Possibly. But we won't know until and unless Apple explains their side. If they are going to be harassing private citizens, then had better, at they very least, be prepared to explain themselves for it.



    Almost everything you say here is predicated on the idea that he connected it to his PC which is not (AFAIK) in evidence at all.



    The rest of it (about the legality of what went on), is just incorrect.



    In cases like this it is in fact quite typical to hire private investigators. I have read other stories in the past, that pretty much take it for granted that Apple actually has guys like this on the payroll. All big companies do. The shutdown of the fake Apple stores was handled by exactly such people.



    As licensed private investigators, they cannot break the law, but if you read the actual story, it said quite clearly that they asked him if they could search the place and he said "yes." There is nothing illegal in that at all. The only question is whether the investigators merely let him *think* they were from the police, or whether they actually impersonated police officers. The later of the two is of course illegal (but far from unheard of).



    I'm thinking that the evidence strongly indicates he is the guy, but that he was smart enough to just put it in a safety deposit box or something and it wasn't in the house. So he had nothing to lose really from letting them search.



    Haven't you ever watched the Rockford Files?



    None of the reported behaviour of the investigator seems either unusual or illegal to me. It's what private investigators do.
  • Reply 84 of 193
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 85 of 193
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    I never said I believe that Tim Cook ordered these people to try and apprehend the phone by breaking the law. if this is true I believe they acted above what apple expected of them to apple's dismay.



    if true they were probably a security team sent to secure the phone.



    like another poster said they probably only implied being cops and Sergio assumed they were. they probably also said something along the lines of "if we find out you lied such and such bad things can happen. it's in your best interest to cooperate." and he freaked. All of that is legal.



    I don't think Apple is strong arming citizens...necessarily...in fact I think if Sergio was smarter the six of them would've left with suspicions but nothing more.



    what I don't think is happening at all is some convoluted mess of an anti Apple conspiracy.



    I think an anti-Apple conspiracy is the least likely scenario, if only because it's so convoluted. I would say an Apple authorized strong arm fake police raid is the next least likely, because it's so very stupid and Apple isn't typically stupid in that manner.



    Beyond that I don't think we have enough information to reach any kinds of conclusions at all, since the entire thing hinges on unverified statements to SFWeekly. Overreaching contract employee, overreacting citizen, bizarre hoax, elaborate misunderstanding-- have no idea. Await further developments with interest.
  • Reply 87 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Here's a saved image of "Tony's" Linkedin profile, removed after the story broke.



    http://forums.macrumors.com/attachme...6&d=1314988362



    Yeah cause you can't lie on linkedin, or fake a screenshot to give to a blog
  • Reply 88 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    No, the phone was said to have been traced to his residence. The same source also reported that no phone was found there.



    Is the phone still pinging at that location?



    If so, why did they call off the search before they found it?



    If not, why did it ever? Or did it ever at all?



    There's too little information here to draw conclusions of guilt on any side.



    No, there isn't "too little" information at all. You are raising a lot of "what if" kind of stuff, but the evidence is quite clear.



    The private investigators (with excellent records and hired by the company with the excellent record), *could* in fact be lying. It isn't that likely however, is it? If they are not lying (and I don't see why they would), then we have a rather solid, hard piece of evidence that the phone was traced to his house.



    That's what's considered real good, solid evidentiary stuff.



    You are just doing what a defence lawyer might do and raising a bunch of wild possibilities that could account for the fact being wrong. It's still far more likely that the fact is correct.



    I mean a passing alien spaceship *could* have affected the GPS reading, but it isn't that likely.
  • Reply 89 of 193
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    No, there isn't "too little" information at all. You are raising a lot of "what if" kind of stuff, but the evidence is quite clear.



    The private investigators (with excellent records and hired by the company with the excellent record), *could* in fact be lying. It isn't that likely however, is it? If they are not lying (and I don't see why they would), then we have a rather solid, hard piece of evidence that the phone was traced to his house.



    That's what's considered real good, solid evidentiary stuff.



    You are just doing what a defence lawyer might do and raising a bunch of wild possibilities that could account for the fact being wrong. It's still far more likely that the fact is correct.



    I mean a passing alien spaceship *could* have affected the GPS reading, but it isn't that likely.



    But do we have any information, whatsoever, that doesn't originate from the guy telling the story? Do we have any further verification that a phone was lost? That it was traced? That security was dispatched? That if people did arrive at a house and claim all those things that they were telling the truth? Do we even know if the guy with the linked-in Apple connection even works for Apple and wasn't just padding his resume?



    I'm not saying any of the above is or isn't true, just that there doesn't seem to be, at the moment, any verifiable "evidence" at all, about anything.
  • Reply 90 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    I think an anti-Apple conspiracy is the least likely scenario, if only because it's so convoluted. I would say an Apple authorized strong arm fake police raid is the next least likely, because it's so very stupid and Apple isn't typically stupid in that manner.



    Beyond that I don't think we have enough information to reach any kinds of conclusions at all, since the entire thing hinges on unverified statements to SFWeekly. Overreaching contract employee, overreacting citizen, bizarre hoax, elaborate misunderstanding-- have no idea. Await further developments with interest.



    honestly? I think it's most likely Apple employees legally tricked this dude and he assumed they were cops based on clever wordplay.



    remember this whole story is his perspective.



    and that's if it happened at all.
  • Reply 91 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    But do we have any information, whatsoever, that doesn't originate from the guy telling the story? Do we have any further verification that a phone was lost? That it was traced? That security was dispatched? That if people did arrive at a house and claim all those things that they were telling the truth? Do we even know if the guy with the linked-in Apple connection even works for Apple and wasn't just padding his resume?



    I'm not saying any of the above is or isn't true, just that there doesn't seem to be, at the moment, any verifiable "evidence" at all, about anything.



    ... and if the guy doesn't go to the cops then we most likely will never know.
  • Reply 92 of 193
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 93 of 193
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    honestly? I think it's most likely Apple employees legally tricked this dude and he assumed they were cops based on clever wordplay.



    remember this whole story is his perspective.



    and that's if it happened at all.



    It's a possibility but hard facts are thin on the ground, so I'll wait to have an opinion.
  • Reply 94 of 193
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,750member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    Obviously you have experience in these matters. Oddly enough, my cousin's a cop... I found her number in 411. I guess that blows your theory.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    You can't get the home number of address of a cop? That's total BS.



    I just checked on the two friends who I know who are cops - both of them have listed phone numbers and addresses.



    Some police can choose to list their numbers. insult removed
  • Reply 95 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    I guess, if that dickhead also very coincidently lived on the right street and was the right age from the original story, was able to find the corporate (unlisted?) phone number for that Apple employee, I guess he would have hit the dickhead jackpot where the stars aligned to let him play a little hoax. A hoax for which, despite the intelligence such a hoax would demonstrate, the only logical outcome would be him being sued into oblivion by that Apple employee and Apple.



    Very reasonable hypothesis.



    Or how about a couple of dickheads want to concoct a story bigger that the whole Gizmodo thing so they create a fake linkedin account for a fake employee. Then one of them goes to said bar so people can remember him there. Then he contacts CNET claiming he was searched etc. Tony is his partner carrying around a disposable phone in case anyone calls it for a response etc. Heck Sergio could be a fake name, for all we know and it was made up by the reporter that posted the story.
  • Reply 96 of 193
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,750member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    If an Apple employee does something at night without telling Apple and without Apple's approval, how is that Apple's fault?



    If a Walmart employee robs your home, is that Walmart's fault?



    Um, yeah, if in the process of performing his duties and on behalf of walmart, he breaks into my house, yes, I would say it is Walmart's fault. So would the law.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    I villify ANYONE who makes up likes and uses them to further their own political agenda.



    Like you - defending a story when even you admit that it's full of holes.



    Actually Joe, you vilify anyone that disagrees with you.



    It reminds me a a guy that used to post thousands of insane posts on the Mac advocacy groups way back when (like 15 years ago). The rest of us were there to evangelize the Apple platform. A lot of us though this guy was completely bat shit insane. He took it too a whole other level of crazy. You don't like people that make shit up to further their agenda, you should have read what this guy posted.



    Actually, maybe you know him, given your user name, maybe his is a relative. Joe Ragosta. You know him? Talk about a guy with an agenda. He would be the last person in the world to accuse someone else of having an agenda.
  • Reply 97 of 193
    Quote:

    In a follow-up report, the Bernal Heights man whose home was searched said that six people claiming to be San Francisco Police officers came to his home and allegedly questioned him and searched the premises. They reportedly said they had traced a prototype iPhone to his residence using GPS technology.



    "This is something that's going to need to be investigated now," San Francisco Police Department Lt. Troy Dangerfield said, according to the report. "If this guy is saying that people said they were SFPD, that's a big deal."



    Sergio Calderon, the 22-year-old Bernal Heights resident, said his home was searched on an evening in July by six people who "threatened" him. He claims four men and two women wearing badges showed up at his door and identified themselves as being with the San Francisco Police Department.



    The man said he let the six individuals search his car and his house, and he gave them access to his computer. Calderon said he is an American citizen, but the people who came into his home questioned his citizenship and stated they "were all going to get into trouble."



    Calderon said one of the men identified himself as "Tony" and provided a phone number to call if he had further information. When SF Weekly called the number, they reached an Anthony Colon, who reportedly said he is an employee of Apple.



    Colon's profile on LinkedIn has since been taken down, but it previously revealed that he is a former San Jose Police sergeant who works as a "senior investigator" at Apple.





    Please launch a criminal investigation and throw the criminals in jail where they belong. Plus, sue Apple for criminal invasion of domicile.



    In Canada, impersonating a police officer and home invasion are taken very seriously. Hopefully, California has the same laws.





  • Reply 98 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Here's a saved image of "Tony's" Linkedin profile, removed after the story broke.



    I wonder if Apple's "Tony" been removed?

    /

    /

    /
  • Reply 99 of 193
    Im trying to figure out why everyone is taking this whole thing way too seriously. Yes, the story is interesting and if true or even false it would be a good read to have the issue resolved. But until I see some hard evidence supporting EITHER side I'm not going to take this story too seriously.



    From what I have gathered, these are some possible scenarios from this:



    1) The entire story was made up, and when the SFPD were asked they said they don't have any records. So then when the police department was told about the second part where the guy claims people came into his house claiming to be police, they responded the way they did (saying it was a serious issue, and now they are going to look into it). *I don't think this scenario is too farfetched.



    2) The story is true, and now Apple is going to be fucked. *I think this one is less likely because I just don't think Apple would be that stupid to impersonate police. We have heard of them do their own private investigations, but then they always bring in the right authorities to do the final steps that they can't.



    3) The story about Apple coming to the guy's house is true, and he may have THOUGHT they were police. So he lets them in and lets them search. Then he tells people he was told it was the SFPD. People imply things all the time, especially in stressful situations since they make quick decisions without thinking them thru. *This one isn't that hard to believe. It could have been some of Apple's private investigators come to do their job, and the guy could have gotten scared thinking they were police and lets them in and tells them they can search.



    4) The entire story could be made up. *Wouldn't be the first time.





    There are more but I'm a lil tired of typing, and those are probably the main ones others on here are contemplating.
  • Reply 100 of 193
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    Um, yeah, if in the process of performing his duties and on behalf of walmart, he breaks into my house, yes, I would say it is Walmart's fault. So would the law.



    You're talking in circles.



    The original claim was that Apple was liable even if the guy acted on his own.



    I pointed out that if the guy acted on his own on his own time that Apple has no liability.



    You're now claiming that if the guy acted under orders from Apple that Apple would be liable.



    OBVIOUSLY, if someone did something illegal under orders from Apple, then Apple would have some liability. But there's absolutely no evidence of that - and it is extraordinarily unlikely that Apple would do anything so stupid.



    The most likely scenario is that the entire story is made up. The fact that the guy hasn't filed a report with the police affirms that.
Sign In or Register to comment.