Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

District Attorney Critiques Gizmodo Emails In iPhone 4 Prototype Case

Posted by Soulskill on from the stay-classy dept.

lee1 writes "After the police broke in to a Gizmodo editor's home and collected emails from computers found there as part of the investigation of the stolen 2010 iPhone prototype, the San Mateo District Attorney's office petitioned the court to withdraw the search warrant, because it violated a law intended to protect journalists. Nevertheless, the DA, rather than apologize for the illegal search and seizure, issued a critique of the seized emails, commenting that they were 'juvenile' and that 'It was obvious that they were angry with the company about not being invited to ... some big Apple event. ... this is like 15-year-old children talking.''"

6 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. A tale of two cities by manekineko2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What are the chances of the government going to such lengths if an ordinary person gets robbed? The ordinary response from police is that's nice, we'll look into it if we have nothing better to do. The crimes they were alleging are not different than the crimes that would be applicable if this were to happen to an ordinary person instead of a powerful corporation.

    And then, the chutzpah of the DA's to call out the Gizmodo editors (who may or may not have deserved it) after conducting an illegal search...

    1. Re:A tale of two cities by manekineko2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Worth a billion dollars in terms of what?

      Value of the device itself? Hardly.
      Value of the device on the open-market to others? 10k is what they were able to fetch for it from Gizmodo
      Value of the device to the victim, Apple? The police hardly take that into consideration when a starving artist has their laptop stolen containing all the work they need to make a living.

      Value of the victim in terms of its political clout? Ah, that makes sense.

      If the crime that is being alleged is the same, and the real-world value of the stolen property is the same, I don't see a reason off-hand why it's right that the police should be playing favorites.

    2. Re:A tale of two cities by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      which is quite enough to warrant police intervention.

      There is a difference between intervention and corruption.

      An investigation is fine. Violating the rights of the Gizmodo editor in such a cavalier way with no remorse or accountability only furthers the public's disillusionment with law enforcement as being their to truly serve and protect The People. Being snarky about it afterwards only digs the hole deeper.

      It also reminds me of the Skylarov case. Law enforcement was at the beck and call of Adobe, and acted as nothing more than a private security force. Ultimately, it was determined that Skylarov did nothing wrong, yet I don't see an apology from the FBI or Adobe on that either. Keep in mind, the man was held against his will in a foreign country for nearly 6 months for doing nothing wrong.

      How about the mentally challenged work program at the FBI? That's about the only thing that can explain how an FBI agent all hopped up could seize every system in a datacenter causing extreme harm to such a large number of corporations that were innocent bystanders. Effectively, it was no different than arresting a whole neighborhood of citizens due to the behavior of one person in one house.

      The problem is not the investigations. It is the actions of the investigators.

  2. Re:Normal communications.. by The0retical · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Granted everyone makes those types of comments however the problem with this situation is that you have an official from an agency established to serve the tax payers deriding one of their constituents to a journalist on record.

    There is such a thing as discretion and this DA just stick his foot in his mouth because this is going to be thrown back at him. Hopefully there will be consequences when the next elections come around and constituents finally decide that they cannot have their rights further eroded.

  3. Exactly, when did theft become so praiseworthy? by Brannon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gizmodo stopped being protected by any journalism shield the moment they actively participated in theft of private property. There also appears to be evidence of malicious motives on their part. I don't see journalism anywhere around this case.

  4. Re:Broke in? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DA should be impeached.

    1. Perjury during application for warrant.

    2. Ethics violation for disclosing private information obtained via illegal warrant.