District Attorney Critiques Gizmodo Emails In iPhone 4 Prototype Case

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.''"

Comments

First post!

[prxp]

What about that for "juvenile"!

Re:First post!

[ColdWetDog]

What about that for "juvenile"!

Less 'juvenile' than the DA's behavior. And that's pretty sad.

A tale of two cities

[manekineko2]

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...

Re:A tale of two cities

[EdIII]

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.

Re:A tale of two cities

[LynnwoodRooster]

Finally a use for bitcoin!

Gizmodo juvenile?

[metamatic]

Next you'll be telling me bears defecate in forested areas.

Re:lawsuit

[xavdeman]

"Usually?" It's happened once.

At least twice: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2011/08/apple-iphone-5-prototype-lost-in-san-francisco-bar/

Re:Normal communications..

[The0retical]

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.

Stephen "I Know Nothing" Wagstaffe

[theodp]

"I don't know if Apple is on the [REACT] steering committee," Stephen Wagstaffe told Yahoo! News when asked about a link between Apple and the Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team (REACT) Task Force that entered Jason Chen's home and seized four computers and two servers as evidence in a felony investigation. Documents revealed that Apple did indeed sit on REACT's steering committee, which provided 'direction and oversight' to the law enforcement agency.

Re:Broke in?

[the eric conspiracy]

DA should be impeached.

1. Perjury during application for warrant.

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

Re:Exactly, when did theft become so praiseworthy?

[snowgirl]

Gizmodo stopped being protected by any journalism shield the moment they actively participated in theft of private property.

Just as a note here, purchasing a stolen good is not the same as being accessory to the theft. Usually, purchasing a stolen good is only punished by forfeiture of the item (without any refund). Yes, knowingly purchasing stolen goods (which Gizmodo clearly did) can be treated more harshly but it apparently has to have a value of more than $5,000 (convenient selling price you used there Gizmodo...)

But still, in order for the act to be accessory to the theft, the theft would have to be done at the request of the purchaser. As this was clearly a theft of opportunity, Gizmodo could have not participated in the theft, but rather only committed a separate crime. (And likely not even then, because the value wasn't high enough.)

That DA is a funny moron.

[MarkvW]

The emails were private. They were unlawfully seized. The DA takes those private, unlawfully seized emails and compounds the wrong by commenting upon them in the media in a derogatory way.

He has absolute immunity for being a prosecutor, but he has no immunity for making stupid-ass statements based on illegally obtained information.

This is an easy section 1983 case, albeit for limited damages. This stupid DA just cost his municipality a few thousand dollars.