Expert: Invalid Warrant Used in Raid on iPhone Reporter’s Home

[n2doc]

By Kim Zetter April 26, 2010 | 4:57 pm | Categories: The Courts


Police raided the house of an editor for Gizmodo on Friday and seized computers and other equipment. The raid was part of an investigation into the leak of a prototype iPhone that the site obtained for a blockbuster story last week. Now, a legal expert has raised questions about the legality of the warrant used in the raid.

On Friday, officers from California’s Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team in San Mateo, California, appeared at the home of Gizmodo editor Jason Chen while he was not there and broke open the front door.

Chen and his wife discovered the officers when they returned from dinner around 9:45 that evening. According to an account he posted online, Chen noticed his garage door was partly open, and when he tried to open it completely, officers came out and told him they had a warrant to search the premises. The warrant had been signed just hours earlier, at 7:00 p.m., by a San Mateo County Superior Court judge. It allowed the police to search Chen, his residence and any vehicle in his control.

The officers were in the process of cataloging the items they had already taken from the premises and told Chen they had been in his home a “few hours already.” According to California law, a search warrant may be served between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. unless otherwise authorized.



Read More http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-raid/

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. He should have bought a MAC

no, wait! .... :)

[ixion]

2. wtf... so the police are enforcing patent protection these days?

:crazy:

[abelenkpe]

3. I work for a studio

someone once released an image of a work in progress to a blog. the FBI came and arrested him, he lost his job, and we almost lost a client potentially putting over a thousand people out of work. You cannot release things in progress. You have to sign all kinds of non disclosure papers. It is a business, part of the economy of the local community so yes, the police are expected to enforce that stuff.

I know it seems silly compared to more violent crimes, but it is still a crime that could have a huge impact on the community.

[MUAD_DIB]

4. If it is under the law then I guess the answer would be yes.

The police are there to enforce the law.

[onehandle]

5. Nothing to do with patent protection. The prototype was stolen. This is about theft.

The warrant was signed to investigate a 'probable felony.'

[onehandle]

6. This 'theory' has been debunked since it was dreamed up yesterday.

Gizmodo, Gawker, the thief and possibly others are fucked.

[Dreamer Tatum]

7. I wonder how much Apple pays the goons to ransack someone's house like that

I wonder if they use the new Apple iGun, that has a 16-round clip and an 8gb media player on the stock.

[onehandle]

8. Zero. If there is probable cause of a felony, which there is, this is the authorities duty.

It's theft.

[TransitJohn]

10. It's theft alright

theft by the Apple engineer who left it on a barstool. The Gawker/Gizmodo team are probably guilty of receiving stolen goods, but not theft.

[n2doc]

11. Yep. I fail to see how finding something in a public place is "theft" n/t

[ecstatic]

9. Apple has gone too far this time nt

[frylock]

12. apple is on the steering committee for the REACT task force that raided chen’s house..

steve jobs' suede-denim secret police.