Stolen iPad's Reported Location Not Enough To Warrant Search, Say Dutch Police 619
lbalbalba writes "A location message sent from a stolen iPad by an anti-theft application turns out to be insufficient evidence to issue a search warrant for the Dutch authorities. A Dutch man reported his iPad as stolen to the Dutch authorities last month. Despite the fact that the rightful owner was able to locate his iPad within hours of the theft, thanks to the anti-theft application he had installed, the Dutch authorities did not issue a warrant to perform a search. According to the prosecutors, a search warrant is 'a very heavy measure,' that should only be used when there is 'sufficient suspicion.' The theft report by the owner was viewed as 'no objective evidence' in the case."
Happened to a friend of mine. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Happened to a friend of mine. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Lessons learnt. (Score:5, Interesting)
Whatever you do, whatever happens: Don't call the police.
That's incredibly bad advice. My bank called me at work last April asking if I was missing some checks, that someone had tried to cash an obviously forged one. When I got home I found my back door broken open and a lot of stuff gone -- including an almost ful box of checks. I called the cops, who took the report, went to the bank and viewed the video, and arrested the guy half an hour later.
However, he had accomplices. Over the next year (it's still going on) I would get notices from merchants that I'd cashed checks on a closed account. Of course I cloised if after the theft! I sent all of them copies of the police report, and the fraudulent bastards, every single one, turned them into the county's State's Attorney anyway.
Had I not reported the burglary I could have wound up in prison for those damned stolen checks.
If you get in an automobile accident you had damned well better call the cops, because if you don't you're jailhouse-bound. If there is an injury you've committed a felony, and the cops are pretty damned serious about folks leaving the scene of an accident.
Now, someone attcks you in a bar? Don't call the cops, they're as likely to arrest you as your attacker.
Re:Plan B. (Score:5, Interesting)
Twice we had people firing guns at our house when it was evening and we were on the porch. Saw the muzzleflash both times. Cops wouldn't even call us back, much less drive by and see if there were any bodies.
My brother was doing security at night and called in some intruders that had broken in. The cops said they wouldn't send anybody else, so he said, "guess that means I'll have to shoot them." and hung up. Cops were there in less than 5 minutes.
It seems if it's not giving a traffic ticket, the local cops don't give a sh##.
I think you just hit on the crux of the problem! (Score:5, Interesting)
Reality is, cops generally don't want citizens "interfering" in the law enforcement process,in any way, shape or form. That's why you regularly hear stories of individuals getting arrested for chasing down a criminal who broke into their home, etc. etc. The typical line? "Leave that work to the police!"
Sure, they want you to call them and make the initial report (as long as they consider it something serious enough to be worthy of their time and energy -- which varies wildly by department and what they've got on their plate). But they don't want you to do any "detective work" for them.
A friend of mine had his truck broken into, right in front of my house, some years back. They stoke his new Alpine stereo head-unit, his cellphone and his wallet, which he had under the seat. He called the cops and besides dusting for fingerprints on his truck's door, they didn't do much of anything but take an initial report.
He got the idea to try calling his cellphone, and the thief actually answered the phone! He got the guy to agree to meet him in a public parking lot at a certain time, by promising him he'd pay him some cash just to get back his wallet with drivers' license and other info in it (and told him he could keep the stereo). He called the cops to tell them what he managed to arrange, and you know what their response was? They didn't have the time or resources to go out there and wait around for the thief to show up!
After that, he realized he was able to log into his cellphone provider's website and get a detailed call log of everywhere the thief called using his phone. The guy had been using it to call girlfriends, buddies, etc. etc. The log was 3 or 4 pages long with local calls the guy was making! He printed that out and gave it to the cops. Guess what? They still couldn't manage to do anything with it!
He wound up better off just claiming all the losses on his insurance and getting all new stuff .... but it just goes to show? Cops completely disregard any detective work done by anything other then their own people, even if it's really GOOD work that would make an arrest a piece of cake for them.
sorry to interrupt this gun discussion (Score:5, Interesting)
Something I don't understand --
> According to the prosecutors, a search warrant is 'a very heavy measure,' that should only be used when there is 'sufficient suspicion.' The theft report by the owner was viewed as 'no objective evidence' in the case."
So, what *would* be considered objective evidence? Does a law enforcement offer actually have to witness a crime before the authorities will pursue it? So, for instance, I'm robbed on the street, but there's no objective evidence that it happened because the crime was not observed? How does that work in The Netherlands?
Search warrant? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Plan B. (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a really old joke. It was very funny to me at first, but in reality by making that false 911 call you're buying yourself a free ticket to be arrested and jailed for the night. And for good reason.
Why is that a good reason? If cops would actually do what they're "supposed" to do and catch a robber, that wouldn't have been necessary. Instead they were probably more concerned with sitting on the side of the road raising revenue or harassing some pot smokers.
I think your absolutely right, if a class 1 felony is not important enough to get the cops off their ass they should be fired. No prosecutor would prosecute you for doing something like this, for starters they would look like a fool at trial and it would bring to light the neglagince of the police. Committing a crime to stop a more grievous crime is also a complete defense, provided it's not excessive (n-1 is generally acceptable). If they were stupid enough to charge you with a crime you would have them by the balls and hypothetically if it got all the way to a trial you could just testify that you shot them with your camera.
You'll be hearing from the Thought Police. (Score:1, Interesting)
Remember the mantra: USA == BAD.
It makes things easier for so many people.
Re:Plan B. (Score:5, Interesting)
Crime rates here in Holland also vary by the racial and ethnic makeup of each region. And I thought there were places in the big US cities where the police doesn't really like to come anymore because the inhabitants of those places are so well armed?
Re:Plan B. (Score:5, Interesting)
Rape is for example twice as prevalent in Holland as in the US.
Are these statistics controlled for different definitions of rape, different reporting levels, etc.? I suspect not.
Double standards for network tracking (Score:5, Interesting)
For those playing at home: network tracking and identification isn't enough to even grant a search warrant for theft of physical property, but it's enough evidence to convict in a case of "theft" of intellectual property.
Double standards much?