A 26-year-old construction worker from San Diego used a location app to successfully track down his stolen iPhone. And when he found the thief, the two got into a physical altercation that ended in the thief getting pepper sprayed and detained by an off-duty cop.
And the whole thing was captured on video.
Kenneth Schmidgall says his iPhone was stolen from a reggae concert on Dec. 28. Like anyone who has ever lost a cellphone, he first tried to call his phone, but it was pointless. So, Schmidgall and his buddy, Greg Torkelson, used an app called “Find My iPhone” to hunt it down.
After tracking the phone for hours, they traced the signal to a man riding a bike.
“I saw the gentleman on the bike and we followed it and kept tracking it and every time it would stop, the guy on the bike would stop,” Schmidgall told ABC 10News.
In the video of the scuffle, Schmidgall appears to get hit in the face. He says the thief was holding a rock in his other hand.
The two men continue to fight until Torkelson pepper-sprayed the iPhone burglar. Shortly after, an off-duty police officer stepped in and held the man until police arrived.
When asked if the phone was worth all the trouble, Schmidgall said, “It’s not the phone that’s so much important…It’s that people get away with this kind of stuff all the time with cellphones being stolen.”
“I do think I taught him his lesson,” he continued. “I really don’t think people should be going out and getting in fights with people because of their cellphones but there comes a point when you have to stand up for yourself and say, ‘This is my stuff, and I’m not going to let people get away with taking it.’”
“Torkelson believes the alleged thief was taken into custody for outstanding warrants from separate incidents. However, police have not yet been able to confirm that,” ABC 10 News reports.
Watch the full video of the fight below (Content Warning!):
(H/T: Daily Mail)
All screengrabs via The Daily Mail
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (126)
blackfeather
Jan. 10, 2013 at 7:19amhar har! love it….the guy needed his **** whipped.
Report this comment
lordjosh
Jan. 10, 2013 at 7:45am“I’m an off duty police officer.” Good for you for, sparky.
Report this comment
Mil-Dot
Jan. 10, 2013 at 9:46amWhat amazes me the most is that people are so addicted to a stupid fricking phone. They have allowed the corporate goons to hypnotize them into thinking the Sun rises and sets because of iPhones. It is just a gadget to distract you from what is happening right under your noses. But, that aside, I am glad the thief got his ass beat. I hate thieves.
Report this comment
monitor
Jan. 10, 2013 at 10:16amAn ass-whipping can solve alotta stuff. It’ll go further than a revolving judicial door. Hell, he’s probably already back on the street victimizing more innocent people.
Report this comment
jcldwl
Jan. 10, 2013 at 10:45amThis was clearly a case where the man who got his phone stolen took the wrong action so don’t glorify it. He tracked the guy down and followed him then initiated a confrontation and the article says the suspect had a rock in his other hand. What if the victim was a ccw holder and shot the suspect to defend himself. Would it have been a good shooting? No. The victim initiated the confrontation and put himself in that situation. That is not self defense that is an aggressive action. I can see the headline now. Angry crazed concealed carry permit holder stalks and shoots man on bicycle. Not a good story. The victim had a friend with him who should have called the police and had them step in and confront the suspect. It happens all the time with people who call in suspected drunk drivers. I am glad it ended the way it did but the alternative would be devastating to our fight to maintain our 2nd amendment rights. So what I am saying here is think before you act. The guy will probably be sued for pepper spraying him and the guy will win because the victim initiated this over a freaking phone.
Report this comment
Pigpen
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:53pmHmmm. Which one LOOKED like a criminal to you? Be honest, YOU ALL thought the skinhead kid was the one who stole the nice looking technocrat’s iPhone, didn’t ya? And whoops, the “nice” man with a backpack, bicycling at the state park, with safe-looking, curly pubes for hair was ***DUM-Da-DUM*** the THIEF!
Oh, and CALL THE POLICE? Yeah, go ahead and give that a try! That always works. [end sarcasm] And what do the newsheads mean “all this for an iPhone”? The “fight” could hardly be called a tousle, (except for the fact that pubes for hair had a ROCK in his hand when he hit the skinhead kid in the face). And my jaw dropped when the newsheads said that the kid’s iPhone “wasn’t even the new model”! The LOWLIFE had stolen this kid’s stuff! WTF is WRONG with these people? Does ANYBODY know the word PRINCIPLE anymore? Pubes for hair got what he deserved… A BEATDOWN!!!
Report this comment
rickfromthecape
Jan. 10, 2013 at 9:36pmHe literally got the snot beat out of him!
Report this comment
GuruMeditation
Jan. 10, 2013 at 7:11amKeep in mind… We’re not talking guns being taken away here, just silly iPhones.
Report this comment
M13
Jan. 10, 2013 at 7:18amI didn’t know Encinom could even use an IPhone.
Report this comment
pdw
Jan. 10, 2013 at 8:50amKeep in mind it is not a iphone but a theft. I do not even know if he could have gotten a police officer to respond. Depends on how much crime is committed in that area and if they would even care as this is not the news media covering the theft.
Report this comment
pdw
Jan. 10, 2013 at 9:01amIf it is just a silly iphone he must be a silly thief!
Report this comment
blanco5
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:48am“People get away with this stuff all of the time’—he’s right and people are sick of no justice, so good fo him. For some reason I think HE will end up in jail over the thief.
Report this comment
BehindBlueEyes
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:28amWhen the SHTF and police services are stretched beyond the limit we all will be on our own for protection of life and property.
Report this comment
Magyar
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:49amYOU have no idea how accurate your statement is.
When the SHTF, law enforcement will do their jobs for approx. 72 hours and then abandon their posts as they realize their own families are in extreme danger. THEN the real danger starts and the 2nd amendment will be your only defense. NEVER surrender your weapon!!! NEVER!!! Do not comply!!!!
Report this comment
BlackCrow
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:04pmWhen? You would be lucky to get them to file a report on theft so you could file an insurance claim. Most of them are out setting radar traps, something that they make money on. No profit in chasing down thieves until they start stealing from banks and costing the feds money.
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:25amAnd back to A) I see someone ‘suspicous’ but they’re really not doing anything wrong, I confront the person but do not assault them or threaten them, they hit me and they have me on the ground and I’m in fear of my life, I shoot them to save my life, but I have a hell of alot of explaining to do.
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:24am@KRYPTONITE
Wow I can honestly say that this is the first time anyone in my life has even remotely considered myself or a statement made by me as being liberal. lol
Interesting that you would even bring this up because I was just thinking to myself thank God that this was a case of rock and mace and not a gun and skittles, but don’t take that as if I’m defending Trayvon, or Zimmerman for that matter. But since you did however try and relate this petty phone situation to a more tragic and complicated situation as the Zimmerman case I’ll make my points on Zimmerman one time and digress.
I make these statements without knowing all of the facts but only what I’ve read and seen in national media.. So here goes from Trays perspective, A) If I were Trayvon and was being stalked and ultimately confronted in a way that was not harmful but only verbal, I would keep walking. B) If I were confronted with force of any kind then I would beat the hell out of the perp.
Zimmerman’s perspective, again without knowing all facts.. A) If I observe a ‘suspcicious’ out of ordinary person in my neighborhood I would investigate from a distance to see what they’re up to and decide if I should call the cops otherwise be on my way. B) I observe that they’re up to no good so I would call the cops and keep tabs on suspect whereabouts until cops arrive. C) They’re up to no good, breaking into someone’s house and they have a gun in which case I call the cops, and then intervene to
Report this comment
thereyougoagain
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:57amI just want to know where this “low information voter” ripped off the bike.
Report this comment
yougottabekidding
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:03amAnother winner against the
“I am entitled” crowd.
Report this comment
Apple Bite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:57amEverything about the ownership of that phone is in the phone itself ans still traceable via AT&T, And since the app and the provider can prove where the phone is and who the owner is, this man is covered by law in being able to track that phone down and retrieve it. He has every right to do so. And whooping the perp’s tail in the process as far as I’m concern is perfectly fine.
No weapons with the intent to kill was used. What? Pepper spray? Better call Al Sharpton, after guns, knives, and sporks, pepper spray might be next on his agenda! Think of all the single women running wild and lose with pepper spray! Sends chills down Al’s spine.
Report this comment
biohazard23
Jan. 10, 2013 at 7:55amBut strangling one’s girlfriend with your dreadlocks is perfectly acceptable. Go figure. ;)
Report this comment
jamespubliusmadison
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:11amA smart thief would turn off location settings, so the Find My iPhone app wouldn’t be able to track your smart phone in the first place. Ask a 5th grader…
Report this comment
thereyougoagain
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:39am“Smart thief”… that’s an oxymoron!
Report this comment
jamespubliusmadison
Jan. 10, 2013 at 5:13amYou’re a fool if you really believe that…
Report this comment
TimKan7719
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:56amSmart Thiefs are not really concerned with stealing an IPhone. Smart thiefs are the ones that Hit little larger targets.
Report this comment
GuruMeditation
Jan. 10, 2013 at 9:05am@thereyougoagain: but mostly moron.
Report this comment
IndyGuy
Jan. 10, 2013 at 10:34amThe smart thieves are in D.C…
Report this comment
bullcrapbuster
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:21amJust lose the video camera. Beat the crap out of the thief,take your phone and then go about your business. The thief will not do a damn thing about it.
Report this comment
The Patriot Vision
Jan. 10, 2013 at 2:13amFor the record.. somebody give that poor blonde woman a cheeseburger.
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:33amGood grief! Stop sticking your finger down your throat, sweetie. Someone please put her in rehab.
Report this comment
Mil-Dot
Jan. 10, 2013 at 9:53amPatriot,
Funny!
Report this comment
nocommie
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:45amI like this method much better than the corrupt courts and greedy lawyers.Good job man
Report this comment
Gums
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:10amA. ******** will try to prosecute the man who got his phone back.
B. ******** will try to outlaw the trace your phone app so nothing like this happens again.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:53amThis guy could be in real trouble.
He accosted, assaulted and detained the individual riding the bike, on the assumption that this
was the person responsible for stealing his ipad.
If this Alleged “thief” claims that he purchased it, or found it, the person who detained him could face serious civil and criminal penalties.
Also, Jason Howerton – the Author of this article, has put his neck out there, by claiming this was a thief.
“And when he found the thief, the two got into a physical altercation that ended in the thief getting pepper sprayed and detained by an off-duty cop.”
Even the News station claimed this was an “alleged” thief.
If I were the accosted individual and I had found or purchased the phone, I would be filing a lawsuit against the off-duty police officer also.
Report this comment
endthemindlessspending
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:03amIt is illegal to purchase stolen property and he would still have the one held accountable. Also if he found it and was carrying it around that is exactly what stealing is. He should have turned it in right away.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:41amSorry, You have to provide evidence that he knew it was a stolen item.
Being in possession of a “LOST” phone is NOT a CRIME, nor is he legally obligated to do ANYTHING in regards to finding it’s owner.
There is a laundry list of remedy for this defendant.
Assault, and unlawful arrest is a serious crime. Picking up an ipad on the sidewalk IS NOT !!!!!
Is the Plaintiff going to provide ultimate facts showing that:
a) The defendant knew without a doubt, that this was a stolen item.
b) The defendent was not on his way to turn in the knowingly Stolen Item to the Authorities.
( which as previously stated herewithin, the defendant is NOT obligated to do.)
c) The defendant was poistive that someone did not just DISCARD this device on the side of the road.
Even someone with minimal knowlegde of the law, like yourself, should know using basic common sense that picking up a discarded item is NOT a CRIME.
Dude, before you debate me about law, you are going to have to study for about 4 years. lol.
Report this comment
DEFCON4
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:47amCounselor Moron, The ‘alleged’ perpetrator, would be ‘wise’ to hire you.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 2:01am@DEFCON4
Thanks. I will take that as a compliment.
Even if I could represent him, it would be too late because he probably gave the Undercover cop
and other witnesses, incriminating information.
I really didn’t watch much of the video, so I didn’t see if he did incriminate himself on tape, or not.
If I had any inkling that he was a criminal, I WOULD NOT represent him.
Report this comment
DEFCON4
Jan. 10, 2013 at 2:35am@Michael, Indeed, a compliment.
The ole’ ‘aggravated-assaulted’ defense willl not ‘work’ here..
Report this comment
Conservative Democrat
Jan. 10, 2013 at 2:39amTo continue, Actor 2 just elevated the use of force matrix (by picking up a deadly weapon (the rock) and entered into another “danger Zone” call felony Battery/ fortunatly actor did not go up the matrix and then held back and subdued actor 2 with less that leatal force (pepper spray) this ended the fray and officers on the scene found wants and warrants on actor2. Actor 1 got his phone back, actor went to get a shower and 3 hots and a cot (and may be some lovin cell mates)
The point is there is only one criminal act that happened, that was possesion of stolen property, misdemenor, 30 days for theft for poor actor 2 , No need for outside lawyers to give a narrative about how every one but the thief should be sued. Sorry it doe not always work out the way you want it….no, no no state funds for you MMoron. Sorry.
P.S. stay in school some of us out here have a bit more that 4 years of liberal study, some even have 8 or 10 years.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 2:48am@Conservative Democrat
You are clueless. lol.
Have another cocktail. Yee haw !!!!!!
Report this comment
dugbru
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:05am@ Michael Moran … you of course are working pro bono for the thief … cuz that is exactly what your 4 years of law school are worth …
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:26amlol.
If the Prosecutor can provide evidence that the alleged perpetrator knew it was stolen, then yes, he is toast.
Or, the defendant does not take away the presumption of law (which he most likely will not),
he will be steamrolled.
More than likely, his legal counsel will recommend he plead no contest, and he will serve whatever
sentencing guidelines calls for. ( probably 30 days and 6 months )
Like I said, If this guy did STEAL the phone, he deserves a beat down. If he Found the Phone,
he deserves an accord and satisfaction redress for physical assault.
This idiot that retrieved his phone should have:
1) called authorities first, and let them apprehend the alleged ‘thief’ (the idiot said he LOST it)
2) asked the guy on the bike if he had an iphone, asked him how he acquired it, and if he was willing to return it.
3) followed the guy until the police arrived.
Report this comment
shorelineliz
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:28amthe way I am reading this article the owner of the IPHone used an app to track HIS IPHOne. Then he found it in the “Possession’ of a guy riding a bike. So he stopped the guy and got his phone back. The guy riding the bike was in possession of “stolen” property. When the police arrived the guy who owned the phone identified his phone. So, the police took the “thief” into custody on the charge of possession of stolen property plus some other crimes this guy was being arrested for. If you are in charge of property that is not your own it is categorically “stolen property” no matter what your story is. The fact that the owner of the IPhone had to wrestle the guy to get his phone back, the bike rider fought back with a rock and the IPhone user had to pepper spray him is evidence in itself. The cops will not rule this an assault on the part of the IPhone user. They know the guy on the bike is not the owner of the IPhone therefore he is in possession of stolen property and he has outstanding warrants for other crimes. The POlice aren’t stupid. They know what is up. This is an open and shut case.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:36am@dugbru
My 4 years of “law school” are priceless. lol.
It is going to pay dividends.
I am anti-ABA. The Lawyer’s Guild of Great Britian are of the same ilk as the Global Banksters and Industrialists destroying my Country.
You must understand your enemy to help defeat them.
75% of our Politicians are/were attorneys.
I have learned their beloved secrets. Hint: It all about Trust.
I don’t mind working pro bono for the good of mankind, I didn’t do this to generate Federal Reserve notes.
I do this to help good people, and to help save my Country.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:54am@Shorelineliz
“The cops will not rule this an assault on the part of the IPhone user”
Cops don’t make rulings, they only enforce the laws. lol.
I was talking about a later civil suit from the defendant, contingent upon the outcome of this case.
~~~~~~~~~~~
“If you are in charge of property that is not your own it is categorically “stolen property” no matter what your story is.”
Due to the fact that you are making a claim that a defendant has no remedy, it is painfully obvious that you have no idea of what you are talking about.
I am done. I will debate real lawyers, or people that have an extensive knowledge of law.
lol, cya.
Report this comment
DEFCON4
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:19am@Michael, now being, back to me, ha ha…
So, now he deserves an ‘Accord’ to have satisfaction
to re-dress in.. ‘cramped quarters’, Counselor…….
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:49amOk first of all before I chime in, I am not a lawyer and have zero years of law school, but IMO Michael is absolutely right. As much as I like seeing a little street justice when the crime permits (for example witnessing a purse snatcher and going after him), this to me looks like a case of assault w/bodily injury by the two a-holes stalking what seems to be a bum on a bike who could have easily found this phone discarded somehwere (something tells me this guy doesn’t frequent reggae concerts but who knows). Regardless though, maybe he’s not a bum, possession is 9/10ths of the law and these a-holes should have called police first and led them to the man, they would have got the phone back. As far as this guy clutching a rock, pure self defense against two guys who have been stalking him all afternoon and then attacked. Even if the guy did throw the first punch, the two a-holes pursuing him seemingly aggravated is more than enough justification to throw a first punch in defense. Messy situation, but again only because police were not called first. To think that all this was over a phone. This world really is going to hell in a hand basket it seems.
Although I don’t know any of you, I would like to assume we atleast have some common interest since we all frequent Glenn’s site. Must say thought I’m a little disappointed in some of your reactions, to seemingly ‘beat down now’ and ‘ask the guy questions later’ and to praise street justice like this. Too much anger.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 4:54am@DEFCON4
Are you a poet, and I do not know it ?
I am trying to read your riddles, such as Davie’s ‘Paranoia’ comment that was ‘aforementioned’ (was that cramped?)
Do people not like my messages ? lol.
Money is no object, I know. But, Murphey can’t be bought.
Theres a riddle for ya, up there in the city/state.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 5:10am@St1cky
You have restored my faith in man. lol. Finally, someone with some common sense.
You are right on the money.
I have 0% law school, and I am most definately not a lawyer, but I have learned quite a bit from this little box called a laptop. This is the super information highway. it’s limit, is only my imagination.
If you tell people you go to the library and study and read, they respect that.
If you tell them you study on the internet, they discredit that. It makes no sense.
The Internet is a Library or school on steroids. It is much better than a library or school.
Here is my “Law Professor”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Shs4mIcEqp8
Report this comment
DEFCON4
Jan. 10, 2013 at 5:24am@ Mike, obviously went to far..
The, ‘Accord’ being,
a sub-compact Honda..
Would ‘allow’ little space for one to ‘re-attire’
after, “nudge-nudge”, know what i mean…..know..
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 5:25am@MICHAELMORON
Sorry, You have to provide evidence that he knew it was a stolen item.
——
He knew it was stolen because the real owner and his buddy “pulled over to talk to the suspect on the sidewalk,” but he fled. An innocent person might be perplexed or angry — even frightened, if he’s a liberal — but he wouldn’t run and hide in the crowd.
Also, didn’t they teach you in law school not to analyze a case based on what the media reports? Especially someone who is sloppy enough to forget conservatives have to call a spade an “alleged” spade?
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 5:50am@KRYPTONITE
Yeah but saying that ‘he knew this, or they knew that’ is all conjecture at best. The fact of the matter is when something is stolen you call the cops, then the cops do a report and 90% of the time thats the end of it because the goods are never found. It’s so nice though that we live in an age where we can call the cops and file a report, AND tell them where to find the merchandise! How awesome is that! Taking the matter into their own hands is going too far. Doesn’t matter if the guy took it, found it, or denied conversation with these a-holes when they ‘allegedly’ approached him. I say allegedly because I find it interesting that their so-called first three attempts in talking to the guy was NOT at the beginning of the tape or atleast not this one, but they claim they tried talking to the guy when speaking to the officer at the end of the video, just saying.
Here is my conjecture, if it isn’t obvious that these guys wanted to make a point by finding and beating this guy up then you’re obviously watching a different video than I am. Driving around for what they said were hours with a scanner, mace, and handcuffs but yet they only wanted the phone back? Whatever. You can hear the adrenalin in their voices.
This guy may have stolen or found hundreds of phones, but this video doesn’t show that. It shows two idiots acting out in anger just to ‘get even’ presumably for the sake of all those whose phones have been stolen and never found. Don’t do
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:03amSt1cky
Even if the guy did throw the first punch, the two a-holes pursuing him seemingly aggravated is more than enough justification to throw a first punch in defense. Messy situation, but again only because police were not called first.
—–
Why, ST1CKY, that is **exactly** the liberal argument against George Zimmerman. I gather you have been just as passionate about defending Trayvon’s right to punch Zimm in the face for stalking him in the middle of the night, instead of waiting in the car for the police to get there. Right??
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:30am@KRYPTONITE
Wow I can honestly say that this is the first time anyone in my life has even remotely considered myself or a statement made by me as being liberal. lol
Interesting that you would even bring this up because I was just thinking to myself thank God that this was a case of rock and mace and not a gun and skittles, but don’t take that as if I’m defending Trayvon, or Zimmerman for that matter. But since you did however try and relate this petty phone situation to a more tragic and complicated situation as the Zimmerman case I’ll make my points on Zimmerman one time and digress.
I make these statements without knowing all of the facts but only what I’ve read and seen in national media.. So here goes from Trays perspective, A) If I were Trayvon and was being stalked and ultimately confronted in a way that was not harmful but only verbal, I would keep walking. B) If I were confronted with force of any kind then I would beat the hell out of the perp.
Zimmerman’s perspective, without knowing all facts.. A) If I observe a ‘suspcicious’ out of ordinary person in my neighborhood I would investigate from a distance to see what they’re up to and decide if I should call the cops otherwise be on my way. B) I observe that they’re up to no good so I would call the cops and keep tabs on suspect whereabouts until cops arrive. C) They’re up to no good, breaking into someone’s house and they have a gun in which case I call the cops, and then interve
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 6:31amAnd back to A) I see someone ‘suspicous’ but they’re really not doing anything wrong, I confront the person but do not assault them or threaten them, they hit me and they have me on the ground and I’m in fear of my life, I shoot them to save my life, but I have a hell of alot of explaining to do.
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 7:57am@ST1CKY
I find it interesting that their so-called first three attempts in talking to the guy was NOT at the beginning of the tape…
—
It doesn’t matter why they didn’t tape it. The man was obviously trying to get away from them AND the off-duty police officer. That’s not the behavior of an innocent man. Also, the owner claims he was on the phone with the PD for hours. He might be stretching it a bit, but it appears he did, in fact, contact the police.
=> “if it isn’t obvious that these guys wanted to make a point by finding and beating this guy up…”
—
Finding him, yes; beating him, no. It was the thief who beat the owner.
=> “Driving around for what they said were hours with a scanner, mace, and handcuffs but yet they only wanted the phone back?”
And no gun? That was stupid.
=> “You can hear the adrenalin in their voices.”
You bet. It’s a normal body reaction when a human being is in fight or flight mode. The thief had an adrenalin rush as well.
I agree these two guys acted rashly, but welcome to Obamanation, where chaos is the norm, and criminals have a friend in the AG.
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 8:41am@ST1CKY
this is the first time anyone in my life has even remotely considered myself or a statement made by me as being liberal.
—
Not you. Your statement, absolutely. You said “aggravated.” That’s verbal, not physical. Don’t shoot me for pointing it out (pardon the pun).
You vehemently condemned the pursuit of this thief, even going to the extreme of calling these guys a-holes. You also defended the thief’s right to punch his victim, which is what Holder would do. That’s a lot of emotional outburst over a petty incident, isn’t it? But I’m talking principles. If you can attack someone because you feel aggravated, then the thief was justified and so was Zimm, the only difference being that Zimm was carrying a gun and the thief – thankfully – was not. It could have ended just as tragically.
Now let me digress as well:
“If I were Trayvon and was being stalked and ultimately confronted in a way that was not harmful but only verbal, I would keep walking.”
Well, how old are you? Trayvon was 17. Teenagers are impulsive, and more than likely racial slurs were exchanged in the heat of the moment.
“ I see someone ‘suspicous’ but they’re really not doing anything wrong, I confront the person…”
So which is it, you confront the person, or you call 911 but disregard their orders?
Report this comment
endthemindlessspending
Jan. 10, 2013 at 10:24am@moron
So by your logic say you are out to eat and get up to go to the bathroom and leave your phone on the table by accident. I could just walk by and take it and everything is fine about that. I didn’t steal it I just found it and was walking around with it.
Here is something you seemed to have been sleeping through at law school. It covers the purchase of stolen goods and who can be charged.
http://www.criminalattorney.com/news/online-fraud/
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 10, 2013 at 10:39am@KRYPTONITE
I’ll say that you’ve definitely made a vigorous effort to twist every single thing I’ve said line by line and extrapolate something entirely different to your own hearts ‘contempt’, or shall I say vivid imagination, despite the few facts that are indeed known in either case. I don’t pretend to know more about what is really going on with this story or the Trayvon case, but nor should you. I was going to address your last response line by line same as you did because you obviously did not read or understand my A) B) C) scenarios and literally twisted or completely missed the last one all together but I’m done with this discussion. We can sit here all day and try to figure out in your own world how everything must either be a conspiracy or government initiative to oppress your views (am I atleast close to the mark on this one?). So be it, I’ve given my thoughts on the matter which I do not do often because of how brutally disingenuine the public space such as this forum often can be. I’m not gonna waste anymore space on this page debating someone who is so lost from rationality that you might actually live in your own dimension (ever watch fringe?).
Btw, I’m 34, married 14yrs, two children 12 & 4, own guns, christian, republican, served this country and still live by the oath, and hands are as deadly if not more deadly than any gun. Am I ‘good’ enough now? How about you?
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:10pmBeen trying to get comments through all night.
@$#%#$@ wordpress.
You people don’t know what you are talking about.
Mr. Iphone is $crewed. I am not typing another 1500 character explaination as to why.
Mr. “Thief” may or may not be convicted of Poss of stolen prop. That is IRRELEVENT.
Mr. “Thief” now has a CIVIL case against the moron – Mr.Iphone.
Report this comment
michaelmoron
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:26pm@Mindtheendless
I previously stated: “Sorry, You have to provide evidence that he knew it was a stolen item.”
The page you posted confirms my claims.
Specifially #2
If the case goes to trial, the prosecution generally will have to prove three elements: (1) that the accused gained control of the item, (2) that the accused KNEW it was stolen and (3) that the accused intended to deprive the rightful owner of their interest in the property.
NOT ONCE, did Mr.”Thief “admit that he knew anything.
He is going to win a big settlement/s.
Report this comment
Bluedog78
Jan. 10, 2013 at 1:42pmI’m a cop and I have to take Moron’s side on this one. If the “thief” doesn’t confess to stealing the phone or knowing it was stolen then there is no case to be made unless there was a witness to the theft, which seems unlikely. However Moron’s opinion that the off duty officer could be sued for detaining the “thief” is a stretch. Officers have to make quick decisions based on limited information and as long as they act in good faith there is no case to be made for malice on the officers part. The officer saw the scuffle, the bald guy told him that the other guy stole his phone and he was trying to get it back and the officer held onto him until on duty officers showed up, not exactly gross police misconduct.
Report this comment
docvet
Jan. 10, 2013 at 3:04pmYou folks are probably right. Nevertheless, the thief may have second thoughts about possessing an iPhone not his. Or, he will stick to stealing phones from young women or little old ladies and hope that they don’t have a big boyfriend or big grandson respectively. I hope the iPhone owner doesn’t get too “bruised” when the judge gets done with him.
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 11, 2013 at 2:07am@ST1CKY
Meh. You approve of the thief’s behavior, and then pretend you didn’t and attack me for pointing it out. Call yourself whatever you like.
Report this comment
St1cky
Jan. 11, 2013 at 4:32am@KRYPTONITE
Meh, whatever, you’re right and everybody else is wrong. There ya happy now…
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 11, 2013 at 7:34amGeez, couldn’t post either.
BLUEDOG
You’re right, but that is not what MM is arguing.
@MICHAEL MORON
Have you considered that high tech apps may change the way the courts decide a case? For example, it had to be obvious to the thief that the owner had tracked his lost iPhone. Yet he not only refused to have a civil conversation with the owner, but he denied he had the iPhone on him and proceeded to physically assault the rightful owner. That’s on tape. There’s no way the thief is going to sue.
ST1CKY
Ad Hominem. Meh.
Report this comment
kryptonite
Jan. 11, 2013 at 8:43amGeez, couldn’t post either.
@BLUEDOG
You’re right, but that is not what MM is arguing.
@MICHAEL MORON
Have you considered that high tech apps may change the way the courts decide a case? For example, it had to be obvious to the thief that the owner had tracked his lost iPhone. Yet he not only refused to have a civil conversation with the owner, but he denied he had the iPhone on him and proceeded to physically assault the rightful owner. That’s on tape. There’s no way the thief is going to sue.
@ST1CKY
Ad Hominem. Meh.
Report this comment
MrKnowItAll
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:07amTwo easy kind of people to beat up. Crackheads and Alcoholics. Something went wrong here!
Report this comment
spfoam1
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:43pmLOL! All that for a free phone. This is an indication of how the libs will fight for those free Obamaphones.
Report this comment
kurwa
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:43pmpoor guy spent all his money on becks snakeoil, couldnt afford a phone.
Report this comment
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:08amBeck sells snake oil. Oh man, that’s some good stuff, cures scavies and cooties. You should buy at least 4 bottles.
Report this comment
GPS-Tech
Jan. 10, 2013 at 12:36amIt also cures STDs you get from fluking liberal sluts.
Report this comment
Apple Bite
Jan. 10, 2013 at 5:01amBeck even has some special shampoo to, you know, keep Liberals out of your hair….Great stuff that is! Head and Shoulders be damned!
Report this comment
Efrem
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:40pmI wonder how long until piers morgan demands this I phone app be banned.
Report this comment
markeng
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:38pmPeople are mad as hell and aren’t taking it anymore. The polite silent majority is waking up. Millions of law abiding citizens are now legally walking the street with guns. Never has the percentage of law abiding citizens who carry guns been this high. Everyone realizes the legal system does not prevent or protect the citizenry from crime and that personal safety and security of one’s property is a personal responsibility. The price of crime is going way up. And now the government wants to take away the right of self-defense. Perhaps this is because well-armed law abiding citizens represent a threat to the portion of society which votes to continue the welfare state.
Report this comment
Efrem
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:37pmI wonder how long until the leftists start calling fot this I phone app to be banned.
Report this comment
endthemindlessspending
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:36pmBeat that druggies azz, awesome job fellas.
Report this comment
KingDork
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:24pmmuch better than the idiot that paid his thief $20 and told him he smelled nice.
Report this comment
sscamaro1967
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:20pmkicked the snot out of him
Report this comment
toto
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:19pmGOOD! Need much more of this stuff. The low lives need to be confronted.
Report this comment
TSUNAMI_22
Jan. 9, 2013 at 11:15pmThat’s justice.
Report this comment