Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames0910
I'm not a lawyer, but I gotta agree with kermitology.
Calling a generic care rep isn't a reasonable effort. It's enough to try and say that you covered your ass and certainly makes for an interesting defense, but, really? Did he expect generic customer care rep #123 to jump on the 'I have an iPhone prototype for you' line? Seems like a better effort could have been made.
I'm not saying that he didn't make any effort at all, I just think he did it with full knowledge of the type of response he would receive and as such it wasn't enough. Not a reasonable effort IMO. We'll see where the state of California draws the line though.
And if it goes the other way...wow, the lawyer sure earned his money!
|
It's pretty easy to argue reasonable v. unreasonable in this setting, but in a court setting it's one of the most difficult things to prove to a jury. Remember what the criminal standard is, beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that there's a credible argument to be made that the effort was reasonable makes reaching that standard near impossible.
The DA would really be rolling the dice to pursue that charge without some sort of evidence that indicates the 'finder' knew the effort had no chance of resulting in the phone being returned. There may well be something that indicates that in the materials uncovered in the search, but that opens up a whole new can of worms as to the privilege law. Like I said above, that's likely a state supreme court case if pursued, and I don't know that the state is up for that kind of costly battle over this. We'll see, at the very least it's made for an interesting discussion.