One thing I thought of in relation to this supposed crime... Who exactly paid for the phone? Was it Chen the citizen, or was it Chen the agent for the Gawker company? And, how do we know the information sought is in regards to actually charging CHEN with a crime.
I don't think it makes too much difference if you're committing a crime.
For instance, was it Chen the citizen or Chen the agent who downloaded kiddie porn, since he was writing about kiddie porn in an article?
Was it Chen the citizen or Chen the agent who robbed the liquor store, since he was writing about thefts at liquors stores in the city from the perspective of the criminals?
Was it Chen the citizen or Chen the agent who broke into Apple's labs and stole the iPhone prototype, so he could inform the world about what Apple was coming out with next? [just a theoretical example...]
And again, was it Chen the citizen or Chen the agent who broke the law and purchased lost property, that was either known or even not known to belong to Apple? [see the law up above... :-) ...]
As the police officers who served the warrant stated HE was not being arrested, or detained at ALL. It sounds to me like they wanted his computers to try to figure out who sold the phone.
That's what you do when you're gathering evidence and before you arrest someone. You see what the evidence is, and when you have it, you arrest them... :-)
There are too many unanswered questions in this case. Everything we are discussing here is speculation.
I don't see even a little bit of speculation here. The guy wrote about his crime and basically admitted it himself. It was someone's lost property (it doesn't matter who it belonged to) and he bought it -- that's a violation of the law and a felony violation...
Not too much speculation there... LOL ...
The issue here is whether the journalist may skate (and he might, under California law). But the guy who sold something that does not belong to him? Different issue, that (clearly) some do not understand.