Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: precisionshootist

I responded to your statement that the phone had nothing to do with the crime. Now you have changed it to Apple having nothing to do with it. My challenge stands. The phone contains evidence and has everything to do with the crime. My question mentioned nothing about Apple, which is a different discussion.


221 posted on 02/20/2016 6:39:32 AM PST by doug from upland (Some of you keep telling yourself -- Romney would have been as bad or worse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies ]


To: doug from upland
Sorry but I did not originally mean the phone has nothing to do with the crime. I was in a hurry and left a word out. I will clarify it for you.

Apple does not own this phone. Apple is not connected with this crime in any way.

So with that said I don't know what you are arguing. My point is many people believe a court can issue a warrant or order for Apple to force them to unlock this phone. Apple and their employees don't work for the government and can't be forced to do so.

Now the government could ASK Apple politely pretty please with sugar on top will you help us with this but that is not what's happening.

It is vitally important to all of us that Apple politely tell the judge he or any court has no authority to order apple to do anything in this case and that they will not comply.

230 posted on 02/20/2016 10:24:38 AM PST by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson