Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

morganhilltimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#391

Post by rkt88edmo »

eloisius wrote: post #268
jbuzbee wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've gone through various "International Training" sessions at my company and one of the things they teach is that if a foreign official says something like, "hmmm... your papers are invalid, but I can help you out for $100" or similar, you should pay and immediately report (and expense) it on return. I know one coworker who went through this traveling through a small country.

I had corporate training, annually, that said to do the exact opposite. We were not even allowed to give or accept innocuous gifts like tickets to a game without getting it approved by our legal department.

It isn't going to be taught unless you are going to be doing business in a country where it is the unavoidable norm with the people who are known fordoing it. Otherwise you will be trained to not pay bribes.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#392

Post by nradov »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #308
t-writescode wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, this sounds like it's coming from someone that lives in a country where bribes aren't commonplace. It's good that you and I both live in countries like that; but, in some countries, you report your bribes on taxes, they're so common. From the other comments in this thread, it's suggesting that the CCW permit process in California is very bad and broken and these bribes have been an illegal method of actuall…

I remember reading in the calguns forums a few years back that sheriffs had de-facto outlawed concealed carry in CA with this extortionate program. By the way Apples head of security isn’t the only one. Nanci Pelosi has had a CCW for a long time while simultaneously fighting to suppress gun ownership in her own city and state.

That's nothing new. Senator Dianne Feinstein got a permit to carry a concealed handgun in San Francisco. There has always been one set of rules for the powerful and another set for the rest of us.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#393

Post by acituan »

t-writescode wrote: post #239
wolco2 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably one of the craziest things I've heard. Never commit a crime to look a certain way because it won't look that way tomorrow. The police could be trapping you. If not they now have dirt on you. How in the world can you explain that to a judge if it came to that?

Honestly, this sounds like it's coming from someone that lives in a country where bribes aren't commonplace. It's good that you and I both live in countries like that; but, in some countries, you report your bribes on taxes, they're so common. From the other comments in this thread, it's suggesting that the CCW permit process in California is very bad and broken and these bribes have been an illegal method of actuall…

> but, in some countries, you report your bribes on taxes, they're so common.

Can you give any examples of those countries? Countries with high amount of bribing tend to also be countries with large off-the-record economies, therefore I am skeptical of that proposition.

FYI in the US, you can claim tax deductibility on bribes paid in foreign countries iff they are not legally classified as bribes in the respective local laws.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#394

Post by throwawaygh »

wl wrote: post #274
throwawaygh wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A private citizen of limited means paying a bribe is somehow reasonable because there's a huge power imbalance. Refusing to pay a bribe is also a refusal to participate in a racket. Local police can be extremely petty and extremely violent [1]. If a police officer told me he'd let me off for a bribe, I would probably pay it. I wouldn't be paying to get what I want. Rather, I would be paying to avoid the appearance th…

> A high-level exec at one of the world's most powerful companies paying off a local LEO for a permit instead of, IDK, contacting the State or the Feds, is beyond inexplicable. The State or the Feds don't issue CCWs in California. Chief local law enforcement officers only, which means sheriffs and police chiefs.

>> A high-level exec at one of the world's most powerful companies paying off a local LEO for a permit instead of, IDK, contacting the State or the Feds, is beyond inexplicable.

> The State or the Feds don't issue CCWs in California. Chief local law enforcement officers only, which means sheriffs and police chiefs.

No, but they do investigate other LEO agencies for corruption. See: the article.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#395

Post by HarryHirsch »

cowmoo728 wrote: post #247
HarryHirsch wrote: post #221

It worries me that the local sheriff thought he could extort bribes from a multinational company and get away with it. And Apple is very much top of the list. Of course the cops are corrupt, but this degree of corruption is something you'd have thought would happen only in Brazil. It's either more common than we know or this individual is unusually stupid.

Bribery for gun permits is also very common in NYC. It's well known that you either have to employ ex-NYPD in some capacity to get a gun permit, or pay cash. Maybe it's slowed down since some high profile arrests in 2017. https://abc7ny.com/nypd-police-corruption-investigation/1914... DAs don't like investigating cops.

The sentences were exceedingly lenient: https://nypost.com/2019/09/25/ex-cop-who-cooperated-in-nypd-...

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#396

Post by rkt88edmo »

kennywinker wrote: post #289
jbuzbee wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've gone through various "International Training" sessions at my company and one of the things they teach is that if a foreign official says something like, "hmmm... your papers are invalid, but I can help you out for $100" or similar, you should pay and immediately report (and expense) it on return. I know one coworker who went through this traveling through a small country.

I have it on good authority that all apple employees are trained to not pay any kind of bribes. Didn't realize that training would need to be applied in the states tho

Campaign contribution, lobbying fees, consultants fees...

Tomato, tohmahtoh

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#397

Post by acituan »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #238
jbuzbee wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've gone through various "International Training" sessions at my company and one of the things they teach is that if a foreign official says something like, "hmmm... your papers are invalid, but I can help you out for $100" or similar, you should pay and immediately report (and expense) it on return. I know one coworker who went through this traveling through a small country.

That is illegal according to US law. At my company, we are explicitly taught the opposite: paying "facilitation fees" is prohibited and illegal and that the employer will fire you and throw you under the bus if they find out you did so. They explicitly mention that this is not allowed even if it is the norm in the country in which you are doing business.

> That is illegal according to US law.

Not always. If the local laws don't classify it legally as bribe you can pay it and even claim it on your taxes as cost of doing business.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#398

Post by azernik »

thathndude wrote: post #386
Spooky23 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nooooo. You’re making up stuff about things you don’t know about. Accepting gifts is always an issue in government, and often a serious crime for the employee, regardless of who benefits. Accepting or demanding compensation for official action is corruption, regardless of the beneficiary. Negotiating public contracts, seeking public benefit, or enforcing requirements related to permitting is not bribery or corruption…

Go back to the original city council meeting where Jobs announces the new Apple headquarters. The council asks if they’ll be getting free Wi-Fi with the campus or anything. Not a straight up pay to play, but things like the above commenter described DO happen.

"Officials administrating the permitting process have discretion to act."

City councils are political bodies, and within their jurisdictions are the ultimate authority on what should and should not be allowed.

LEOs are employees of the state, and are meant to follow the dictates of the legislature or other political body that governs them.

If you want to negotiate a legitimate trade of public donation in exchange for a CCW, that needs to be done publicly through democratic and legal processes.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#399

Post by sfkdjf9j3j »

throwawaygh wrote: post #120
paxys wrote: post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

A private citizen of limited means paying a bribe is somehow reasonable because there's a huge power imbalance. Refusing to pay a bribe is also a refusal to participate in a racket. Local police can be extremely petty and extremely violent [1]. If a police officer told me he'd let me off for a bribe, I would probably pay it. I wouldn't be paying to get what I want. Rather, I would be paying to avoid the appearance th…

I agree but I want to point out it's actually worse than you make it sound. One of the indicted officers is second in command in Santa Clara County!

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#400

Post by zucker42 »

dharmab wrote: post #85
zucker42 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything that indicates his desire to carry a weapon has anything to do with the fact he is an Apple employee. Some people like to carry concealed weapons for protection.

> Santa Clara County alleges that Mr Sung held back issuing concealed weapons permits to Apple's security team, until Mr Moyer agreed to donate $70,000 worth of iPads to the sheriff's office.

Oops, I did not read carefully enough.
Post reply on HN