JJB gave grandsons ipod away.

marleyboy

We can only hope this is the case, albeit the woman in question could have easily sold it on, or it is more likely going to be held as evidence up until a trial date (which can take Months, in some cases as much as a Year).

cyberbob

This thread is getting Rather silly now. I very much doubt the OP will be back to have every little piece dissected.

With all the strange pruning who knows what posts have gone. Certainly not the abusive ones.

sookipeaspud

Once the Ipod connects to the internet, APPLE / Itunes will record the IP address of the user. Apple could provide the IP address of the device to the police who will be able to execute a warrant (if granted by the magistrates) to enter the property and seize the said Ipod.

The OP will have to provide details of the purchased Ipod and if not then the registration details of the Ipod in question. There MUST of been some sort of registration to sync the Ipod to a computer.

Once the police have a warrant they can smash down the door if necessary to get the Ipod.

I was told this by a friend at my local pub who has a retired uncle from the police.


Thanks,

thriftymanc

sookipeaspud wrote: »

Once the Ipod connects to the internet, APPLE / Itunes will record the IP address of the user. Apple could provide the IP address of the device to the police who will be able to execute a warrant (if granted by the magistrates) to enter the property and seize the said Ipod.

There MUST of been some sort of registration to sync the Ipod to a computer.

Two problems with this though: Firstly, depending on your internet connection, IP addresses are not static - they can change every time you connect to the internet if you turn your router on and off regularly (or sometimes your ISP changes them periodically) so an IP address won't always tie you to a physical address. (E.g. I turn my router off every day - once I went on Wikipedia and was confronted with a message telling me off for vandalising their pages - except I hadn't, I'd just got someone else's old IP address so whoever had the address before me had been on a mad Wikipedia rampage but I ended up getting the shouty message!). Secondly, you don't need to connect an iPod to the internet ever if you don't want to. My dad's got an iPod he's only ever used on an old laptop that wasn't connected to the internet (just used it for ripping CDs - he doesn't download). No registration required.

Pound

thriftymanc wrote: »

Two problems with this though: Firstly, depending on your internet connection, IP addresses are not static - they can change every time you connect to the internet if you turn your router on and off regularly (or sometimes your ISP changes them periodically) so an IP address won't always tie you to a physical address.

Even if the IP is dynamic and only used for a few minutes the ISP should have a record of which customer it was assigned to provided they're given the exact time it was used.

adouglasmhor

What happens if you are using Hippo iPod manager or any other third party iPod tool?

DCFC79

This still going on, thought it would have been resolved

gordikin

It could have easily been resolved ages ago if someone had taken 'ownership' of the problem! OP's son didn't want to phone the police in case he was put on hold and granny (OP) was allegedly too busy to deal with it.

peachyprice

sookipeaspud wrote: »

Once the Ipod connects to the internet, APPLE / Itunes will record the IP address of the user. Apple could provide the IP address of the device to the police who will be able to execute a warrant (if granted by the magistrates) to enter the property and seize the said Ipod.

The OP will have to provide details of the purchased Ipod and if not then the registration details of the Ipod in question. There MUST of been some sort of registration to sync the Ipod to a computer.

Once the police have a warrant they can smash down the door if necessary to get the Ipod.

I was told this by a friend at my local pub who has a retired uncle from the police.


Thanks,

It's an Ipod, not the crown jewels.

Do you really thing the police are going to do this, especially taking into account that the theft involved no violence towards the child who lost (yes, lost) it?

Pollycat

peachyprice wrote: »

Polly, OP was asked, several times in this thread, whether the recording had sound, and preferred not to answer.

All probability is that the store didn't have sound at all, as 99% of stores wouldn't, therefore the conversation is quite likely to be largely guess work.

Can you see why that would make one sceptical of OP's version of events?

Yes, peachyprice, I CAN see why that would make SOME people sceptical of the OP's version of events.

However, I may be being naive but the OP's detailed version of what was said on the cctv (information passed onto her from her son) makes me tend to believe her version.

I don't know why the OP hasn't answered the question about sound but I DO know that some posters have hounded the OP quite agressively about updates and answers to questions..

Maybe that's why she's not answered.