Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×
Crime The Almighty Buck The Courts Apple

Apple Exec Stashed $150,000 In Shoe Boxes 345

angry tapir writes "US federal agents found more than US$150,000 in cash when they searched the house of Apple manager Paul Devine earlier this month, according to prosecutors. 'He had over $150,000 stored in shoe boxes,' Department of Justice Attorney Michelle Kane said. Devine was charged two weeks ago with taking kickbacks from Apple suppliers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Exec Stashed $150,000 In Shoe Boxes

Comments Filter:
  • Mattress! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by OffaMyLawn ( 1885682 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:37AM (#33369576)
    You don't use shoe boxes, they're too obvious.
  • No app for that? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:38AM (#33369590) Homepage Journal
    Hmm...seems like there should be an app for that??

    Seriously, if this guy was socking cash back and wanted to hide it from the feds, why didn't he think of better hiding places?

    Heck, just watching the Sopranos would give you some better ideas for cash placement than shoe boxes all over the house.

  • by PalmKiller ( 174161 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:38AM (#33369594) Homepage
    Maybe he just don't trust banks to be to big to fail anymore.
  • by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:40AM (#33369604) Homepage

    That would be an awesome name for an Apple-themed porno...

  • by bozone ( 113268 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:42AM (#33369644)

    What's next "Apple Employee Cuts Line at Starbucks"?

    Hardly stuff that matters

  • by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:42AM (#33369646) Homepage

    There are lots of ways to securely stash cash. shoeboxes under the bed are not one of them. a run to home depot for a post hole digger, some PVC pipe and caps = a money safe the feds wont find.

    Although this guy does not look like the type that knows how to run a complex device like a shovel.

  • Re:Mattress! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ironhandx ( 1762146 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:48AM (#33369744)

    Mattress or Shoe boxes, either one is safer than a lot of banks or investment firms these days.

  • by whisper_jeff ( 680366 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @10:49AM (#33369754)
    Um, I hate the obviously anti-Apple news as much as the next Apple fanboi but this is hardly negative Apple news. In fact, I can't find even a vague hint of anything negative being directed at Apple in this situation.

    More so, this is kind of a big deal in the geek and tech industry. If this doesn't qualify as news than I have absolutely no understanding of the word. I would say that the employee of one of the top tech companies being caught in a scam where he made off with over $1 million dollars is quite certainly news for nerds and stuff that matters.
  • Re:Inflation (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:03AM (#33369978)

    That's true in inflationary times. We are not in inflationary times however.

    Even large well-run companies are holding tons of cash right now.

  • Re:Inflation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by oldspewey ( 1303305 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:04AM (#33369980)
    Hey, that beats the hell out of losing $60,000/yr due to insolvent banks and plummeting securities.
  • Re:Inflation (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:04AM (#33370002)

    And how is that any different from leaving it in a bank account that doesn't gain anything other than some joke interest rate? Or stocks that can collapse overnight on the whim of an all-boys club having a laugh about a crop failure on the other side of the planet? Or property that may rise in the long term, but true gains are actually eaten by taxes, insurance and maintenance costs (assuming you can afford to buy without debt)?

  • Um, I hate the obviously anti-Apple news as much as the next Apple fanboi but this is hardly negative Apple news. In fact, I can't find even a vague hint of anything negative being directed at Apple in this situation.

    That's odd, this story causes me to wonder how much corruption is rampant at Apple if we scratch the surface and find shoe boxes with cash ... whatever the case here in the US, this certainly illustrates the growing problems that Apple and many other companies are having with foreign counterparts guilty of "when in Rome" infractions against ethics and business.

    I used to think "Made in America" when I bought an Apple product. Then after realizing it was all coming from Taiwan and China I thought "Invented in America, Made in China" but I still imagined this premium I was paying lead to good American ethics and proper treatment of employees to consumers. The deaths of nine or more plastics workers in Apple's iPhone supplier followed by a million in kickbacks being stored in shoe boxes by a corrupt Apple Manager and suddenly I realize that buying Apple just means you're paying a premium on something that might provide you a better experience but really employs all the same corruption inherent in almost any very large business.

    While I'm not faulting Apple anymore than -- say -- Samsung or Sony, they've dropped from high standards of worker and consumer ethics all the way down to 'one of the rest.' Maybe they're simply too big to control that now but you better believe this is negative to someone like me. I've only ever bought (to my knowledge) iPod shuffles as gifts and a single exclusive album on iTunes but you won't catch me buying anything else from them for a while.

  • Re:Inflation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Primitive Pete ( 1703346 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:09AM (#33370050)
    And it is WAY better than losing 100% to the feds.
  • "kickbacks"? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by v1 ( 525388 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:10AM (#33370058) Homepage Journal

    from TFA:

    Prosecutors say that Devine shared confidential information on Apple products such as the iPod and iPhone in exchange for cash kickbacks. He allegedly provided suppliers with projected sales figures, data on how much it cost Apple to produce the products, and pricing bids from supply chain competitors.

    This looks a lot more like "corporate espionage" than "kickbacks". I usually consider kickbacks to mean that he accepted bribes from clients for favoritism. But this guy was basically getting paid to spy on his employer and provide intelligence.

  • by jeffmeden ( 135043 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:24AM (#33370242) Homepage Journal

    Good advice, but your stereo equipment idea fails the "would someone steal it even if not looking for hidden loot" test... A great spot I would add to the list (not that I have anything to hide, ahem) is the underside of just about any heavy furniture like a hutch, dresser, entertainment center, etc. If it's not already boxed in, a few pieces of masonite can make it look like it was meant to be that way, and a few furniture sliders on the bottom can make it easy to get to the back, while the wood tacks traditionally used will make it easy to open if you need to retrieve the items in short order (without destroying the furniture).

  • by cellocgw ( 617879 ) <cellocgw@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:32AM (#33370376) Journal

    Even so, storing loot in shoe-boxes is not the action one would expect of an innocent man.
    Humbly beg to differ, for two reasons.
    First, there are plenty of people who, for whatever reason are hoarders and/or don't trust banks. That doesn't make them criminals.
    Second, and more important: it's not (yet...) illegal to possess US currency. Period. Fuck the "it looks suspicious so it must be illegal" jackasses.
    Now, if a valid search warrant, including some phrase like "evidence of unearned wealth" is in place, then there's an excuse to impound the cash.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:50AM (#33370684)
    Until it burns. A house is a particularly bad place to store lots of cash.
  • Re:Mattress! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @11:53AM (#33370722) Journal

    Now when you have a ~5% devaluation rate on your paper, due to the Private Central Bank running the printing presses like mad. $150,000 today... $142,000 next year... $135,000 the following year... and so on.

    By 2020 your mattress or shoebox stash will be worth just $89,000. You're better off to put the paper in the bank where the 5% devaluation can be offset by a 1-2% interest rate.

  • by Lunix Nutcase ( 1092239 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @12:00PM (#33370816)

    The deaths of nine or more plastics workers in Apple's iPhone supplier

    Who is also the same supplier of Dell, Microsoft, Logitech, HP, Intel, etc on and on. Why do you only single out Apple out of all of Foxconn's customers?

  • Re:Mattress! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @12:51PM (#33371624) Journal

    >>>the value doesn't depreciate. It's still $150,000.

    False. $150,000 cash in 2010 will buy you a medium-sized house (or a new Ferrari). $150,000 cash in 2020 will only buy one-half a house or ferrari. What changed? The paper lost value. Put another way:

    When my grandfather was my age (in the 1920s) a nice wool suit only cost $12. Today a wool suit costs around $400. Again: It's not the suit that changed - a wool suit is a wool suit. It's the paper that lost value.

    Paper money depreciates over time, due to banks doubling, tripling, quadrupling the paper supply.

  • by scosco62 ( 864264 ) * on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @01:19PM (#33371930) Journal
    They hire Procurement people to wrestle every penny out of a partner; and then expect them to behave differently when it comes to their own pockets? Sounds like poor controls to me.....
  • Re:Mattress! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by AequitasVeritas ( 712728 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @01:39PM (#33372136)
    False again. The value of the money didn't change, the purchasing power of the money changed. The paper is still worth $150,000 regardless of year. The purchasing power of $150,000 will go up or down as inflation and de-inflation change the purchasing power of the paper money.

    Going back to when you grandfather was your age, that same $12 (assuming a $10 bill and 2 $1 bills) would still be worth $12 in todays economy. However, the purchasing power of $12 is vastly less today than it was 90 years ago.

    Purchasing power is where we derive things like the CPI, so we can track how it changes over time.
  • by CohibaVancouver ( 864662 ) on Thursday August 26, 2010 @10:29AM (#33381700)

    And which of those will not tell the person I share a checking account and credit card account what I bought?

    My wife and I have joint banking accounts and joint credit cards, but we also have credit cards in our own name. This is something you should do too, and a very good idea - If something happens to your account (robbery, for example) you still have access to a backup card. When I was pickpocketed in Barcleona our joint-card was cancelled, but we were still fine. Ditto ATM cards. You should each have a bit of backup money in a bank account, with a separate ATM card.

    The bills come to your email account, so if you want to make a surprise secret purchase, use your own card and when the bill comes via email, pay it online. Presto.

    Finally, I'll add that if the twenty stays around, purchasing a $1000 item is fifty twenty-dollar bills. Hardly unmanageable - Easily fits in an envelope. If you're buying gifts that are worth more than $1000 you're wealthier than me, but if that's the case just use the method above.

    Which of them also will not cost me anything in interest

    What interest? A credit card bill comes, you pay it off. There's no interest, and as a bonus we earn frequent flyer miles with each dollar spent. Because of this, pretty much everything goes on the card.

    or debit fees?

    I live in Canada, so I can't speak for US banking, but with my account if I keep a minimum balance there are no fees. My American friends seem to have similar accounts.

    which of those will work at random small shops across the planet which do not take credit/debit?

    If you're travelling you definitely want to travel with something other than cash. If you want to make a purchase at a random small shop, you go to an ATM and take out some cash. Or alternately, you use traveller's cheques. You just take them to a bank and convert them to the cash you'll need for that day. Carrying around stacks of hundreds while travelling into random small shops across the planet is a recipe for trouble...

There are no data that cannot be plotted on a straight line if the axis are chosen correctly.