So the guy stole data and hardware. Instead of leaving immediately for China before it's discovered, he went back to Apple and told them that he's leaving. And not just leaving, but leaving to work for a competitor in the self-driving car industry. If he wanted to raise any more suspicion, he'd need to show up to the exit interview in a ski mask, carrying a crowbar.
And after that, he still stayed in the US for over two months (April 28 - July 7). This simply defies belief.
I don't even mention the fact that he admitted to the Apple security team that he stole stuff. Presumably without any lawyer since no lawyer would let him admit to anything. Why would he even meet with a security team, if he's not under arrest? Even if he thought he can't get caught, surely he knew something was wrong when the security team called him for an interview?
Maybe he thought it's impossible to prove what he did? But the guy is intelligent, he was hired to an important project at Apple. He must know that corporations have security cameras and also can check corporate device usage.
So I'm down to my final two guesses. Either the guy thought he didn't do anything wrong (really? taking confidential documents and hardware??). Or the article heavily distorts the facts.
Anyone has better explanations?
Edit: just saw the official FBI court filing at the end of the article. The article did not distort anything. I have no words.
And after that, he still stayed in the US for over two months (April 28 - July 7). This simply defies belief.
I don't even mention the fact that he admitted to the Apple security team that he stole stuff. Presumably without any lawyer since no lawyer would let him admit to anything. Why would he even meet with a security team, if he's not under arrest? Even if he thought he can't get caught, surely he knew something was wrong when the security team called him for an interview?
Maybe he thought it's impossible to prove what he did? But the guy is intelligent, he was hired to an important project at Apple. He must know that corporations have security cameras and also can check corporate device usage.
So I'm down to my final two guesses. Either the guy thought he didn't do anything wrong (really? taking confidential documents and hardware??). Or the article heavily distorts the facts.
Anyone has better explanations?
Edit: just saw the official FBI court filing at the end of the article. The article did not distort anything. I have no words.