Father Stabs Thief to Death After Tracking Him with Find My iPhone
LIKE
TWEET
SHARE
PIN
SHARE
POST
MAIL
MORE
Posted August 7, 2014 at 12:30am by iClarified
After tracking his son's stolen iPhone through Find My iPhone, Derek Grant ended up stabbing and killing the thief who robbed his son at knifepoint, in self defense.
Jordan, 20, was initially robbed of his iPhone at knifepoint. He went home and told his dad, Derek Grant, who proceeded to locate the stolen device through Find my iPhone. Grant and his two younger sons aged 16 and 17 confronted Patrick Bradley, a thief who had a significant record for violence.
Grant demanded Bradley hand over the phone but instead Bradley stabbed Grant in the left eye. Grant retaliated by grabbing his own knife he brought for safety and proceeded to stab Bradley multiple times, ultimately killing the robber.
Father-of-four Grant was arrested and later said: “I wish to declare for the record that at the time of this incident, I was acting in self-defence.”
Grant originally faced murder charges, but prosecutors accepted his guilty plea to the reduced charge of culpable homicide. His sentence has been deferred until September 1.
I got my phone stolen a month ago and went to the police with a known location via Find my iPhone. They did ABSOLUTELY nothing! This is clearly the only option. He got stabbed in the eye, and acted in self defence. Good on him.
Not because of that... - August 8, 2014 at 12:53pm
Guys they obviously arrested him because they are wondering why did he bring the knife with him, now I know he said for self defense, but they are thinking why didn't he go to the police? Why didn't he show the police and let them track him down with find my iphone? Why did he bring a knife with him? If you add all those questions it would make him seem like he was going to kill him. Plus it is illegal to bring a knife, so they are thinking he was going to kill him and retrieve the phone.
Guy confronts theif, theif stabs guy in the eye, guy defends himself and gets charged with murder. Please tell me this must have happened in England or Australia. Those countries have such ass backwards laws when it comes to self-defense and promotes a legal system that rewards criminals and punishes victims. Sickening..
It doesn't matter if the police are going to do anything or not, per someone's presumption. You have to look at it from a strictly legal view, as the law will, obviously. Am I saying the bad guy shouldn't have gotten shanked? Not really. What I'm saying is that a theft took place (at minimum, possibly also an assault and/or other crimes); that was at the original crime scene. Once the victim/attacker leave that scene and moment, things change. You're supposed to contact the police and let them deal with it (regardless if they care or do a damn thing)— because they have legal authority to do so. Otherwise, it's just vigilante justice/revenge and what now happens is that the victim's /father/ is now the person confronting another person without any authority to do so. When he does after this dude, he is in the "aggressor/offense" position. He wasn't even the original victim! That's no different than my buddy going to settle the thing, taking a knife with him and chasing this guy down. This shows 1) he was the aggressor in a second totally new incident 2) he obviously premeditated it and brought a weapon, regardless if he knew he would use it or not. The problem is: had he not gone after the guy himself, he would not have gotten stabbed, and there would be no need for self-defense because he wouldn't have placed himself in a volatile situation willingly, and thus, there wouldn't have been a homicide. In the law's eyes, you're not defending yourself you go after someone (doesn't matter the previous crime)— he has no authority to just head after this guy when he's in no imminent danger. He placed himself in that situation, and as a result of that, the guy who stole from his son still had legal rights, just as any other. So if I go into the lion's cage at the zoo and he feels threatened and mauls my ass— who is at fault? Him, for being in his cage— or me, for going into his territory and getting up in his face? The answer is pretty clear there; how is this different? By law, it's not any different. You're some random guy approaching this criminal and at the very least, verbally demanding the return of the phone. You don't know that the father didn't walk up to the thief and pull a knife on him, saying "gimme back the iPhone or I'll kill you". In that case, the thief would be the one with the "self defense" claim, and the father would be guilty of 1st degree murder! Or even possibly the thief could have stabbed the father to death in "self defense" and possibly walked free. So many of you are thinking too much on moral and social justifications. The law is objective, based on legislation , not subjective factors like moral principles and opinions. Maybe the thief got what was coming to him, from a personal/moral justice POV. Fact of the matter is, what I have pointed out are things that the law doesn't dismiss quite so easily. Legally, he was not justified in any of it. He should have stayed away and it wouldn't have happened. His actions directly caused the chain of events that followed. The thief became the legal victim and you just can't walk up on someone and harass or threaten them, no matter what. Now if the thief feels that he is in great danger, he has the self defense coin and if you "defend yourself" you're not-- you're only continuing the original crime you began. You're the criminal now. Fair? Logical? Just? It doesn't matter what anyone thinks but the law that addresses such situations. It just is like that. You can't be impulsive and do shit like that, no matter if it's morally justified in your eyes. That's why this man is being charged with the crime. Culpable homicide means you're at fault/responsible for the death, which means you brought about the final circumstances that led to you killing someone, when it could have been avoided. You are at fault for not avoiding that end by all means in your power. And that's true of the evidence presented as I see it here.
AppleisFinishedAfterSteveJobsDeath - August 7, 2014 at 7:42am
All this voilence just for an iPhone =$ OMG $=
An iPhone turned his dad into a Criminal =$ OMG $=
Tim doesn't knows how to Cook =$ OMG $=
Don't become a Criminal, Switch Today, Buy a Samsung Galaxy S5
He did nothing wrong. It was self defense. What else was he supposed to do? Get stabbed to death himself? No. He killed the thief so save himself. Good IMO
:)
![iPhone 16 Named World's Best-Selling Smartphone in Q3 2025 [Report]](/images/news/99295/99295/99295-160.jpg "iPhone 16 Named World's Best-Selling Smartphone in Q3 2025 [Report]")
![Apple Releases iOS 26.2 RC 2 [Download]](/images/news/99291/99291/99291-160.jpg "Apple Releases iOS 26.2 RC 2 [Download]")
![Apple Shares New 'Outrun' Ad Highlighting the Speed of Apple Pay [Video]](/images/news/99289/99289/99289-160.jpg "Apple Shares New 'Outrun' Ad Highlighting the Speed of Apple Pay [Video]")
![Apple Watch Series 11 Drops to New All-Time Low of $299 [Deal]](/images/news/99283/99283/99283-160.jpg "Apple Watch Series 11 Drops to New All-Time Low of $299 [Deal]")
![AirPods 4 With ANC Are Still On Sale for Just $99! [Lowest Price Ever]](/images/news/99264/99264/99264-160.jpg "AirPods 4 With ANC Are Still On Sale for Just $99! [Lowest Price Ever]")
![Final Cyber Monday Deals: M4 MacBook Air for $749, Beats, Sonos, and More [List]](/images/news/99203/99203/99203-160.jpg "Final Cyber Monday Deals: M4 MacBook Air for $749, Beats, Sonos, and More [List]")
![iPad mini 7 Falls to New All-Time Low of $349 [Cyber Monday 2025]](/images/news/99197/99197/99197-160.jpg "iPad mini 7 Falls to New All-Time Low of $349 [Cyber Monday 2025]")
![Apple Watch Series 11 Drops to New All-Time Low Price of $329 [Cyber Monday 2025]](/images/news/99195/99195/99195-160.jpg "Apple Watch Series 11 Drops to New All-Time Low Price of $329 [Cyber Monday 2025]")
