The Rise of Cell Phone Store Heists: A Modern-Day Twist on Bank Robbery
In a shift that has caught the attention of law enforcement and criminology experts, cell phone store robberies are emerging as a lucrative and increasingly common form of criminal activity, eclipsing the traditional bank heist in both payout and frequency. Forget masked figures storming into financial institutions; today’s criminals are setting their sights on stores brimming with the latest smartphones, driven by a booming black market that spans continents.
The article opens with a vivid account of a robbery in Owings Mills, Maryland, illustrating the brazen nature of these crimes. A man feigning interest as a customer reveals his true intentions when accomplices burst in, guns drawn. The target is not cash, but the coveted Apple and Samsung Galaxy devices locked away in the store’s safe. In this single heist, the trio made off with nearly $50,000 worth of smartphones, a haul dwarfing the average take from a bank robbery.
This Maryland incident is not an isolated case. According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the robbers were part of a larger network responsible for stealing approximately $120,000 worth of phones across four stores in the Baltimore area. This surge in phone store heists has prompted federal agents to label the trade "phone trafficking," highlighting the large sums criminals aim to accumulate and sell in distant black markets, including Iran and North Korea.
FBI supervisory special agent Doug McKelway emphasizes the transnational nature of these crimes, explaining that what initially appear as low-level street crimes often have ties to international organized crime elements. The potential profits are staggering. While low-level criminals might earn $500 to $1,000 per phone, ringleaders can amass millions. The risks are also considerable, with significant prison terms awaiting those caught. Xavier Jones, involved in the Owings Mills robbery and other heists, was sentenced to 22 years in prison, while his accomplices received sentences of 12 and 20 years respectively.
In Jones’s case, a desire for a big payday led to his downfall. The crew failed to notice a GPS-tracking device hidden among the stolen phones, enabling federal agents to locate and apprehend them.
The trend of phone store heists is not confined to Maryland. McKelway points to a pivotal case in Texas, where law enforcement uncovered an alarming number of phone robberies in the Dallas area. Further investigation revealed that armed robbery crews were traveling to Dallas from across the country, drawn by a local store that acted as a fence, paying substantial amounts for stolen phones. This store facilitated the movement of over 70,000 stolen phones, valued at $100 million, to countries like China and the United Arab Emirates.
Criminologists suggest that the rise in phone store heists is a logical consequence of criminals seeking easy targets. Bank robberies, once a relatively straightforward path to wealth, have become increasingly difficult due to enhanced security measures, including alarm systems, surveillance cameras, and electronic tracking devices. The Bank Protection Act of 1968 mandated nationwide security improvements in banks, leading to a dramatic decrease in bank robberies and a significantly lower average payout.
As banks become more secure, cell phone stores emerge as attractive alternatives. These stores often lack the robust security measures found in banks, despite housing valuable and easily resalable merchandise. Accounts of phone store robberies read like modern-day versions of the escapades of infamous gangsters like John Dillinger and Baby Face Nelson. Robdarius Williams, D’Maurah Bryant, and Quintez Tucker received a combined 65-year prison sentence for robbing eight cell phone stores in Indiana in just 25 days. Their methods involved brandishing weapons, ordering people to the ground, and, in one particularly disturbing incident, waving an AR-style rifle in the face of a two-year-old.
Some phone store robbers have exhibited extreme violence. Lawrence McKay and his crew, who robbed six cell phone stores in the Philadelphia area, escalated their tactics over time. In one incident, they tied up victims in a bathroom, and in another, they shot an employee. McKay himself committed a particularly brutal act, shooting a victim in the stomach and then kicking him in the face.
Faced with this growing threat, some cell phone store owners are beginning to implement security measures similar to those used by banks. These measures include hiding tracking devices among the phones and keeping devices in safes that only open at specific times. However, many stores still lack adequate security, leaving them vulnerable to robberies.
Network providers have also taken steps to combat phone trafficking by blocking the use of stolen devices. The Global Standard Mobilization Association maintains a vast database of stolen phones, which is used by over 100 providers worldwide to deny access to stolen devices. However, not all countries participate in this system, including China, Russia, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates.
Despite these efforts, stopping phone trafficking remains a challenging task. While law enforcement can shut down significant local networks, new ones quickly emerge. The internet facilitates the resale of stolen phones, and there is a high global demand for these devices.
In conclusion, the rise of cell phone store heists represents a significant shift in the landscape of criminal activity. While traditional bank robberies have become more difficult and less profitable, cell phone stores offer criminals a new and attractive target. The transnational nature of phone trafficking, the high profits involved, and the relative lack of security in many stores have created a perfect storm for this type of crime. Law enforcement agencies, network providers, and store owners must work together to implement more effective security measures and disrupt the networks that facilitate phone trafficking.
