• Full Story

Clinton may authorise Dotcom extradition

Email
Print

Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:25a.m.

As Secretary of State it may be Hillary Clinton's responsibility to sign-off the extradition order (Reuters)

As Secretary of State it may be Hillary Clinton's responsibility to sign-off the extradition order (Reuters)

An extradition request to transfer Kim Dotcom from New Zealand to the United States could be authorised by US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

The 38-year-old internet tycoon has been in custody since he was arrested on internet piracy charges last month.

PricewaterhouseCoopers director of forensic services, Alex Tan, says the US government will not be taking any chances.

“In general an extradition request is a request from one sovereign nation to another sovereign nation, and so the final requesting papers are generally signed at the most senior level. When I was in the police in Hong Kong, and we dealt with extradition requests from America, it would generally be the Secretary of State,” says Mr Tan.

Alex Tan says it is one of the first extradition requests he has heard of involving alleged copyright infringements and piracy charges.

RadioLIVE

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

13 Feb 2012 01:52p.m.

Neil wrote:

Nigel I agree with most of what you've said, except changes to the law in USA read to me like Mr Dotcom almost has to prove his innocence, more than the prosecutors have to prove him guilty.

12 Feb 2012 07:43p.m.

Wow wrote:

Nigel, Megavideo had search capability, but it obviously wouldn't display videos marked as 'private'.

If you read the indictment, you'd see that DOJ is trying to present Megaupload as 'private cyberlocker service' (which in reality it was not), and then at the same time complains how Megaupload did not provide search capabilities (to find peoples' private files, huh?).

Read the indictment, you will have a laugh.

If they had such search capability, they'd be guilty of 'making copyrighted material easily available'. If they don't have search capability, they're guilty of 'not making copyrighted material easily available'.

DOJ uses some really neat logic there.

11 Feb 2012 04:46p.m.

rod wrote:

dotcom has made some big mistakes here...
firstly he hired a clinton lawyer, what was he thinking?...
secondly nz is the last place u should come, he must of thought that it was so far away from the world, haha, he sould of went to china or even better russia

11 Feb 2012 03:22p.m.

Nalley wrote:

Honestly guys, if Nz let Dotcom go to the USA from NZ looking like a criminal when is clear that he is not, after all the things that he has done for the people in CHCH, Goverment funds, supporting other NZ and Immigrants with jobs, then I can honestly assure that NZ has become another USA puppet, and there ain't such thing has democracy in this country.

11 Feb 2012 12:09p.m.

nigel wrote:

For the rest of the story: Laundering money in America just means spending criminal proceeds, doesn’t matter how or what you spend it on. Racketeering is two crimes added together like copyright infringement and money laundering. Proof of these charges depends on the US government proving copyright infringement in the first instance and this hinges on one thing! The Americans allege that Megaupload had systems in place to specifically deny copyright holders knowledge of copyrighted material stored on Megaupload’s servers, thus intentionally frustrating copyright holder’s efforts to have their property removed. If this is true then Kim Dotcom is guilty as charged on all counts. However if it is not true then Kim Dotcom is completely innocent. Moreover these alleged “systems” would have to be software based, a part off and intrinsic to, the Megaupload websites. For the sake of Justice, democracy and the American way, the Americans need to prove this, members of the Judiciary take note.