• Full Story

FBI ordered to release Dotcom evidence

Email
Print

FBI ordered to release Dotcom evidence

3News NZ

Kim Dotcom

Kim Dotcom

 

A New Zealand judge has ruled that the FBI must release evidence it has gathered to support its court case against internet piracy accused Kim Dotcom.

The ruling released today by Chief High Court Judge Winkelmann follows an earlier district court ruling by Judge David Harvey which was challenged by Crown lawyers acting for the FBI.

This challenge led to Justice Winkelmann’s review, which has now upheld the earlier ruling.

Dotcom, 38, and his three co-accused are fighting attempts to extradite them to the United States, where they face charges of copyright infringement, money laundering and racketeering.

The extradition hearing is set down for March next year.

Dotcom was also back in court today asking for access to some of his frozen funds to pay his legal expenses.

The multi-millionaire Megaupload founder hasn't been able to access his assets since his arrest in January in an armed police raid on his Coatesville mansion, north of Auckland.

Dotcom's lawyers are seeking a variation to the foreign restraining orders in place so that his legal fees, which are approaching $2.7 million, can be paid.

Dotcom's lawyer Willie Akel told the High Court at Auckland on Thursday that his client wants a $10 million New Zealand Government bond released so he can borrow money against it.

Given the highly unusual situation, Dotcom should be able to access experienced legal counsel, he said.

Mr Akel said the case is "totally unlike any that have come before the court in the past".

He told the court there has never been any suggestion that anything that has been done on behalf of Dotcom has been a waste of resources or not bona fide.

Crown lawyer Anne Toohey has begun making her arguments to the court on Thursday afternoon.

3 News/NZN

 

Post a Comment

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


(Won't be published)



Comments

28/08/2012 9:48:05 p.m.

dennis wrote:

Excellent, considered, fair, thoughtful, wise, thorough and, of course, contextual are all applicable to His Honour Judge Harvey's judgement. There is but one rather important "context" overlooked. He is holding 4 men under arrest on charges of copyright violations where we all KNOW that they would not be charged as such in New Zealand. We would tell the poor complainants to file a law suit to right their alleged wrongs. Not exactly a minor detail and puts absolutely everything out of "context"!

27/08/2012 11:30:29 a.m.

dennis wrote:

Rod Sharp wrote: "It continues to blow me away how NZ is letting the US belittle Kim and his family. I just can't believe how laws have been broken but there is a huge unwillingness from the US to comply or even give him copies of what they have so he can defend himself. Who knows what ridiculous evidence they have manipulated. The NZ police and govt got sucked in big time on this one, the FBI came calling and local police commanders and govt were star struck. It truly shows that the US think they are above and beyond all laws except for their own mighty constitution. If Kim ever leaves NZ for his extradition case the American court system will swallow him up. I am disgusted in the US, but especially in the NZ govt for allowing this to go on in our country. John Key is pathetic, lies, lies and more lies in every area of NZ govt he is involved with. If Kim is found innocent no doubt John Key will flip flop at the 11th hour like usual. I am a NZ-er, born and bred but this country makes me sick. Police can't just raid your home because they got told by a person that your a bad person and then take all your money and everything that you own, and do this to your friends also so you have nowhere to go...and then say right time for a court case ha-ha when they full well know Kim wouldn't be able to afford a lawyer or a chance to defend himself. He's not even allowed to see a copy of his own files. I mean what the hell is this?? He has acted morally and ethically in the right way. The NZ govt, police and US govt most certainly have not. We have laws for a reason but apparently governments can break them if they wish too. This entire case has been a sham from the start. I love the way Kim and family have fought back legitimately, he has made all involved look foolish because of their unprofessional actions". This is not just rhetoric. Judges McNaughton, Harvey and Dawson (and Doogue). Kim Dotcom is not responsible for someone copying 2 NZ films onto his computer network. You can not have him reporting to police for 14 months based on an untrue "belief" that he has committed an extradition offence

22/08/2012 11:22:32 p.m.

dennis wrote:

Brett said: "Hope he gets it. Anyone watching this case should note that, so far: everything Kim Dotcom has said is correct and the courts are being forced to finally follow the law. Keep it up Dotcom" Sorry. I didn't mean to push your comment on to the 'next' page. We all hope he gets it (except Mike). Better to not hold our breath awaiting the special delivery

22/08/2012 2:08:37 p.m.

dennis wrote:

Score: Dotcom. 3 Losses 4 wins. Megaupload. 30,000,002 Losses. Crown Law Office. 4504 losses 3 wins. America. results censored. Police. results sub-judice, but provisionally censored. New Zealand. 0. Central Authority for the mutual assistance in criminal matters. 3 losses. Come on Crown Law Office. Stop floundering around in the middle of the Pacific. Don’t worry about the 4500 hours because the Commissioner’s got the tab (it’s only $15 per hour, eh). Jump on to the winning team. No one may even notice the ethical dilemma. Suggest to Judge Dawson he appoints an Amicus Curiae to decide section 4(2). If the Copyright Act provides no extradition offence, problem fixed. Just have to find a lawyer for NZ then

22/08/2012 6:02:18 a.m.

geral wrote:

Fine, then order the release of fbi/cia data on their own historic crimes against humanity.


Re: torture & murder of humans.
Most are not awakened to the reality of the macabre usa global program; some don't care; others rejoice in the carnage; while many others participate in the slaughter. USA is among the youngest gov with about 200-400 years in existence, Egypt 5000 years and itself is a dangerous place to try to live, European countries (France and Britain) are about a thousand years in the making of their sickening kingdom/oligarchy, and China in three thousand years still can't respect fundamental human rights including the right to live. In a sense the Oligarchy also rules the USA today and encourages the barbarity that we witness. Thus, all nations are ruled by tyrants and sociopaths. The youngest nation on the world stage (pitiful & godless usa)propels all other countries to accept the war ethic because the economic & military forces of usa demand carnage. Even peacemakers are forced at birth to prepare for war against his brothers, and I see no remedy to correct the inhumanity that envelopes us all, especially as the fbi/cia assassins are in complete control here and to a degree abroad.Thank you all for sharing your humanitarian spirit on this and other forums.http://sosbeevfbi.ning.com/

22/08/2012 12:05:26 a.m.

dennis wrote:

All charges and versions of offences in question pinpoint to one: Would Megaupload, if operated here, and allegedly allowing persons to access copyrighted work here, be liable to criminal complaint, or civil action only (commenced here)? "The principle of double criminality is satisfied where, and only where, any alleged offence against the law of the requesting state in respect of which extradition is sought would necessarily involve a criminal offence against the law of the requested state if the acts constituting it had been done in that state." Surely Judge Harvey new the answer. How much more damage before 4(2) is answered? Someone needs to say definitively it is or it isn't an extradition offence and stop bluffing the sheep

19/08/2012 10:02:26 a.m.

Mike wrote:

We need our NZ residency to be firmed up to keep career criminals out of NZ like dotcrim. We should add a clause that allows residency to be revoked for later charges brought against an applicant. If charges are brought in say the following say 5 years, the application could face those charges, and if found not guilty, the revoking could be reversed. But crims that just try to avoid justice like dotcrim, they should be booted out NZ. Dotcrims application should be examined and if any lies on the application it should be revoked, and dotcrims history suggests any digging should find fault in his application.

Dotcrim has conviction on 2 continents and a 3rd is trying to bring him to justice for more crimes.

Dotcrim is a self confessed criminal who claims to have hacked illegally and caused damage through hacking. Compared to dotcrim, Stuart Murray Wilson is an upstanding member of the community. Compare their records at the same age, and dotcrim has spent more time in court, all around the world.

Dotcrim had plenty of security - why? Is it because some of the investors in Megaupload are a little dangerous to not repay? I wish the Hongkong investors all the best in collecting what is owed by dotcrim. That a couple of deaths in NZ have been linked to Hongkong investors doesn't worry me - crims that get dangerous crims to invest deserve what they get. And some of the Hongkong investors in Megaupload seam to be linked to Hongkong criminals/triads, which tends to explain maybe why money laundering is amoung the US charges?

18/08/2012 8:52:45 a.m.

dennis wrote:

Mike. A direction to disclose information has nothing to do with an alleged extraditable person's "chequebook". It is a mandatory process as part of the proceeding. (Note the words "MUST be taken into account") Judge Harvey was required to request everything he ordered, and probably more. It did not require prompting by a lawyer. It is the unlimited govt-cheque-writer squealing "review" and "appeal" to obstruct the process who is attempting to rewrite the Extradition Act 1999. "In making a determination for the purposes of section 4(2), the totality of the acts or omissions alleged to have been committed by the person must be taken into account and it does not matter whether under the law of the extradition country and New Zealand— a) the acts or omissions are categorised or named differently; or (b) the constituent elements of the offence differ"

17/08/2012 2:16:49 a.m.

dennis wrote:

Well Mike, according to the judgement at paragraph 5, you are right and I am wrong. The offences are extraditable. Section 4(2) is not to be read literally. Would you explain it to me again but please don't tell me to get real because I thought I was. Does it mean you can lump all the individual offences together as "the offence"? I don't accept it.

16/08/2012 11:57:41 p.m.

Andrew wrote:

@Mike The US has more money than MegaUpload and its members could ever even hope to ever have and you claim that they bought out the judges.. Oddly enough its usually the Movie and Music industry companies that are accused of buying out judges, whether this really holds true is another case entirely. Here's how I see it, the US side has to try prove it has a case for which to extradite MegaUpload on but with access to what they are defending on MegaUpload can potentially argue/refute what would have otherwise been a reason to extradite. I think that's fair personally. If I may ask, obviously you have an interest in this case but what I'm curious in is what experience have you had with NZ/US law. I saw on one of your previous posts that you said you had training or tuition in the US or something. I was just curious if that was to do with law.