Political questions raised over Dotcom’s residency

Print

Political questions raised over Dotcom’s residency

3News NZ

Photo: Elliott Kember

Photo: Elliott Kember

By Adam Hollingworth

Police have completed their search of the Dotcom Mansion in Coatesville after the arrest of the Megaupload kingpins -- taking computers, documents, luxury cars and artwork.

Now a political row is brewing over the decision to grant residency to Kim Dotcom, the boss of the file-sharing website who is in prison awaiting a bail hearing.

 As the founder of Megaupload, Dotcom has spent his 38th birthday behind bars, and plans for a big bash at the Chrisco mansion in Coatesville are on hold.

This morning, all was quiet at the house – and there was no chance of talking to anyone inside but others in the Megaupload empire were trying to restore the file-sharing platform which claims to have captured four percent of all internet traffic,

Lawyers were insistent they had done nothing wrong.

Since the raid yesterday, more details have emerged of what happened with Police saying that when they arrived in two helicopters, Dotcom retreated into an electronically locked panic room which officers had to cut their way into.

Who is Kim Dotcom?

Read the story about the dramatic arrest

Police say they found him near a firearm that looked like a shortened shotgun when they entered the room.

Police searched the mansion until midnight, taking away assets, including luxury cars with number plates that included stoned, hacker, police and mafia.

During the case, the items become property of the official assignee and four FBI officers will remain here while Police prepare for Monday's court case.

Already, however, questions are being raised about the decision to give Kim Dotcom residency in 2010.

Dotcom came in under the investor plus category - meaning he agreed to invest $10 million in New Zealand Government bonds for three years - and despite two-year probation sentences for embezzlement and insider trading within the previous ten years he was let into the country.

His entry to the country has raised questions about millionaires being able to buy their way into residency in New Zealand.

In a statement the Immigration Service said that “Mr Dotcom made full disclosure of his previous convictions and they were taken into account in the granting of his residence.

 “The Immigration Act allows for discretion to be exercised in certain cases. In this particular case Immigration NZ weighed the character issue and any associated risk to New Zealand against potential benefits to New Zealand.”

The Government has confirmed no minister was involved in the decision, but the Labour Party will insists that given the risks involved one should have been.

3 News

 

Post a Comment

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


(Won't be published)



Comments

26/01/2012 3:04:03 p.m.

Clarke wrote:

LOL the truth hurts doesnt it alan... from what I read of your posts you are a corupt employer yearning for the days of slavery... either way I dont know you or who you are.. just your politics... which like John Keys.. are slimey and hurt people... thats all I presume to know about you. I could make you out to be a dole bludging beneficiary as well... its merely a cheap childs trick to try to get readers to think lower of someone... elitism at its best huh bigot boy?.

26/01/2012 2:23:51 p.m.

Neil wrote:

You're doing better than I am MG - I still haven't heard a word directly from Schmitz about this dubious case. His voice has bee nheard via his old internet braggings and from his lawyer. Everything else has been feed to us by by FBI through our police force. I have to ask the question by it needed helicopters, twenty six TAG team members and FBI to surprise raid the guy. No wonder he and his family were scared and he hid out in a panic room with a gun - probably thought someone was after him to kidnap him for ransom....and no the Police didn't indentify themsleves until they were trying to get him out of the room.

26/01/2012 12:29:18 p.m.

CW wrote:

Not only do the US want to control every nation that disagrees with their policies, they now want to control the internet the last bastion of freedom. For our part the NZ police can send 76 officers to raid dotcom but cant even look after their own tax payers by investigating petty crime the precursor to greater crimes. Lets start cleaning up the crime against our own people before we start wasting good resources helping the FBI out.

26/01/2012 10:55:47 a.m.

alan wrote:

Having read a number of clarkes blogs I can only assume he is a beneficiary who longs for the return of a labour government who will increase the tax burden on the working and productive sector and pay larger benefits to bludgers, or he is a very sad, envious, individual who slags off national no matter what policy they have. Take a rest clarke and dont forget your medication.

26/01/2012 7:06:18 a.m.

Max wrote:

Not considered here, but not excluded by official comment, is the possibility that this was all a set-up to get these alleged crooks feeling secure in a backwater so they didn't run off beyond extradition possibilities - as some of their buddies have done. And NZ gets a few million of investment dollars into the bargain. If this was the game, then good on the officials and good riddance to the crooks!

25/01/2012 8:03:34 p.m.

Clarke wrote:

Its quite simple really... one corrupt businessman let another in.... businessmen dont consider insider trading to be illegal or immoral... infact they dont know what either word means aye Mr Key. If a Three stroke murderer applied for resedency and he or she had 100 million dollars... John Key would be at the airport to meet the plane and welcome them to the country. Thats just the way National work.

24/01/2012 8:47:51 a.m.

JD wrote:

Funny thing, we let thousands into New Zealand each year from the Pacific, Asia and the Middle East, your telling me that out of this large group, there are not those of a dubious nature and past. Instead of getting upset that one dubious chap made a large donation to help secure residency, why not focus on the thousands of dubious characters that we instead give tax-payer benefits too the moment they arrive here.

23/01/2012 6:36:44 p.m.

key wrote:

Go Big Fella.

23/01/2012 3:38:02 p.m.

Chargone wrote:

"Isn't paying money to get a visa that he didn't qualify for called a bribe? Where is the investigation of this? Thank god the Americans are looking after us." not if it's within the law, which apparently under national and John key it is. and anyone who believes strongly enough that the Americans are looking out for anyone other than the pockets of their biggest corporations to actually present that as a reason for letting them interfere in NZ affairs (among other Incredibly bad moves they're making that this event is tied up in) should remove themselves from the genepool immediately to avoid the further spread of 'stupid'. not that i in any way support 'cash for residency'. it's an incredibly crap policy.

23/01/2012 12:45:52 p.m.

Cellar wrote:

I recall this "Kimble" character as a bit of a laughing stock, though he certainly hasn't done badly for himself. It's just the way in which he did so. <p>

Still and all, the FBI is certainly laying the drama on thickly, that may or may not even be justified; apart from a few thorougly snowed-under appearances of the obligatory "allegedly", they certainly sound like they've already tried and convicted what may well be a completely legit operation. Even if it turns out it's not, he's still entitled to a fair trial, which this is not. <p>

Do they even have jurisdiction? I don't know, all I know is that the USA has a habit of assuming so anyway. And assumptions abound in the case. But are they founded on anything at all? Would you want them to "look after us"? I certainly wouldn't, certainly not without a vote in the US government system, thanks. <p>

So this guy is a well-known, well, speaking colloquially, crooked character. Then again, the US government doesn't have clean hands either. And he did bring in the money, doing some good, and what exactly did he do wrong this time? Please lay off the scapegoating and the blame game until he's well and truly convicted. No need for racking up the knee-jerkery before that, and you can always correct the oversight afterward. <p>

Instead use that interweb thing you have there and do some research yourself. What, really, are the allegations, what're they based on, and are they well-founded? What else can you find? It's more work but also more rewarding that making a lot of huffed-up indignant noises.