Kim Dotcom extradition: Feds can keep evidence against Megaupload mastermind a surprise Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom has suffered another setback in his fight against extradition to America to face piracy charges, as the New Zealand Supreme Court denied his appeal to access the evidence the US feds have on him. The top court decided [PDF] that Uncle Sam's prosecutors are not required to disclose the evidence …
I wonder how many other countries were 'tricked' or coerced into signing extradition deals which require no evidence to be disclosed before extradition.
There seems to be a pattern developing here. Treaties are put in place and left to stand for a number of years. Then one day the US aggressively starts applying it's laws to foreigners in foreign countries.
I can only assume that the delay before aggressively pursuing foreigners on foreign soil was so they can get enough treaties with different countries in place before their real intent was revealed.
Now it will be too late for many countries, so the question is how many countries have similar deals with the US ? I know the UK is one of them. Whoever signed the treaty must have been blind.
I wonder how many other countries were 'tricked' or coerced into signing extradition deals which require no evidence to be disclosed before extradition.
To my knowledge, evidence is never required before extradition. All that is required is a valid extradition order.
To release evidence before extradition invites having an evidentiary hearing, then a pre-trial hearing, then a pre-trial in the country of residence before the real trial at the requesting country. This sort of continuous process can can clog up courts, cause never-ending delays, and bankrupt all but the most wealthy people from legal fees. it also introduces a loophole to prevent valid extraditions.
"To my knowledge, evidence is never required before extradition. All that is required is a valid extradition order."
Your knowledge is wrong. If the extradition is contested then most countries require enough proof to show a demonstrable case (as in, criminal levels of proof) AND that it be for something illegal under local law.
And yes, a challenged extradition _does_ require evidentiary hearings.
As a background to this, it's worth noting that before NZ had the Supreme Court in place, the highest level of appeal was the Privy Council - who _frequently_ slapped down criminal cases that had been upheld all the way to that point, with harsh words for both NZ police and courts about standards of proof and poor procedures.
It's widely believed the reason for the government blocking access to the privy council is that it's easier to get the judgements you want when the judges are under your control.
New Zealand was only a few steps off being a Banana Republic and recent changes have brought it even closer there. Forget the stuff about being "non-corrupt" - the organisation which issues those proclamations (Transparency International NZ) is 100% NZ govt funded, utterly opaque and kicked out the most active transparency campaigners.
" Forget the stuff about being "non-corrupt" "
The NZ police may not accept bribes (yeah right), but try being on the wrong end of a case. Very corrupt, falsification of evidence and charges, intimidation of witnesses (including physical violence and planting of evidence), and of course denying people access to lawyers and so on, assaults in police custody (one or two have proven fatal - check if you doubt)
This isn't just rare or big cases either, this is day to day. Probably the huge bonus they get for a conviction "encourages" them to make sure they get their convictions even if it means going to lengths that may not exactly be legal.
The last time I recall a country asking America for evidence before extraditing a suspect was a little place called Afghanistan, in 2001, asked to hand over a dude named "Osama bin Laden".
You might remember what followed that episode of standing on legal niceties.
This post has been deleted by its author
I think it looks as if some back handed deals are going on.... Also I always thought that the accused is allowed to see all the evidence against him or how else can he defend himself?
Isn't it funny that the US is screaming out against Putin and the Crimea when they can't even get their own house in order when it comes down to justice.
Maybe, I can't say that he's a very likable guy but that's not the point. The USA is charging him with some nice big fat "crimes" mostly because he pissed off the movie industry by offering a service that is theoretically protected by the exclusions in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. So now the world gets to see how Justice works in America ... but Kim's relatively wealthy so he can afford a better class of Justice ... this will be interesting.
"Why do *I* have to go to jail to protect *your* freedom? - Larry Flynt.
|!¬ Kim jong un. Kim dot com. Are they by any chance related? q~;
As sumeone above mooted with banana republics.
To get a country in your pocket the way United Fruit did was to hire CIA directors to run their business. But bigger fish have larger fish upin their backs to smite them. Like Jedgar sodomising Johnson and Nixon. In every day in every way the USA is a corrupt police state.
Reminds me of England though : # (
The fact is he didn't kill anyway, no one was caused physical harm by his actions, no one was proven to be out of pocket because of what he did... Is it worth extraditing him over? Not in my opinion, if there is a crime to pay, have him answer for the crime in his country...
Also we need to get precedent set for crimes like this... IF someone commits a denial of service attack on a server in the USA, but they are not in the USA, should the USA have jurisdiction?
In my opinion, cross border crimes should be tried in the country where the perpetrator was at the time of the crime being committed.
Yes yes this is great news. This man is the Osama Bin Laden to corporate America and their incredibly valuable IP. Not just that but he is a security risk to all Americans or else the Department of Homeland Security wouldn't been so keen on stopping copyright violation would they? By the way I am just kidding and Americans who aren't right wing ideologues (sadly not a huge majority) are disgusted by the heavy hand tactics of our government in this case (actually a tiny minority probably because TMZ doesn't cover stories like this). Yes Kim Dotcom maybe scum but if the government spent as much time and effort going after the crooks on Wall St. as they do guys like him it would probably benefit the general public more. Of course they won't bite the hand that feed them.
He is building up a bad line of credit here with various individuals and companies, yet flies around in a chopper and take expensive holidays. Here is a bus advertising both his rubbish house music album on the back, and the ISP he advertises for on the side.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o257/robertosbourne69/KimDotBlob_zps2a5ab5b8.jpg
This issue is far from over. Please note the following,..
- KDC is setting up an Internet Party in NZ, to contest the election in September. As a non-citizen he cannot run but can be the party president.
- He has already fallen foul of election laws by trying to launch the Internet Party earlier with an actual party, which would have breached gifting and campaign laws had it gone ahead.
- He has claimed this weekend he has one sitting MP ready to join his party.
- The co-leader of the NZ Green Party (currently in opposition) has said he would overrule any extradition order for KDC.
- Under NZ's MMP system, a party with one or two seats (out of the 120 available) can hold the balance of power in forming a coalition government. The papers here are speculating what conditions a coalition deal with the Internet Party would involve. Care to hazard a guess yourself?
So, can anyone think of another occurence of a german starting a political party with a specific agenda and ending holding the balance of power? How well did that work out?
The mainstream media in NZ has mostly feted KDC, as have quite a few politicians. Now they are embarrassed at being caught out, so they are largely silent on the negative coverage and its the blogosphere (ironically) that is putting this information out there. Visit the excellent Whaleoil Blog in NZ for proper news and analysis.
So, thumb me down and boo and hiss me like I'm a panto villian but watch this fat f**ker try to buy his way out of his extradition with political favour.
> can anyone think of another occurence of a german starting a political party with a specific agenda and ending holding the balance of power?
Erm, was his name Godwin...?!
> watch this fat f**ker try to buy his way out of his extradition with political favour.
You mean as opposed to US Big Media trying to buy his extradition with political influence over a foreign country's judicial system?
Although I do think it would be nice if he could also pay the people he owes money to before we put on the plane out of here.
I wonder what the flag for the Internet Party is going to be? That red and black one he has stashed away in his basement that Whale Oil mentioned?
"The top court decided [PDF] that Uncle Sam's prosecutors are not required to disclose the evidence they'll use to attempt to secure Dotcom's extradition from New Zealand to the US at a hearing in July."
It's not as if New Zealand was a real country anyway ..
Sadly, that's my impression now too... I used to wonder at Australia, that how is it possible that Aussie pols are SOO ready to serve any foreign interests over their own country's, even to openly abandon their own citizens (Assange), I mean it was downright disgusting, what a real scumbags Australia's political elit is made of...
...but now I have to admit, NZ is practically the worst developed place to live if one is counting on his/her own civil rights, protection from foreign powers etc - as you said, it hardly seems to be a real country at all.
If I were him I would have fucked off to Russia instead, like everyone else.
Quite a nice country, when it's not gobbling up the odd neighbour, with politicians that, for right or wrong, at least have some spine.
Pretty women and the absence of an extradition treaty with the US are a bonus. :)
Come one come all.. Watch Shon Key become the cuntry's most sexually active person.. While he and his cronies are bending over to take it from Uncle Sam (who touches all sorts of inappropriate things, never seen an uncle with so many wandering hands before!) they're screwing the rest of our once not-too-bad nation.
Can I register my shame at still being here in this land, or my sorrow and shame that we as a nation allow Shon key and his bunch of freaks (including those in that particular court (there is nothing "supreme" about it, more to be ashamed of!) to remain here? (Please customs/immigration guys, don't let him back in! Please, do the nation a favour and refuse entry to them!)
Guilty or not, likeable or not, I'm glad these processes and systems are getting a rigorous testing. I'm pleased that he has access to the funds to contest these things so that us peons will know how it works and what's valid and what isn't. Too often are these laws dropped like the proverbial ton of bricks onto some poor sap who has zero options to fight it. Governments have come to expect meek compliance from people and it's heartening to see him make them work for it.
Some in the media like to shape public opinion. The fact is that Dotcom's attorney gets all of the evidence once he has been charged. There is no conspiracy or denial of rights. He knew that blatant violation of copyright law was going to land him in prison. He's just trying to buy his way out.
Bearing in mind he won't be charged until he's in the USA, how does that help?
It was always convention (until recently) that the country seeking extradition had to show enough evidence etc. to convince the host country there was a reasonable case to answer. Exact wording changed from agreement to agreement, but the same basic principle. Now, extradition agreements often ask for no evidence. Just extradite because another country is asking.
Of course, European Warrants are just as bad. Greece says they want you, off you go. No real process, no real evidence, just a one way ticket. Once you're there....................
All these extradition agreements are going the same way as it helps the executive (of whatever country) and makes life easier. Justice? What's that?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
