Dotcom and modernising extradition laws

Stuff recently reported that Kim Dotcom extradition appeal to be heard in August

Following the judgment in December they immediately launched an appeal and Justice Raynor Asher called a case review conference on Tuesday where he set a date for the appeal for August 29.

That would give him time to consider his decision and have a judgment ready before the end of the year, he said.

This was despite the United States asking for an earlier date, saying the appeal was of a matter of urgency.

No sign of urgency here, it is four years since Dotcom’s arrest.

Judge Nevin Dawson ruled the Mega moguls be eligible for extradition shortly before Christmas, following a lengthy nine week hearing at the North Shore District Court at Auckland.

He ruled the US had a “large body of evidence” which supported a prima facie case, and that Dotcom and his co-accused “fall well short of undermining the case.”

Dotcom and his Mega co-founders were back in the High Court at Auckland on Tuesday launching an appeal against an earlier District Court decision that he and his co-accused Mathias Ortmann, Fin Batato and Bram van der Kolk, were eligible for extradition to the United States on copyright charges.

David Fisher wrote Kim Dotcom might enjoy another summer

The charges relate to Dotcom’s Megaupload website, which was shut down in a global raid in 2012.

Yes, that’s four years ago.

The delays to this point have, to a great extent, been understandable. The Crown failed to cover itself in glory from the outset, and genuine questions needed judicial answers over discovery, illegal spying and search warrants.

The Crown today pushed for an earlier hearing but was defeated. The issues, said Dotcom’s team, were very complex and needed time to air. The High Court penciled in a date when the first signs of spring are starting to show.

Everyone can again display their expertise at length after the High Court scheduled the appeal for eight weeks from the end of August. That means it is scheduled to wander through to mid-October. Expect further appeals after that.

Guilty or not, liable for extradition or not, whatever — Dotcom looks likely to welcome in the 2017 New Year in New Zealand.

The Law Commission refers to the lengthy Dotcom extradition process in making recommendations for changes. The Herald reports Law change needed to tackle cross-border crime.

The growing problem of cross-border crime means the law should be changed to ensure New Zealand does its part, a review by the commission has concluded.

The report, released today, contains three key recommendations:

  • Requests from the vast majority of countries should be processed in the same way. Currently, the formal extradition steps vary considerably depending on which country is making the request, and treaties in place that are mostly over 100 years old.
  • Tailor-made rules should guide extradition proceedings. There should be a single appeal route, rather than the current regime that enables multiple and separate appeals and judicial reviews.
  • A new central authority should be created to manage all extradition requests. It would consider whether to commence an extradition proceeding, a call that would involve assessing the likelihood of success.

The Law Commission said making the extradition process more straightforward could be done at the same time as protecting the rights of the person sought.

The Law Commission has recommended that the court be given sole responsibility for deciding on nearly all of the grounds for refusal, with only a few grounds reserved for sole consideration by the Minister of Justice.

These recommendations won’t affect the Megaslow Dotcom case but if they are adopted they may speed cases up in the future.

It would help if the police didn’t cock things up in investigating and arresting people as well.

The Law Commission report: Modernising New Zealand’s Extradition and Mutual Assistance Laws

41 Comments

  1. Nelly Smickers

     /  February 11, 2016

    “Roger that – we have detained a number of females and three children…….”

    No matter what you think, surely the cop in the ‘Takapuna patrol car’ could have just knocked on the front door ?

    • Blazer

       /  February 11, 2016

      the Police resources are stretched …90% of burglaries go unsolved…!!!

      • kittycatkin

         /  February 11, 2016

        I wouldn’t expect to have a team of detectives working on the theft of a few $2 solar lights or a plant pot, even though these are technically burglaries. If burglars leave no fingerprints or any other trace behind them, there is a limit to what the police can do. They aren’t psychics. How would you solve a crime where there were no clues of any kind ?

    • Oliver

       /  February 11, 2016

      It’s just police going over the top to manufacture “cool work stories”. It’s the same with car pursuits, they don’t mind killing innocent bystanders just along as they get “cool work stories bro”. The police are pathetic.

      • Kevin

         /  February 11, 2016

        Is that you Martyn?

      • Oliver

         /  February 11, 2016

        Another police pursuit that has ended in tragedy.

        http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11588047

        But at least the police have another “cool work story”.

        • kittycatkin

           /  February 11, 2016

          How do you know that this was used as a ‘better work story’ ? Have you heard the police involved saying so ?

          • Oliver

             /  February 11, 2016

            It’s there slogan they use to recruit police.

            • kittycatkin

               /  February 11, 2016

              I have heard the saying ‘better work stories’, but that does not mean that this is one of them. On none of those ads do they show people being killed in police chases as something that would make a good work story-or on none that I have seen, anyway. Fatal car chases are not used as a recruitment aid.

    • Nelly Smickers

       /  February 11, 2016

      It only took one Detective to arrest William Dwane Bell for God’s sake!

      • Klik Bate

         /  February 11, 2016

        Yeah, but that was in the good ol’ days – before all the real cops had perfed.

  2. Oliver

     /  February 11, 2016

    You should be extradited to the country that you committed the crime. He didn’t commit the crime in the USA so he shouldn’t have to stand on trial in the USA. The arrogance on the US Gestapo who think they can take anyone they want is outrageous. Can’t wait for the US empire to collapse.

    • This gets very complicated with borderless business.

      But Dotcom’s Megaupload servers were in the US, so that’s where the alleged breaches were occurring.

    • Kevin

       /  February 11, 2016

      Um, his computer servers were located in Virginia, which is in, um, the … United .. States .. of … America.

    • Oliver

       /  February 11, 2016

      It doesn’t matter where the servers are located. That isn’t grounds for extradition.

      • Kevin

         /  February 11, 2016

        A little thing called “the law” disagrees with you.

        • Oliver

           /  February 11, 2016

          What law is that Kevin. Do you even know? Or are you guessing.

          • Pantsdownbrown

             /  February 11, 2016

            Best you slip away on this one Oliver – facts got in way of your ‘cool story’ once again……..

          • Kevin

             /  February 11, 2016

            Criminal copyright as one example. Better yet, ask the judge who decided Kim Dotcom’s extradition hearing.

            • Judges make all kinds of decisions which are overturned. Could be just another in the making.

            • Kevin

               /  February 11, 2016

              Unlikely in this case. If you read between the lines the judge so much as said “think very carefully before overturning my decision”.

            • Rob

               /  February 11, 2016

              Reading between the lines doesn’t mean anything in a court of law. And I’m assuming you’re the one reading between the lines.

            • Kevin

               /  February 11, 2016

              We’ll see how Kim Dotcom’s appeal goes. I’m quite looking forward to sticking it up Prentice when KDC loses.

            • Rob

               /  February 11, 2016

              So you want to see someone elses life fucked up because of your petty little squabble. Sad.

  3. Blazer

     /  February 11, 2016

    citizen debt slave —-‘Hello I’d like to report a burglary….
    Police….the stations closed on the weekend,come in on Monday and fill out a complaint form…
    U.S. Corp—–We want that Dotcom,he’s making money that belongs in our pockets.
    Police—-yes sir,we’ll mobilise a swat team,helicopter and get on to it immediately!

    • Oliver

       /  February 11, 2016

      lol it’s funny because it’s true.

    • That’s about right. Most in here don’t give a rats arse about the law around this either. Wonder how many have never downloaded anything illegally, Pretty few I’d suspect. Just jealous of the fat German. Where are all the ‘we need more entrepreneurs’ on this. I hope he gets to stay if only for the pleasure of hearing the whines and moans from all the holier than thou crowd.

      • Kevin

         /  February 11, 2016

        Um, I don’t think anybody here has made millions of dollars distributing copyrighted files that we have no right to distribute.

        • mrMan

           /  February 11, 2016

          There was the bust of YIFY at the end of last year, admittedly they were distributing movies torrents – and not profiting. They were the biggest uploaders of movie torrents and, it turns out, masterminded from a flat in central Auckland

          • Kevin

             /  February 11, 2016

            My guess is that most online pirates don’t make any money. The piratebay certainly doesn’t. What Kim Dotcom did was monetise online piracy by both charging for streaming video and for downloads. And if you’re going to do that, and take that kind of risk, then don’t go crying when the Feds knock on the door and you end up looking at a 20 year + jail term.

            • kittycatkin

               /  February 11, 2016

              Jealous of Dotcom ? I doubt it. Look at him ! He’s an arrogant pig and a control freak-in his own words, he was angry at the discovery that a new car had safety features like something to do with steering because he wants to be in total control of any car he drives. He thinks it’s a big laugh to terrify horses by driving at speed in a loud car with stereo at full volume. He thinks it’s funny to hack the computers of the horses’ owners and leave smart-arse messages on them. He’s grossly obese and is shortening his life thereby-if he doesn’t die young of a stroke or heart attack it will be more by good luck than good management. I’d rather be me than him any day-he can keep his dishonestly earned money.

            • kittycatkin

               /  February 11, 2016

              I can’t believe that anyone is jealous of Herr Dotcom or imagines that other people are. It would be nice to have millions, I suppose but not to be looking over one’s shoulder all the time because the millins were obtained by fraud. Or be so fat that one was likely to die early because of it and need a crane to lift the coffin. ‘There are no pockets in a shroud’. I’d rather be poor than rich under those circumstances.

      • Mike C

         /  February 11, 2016

        @Rkb

        I am pretty sure that I have never down loaded anything illegally 🙂

        At the rate this deportation process is going … DotCom is going to die of old age here in New Zealand … which is no doubt his plan.

        • kittycatkin

           /  February 11, 2016

          That’s assuming that he won’t die of a stroke or heart attack brought on his obesity.

    • Kevin

       /  February 11, 2016

      Gee, someone stealing a few hundred dollars and someone stealing millions.

      I wonder who I would go after?

  4. Theft is theft.

    • That was in reply to you Kevin. So it’s ok to steal a couple hundred dollars but not millions. It’s only money.

      • Kevin

         /  February 11, 2016

        Ideally the cops should go after both. But where priorities have to be made then obviously you go after they guy stealing millions of dollars.

        • kittycatkin

           /  February 11, 2016

          What if the few hundred are all that someone has, or have been raised by a charity and are really needed ?

          • kittycatkin

             /  February 11, 2016

            What if the theft of the few hundred was robbery with violence ?