Slashdot Mirror


Kim Dotcom Faces Jail At Bail Hearing

An anonymous reader writes A bail hearing will resume on Monday at which New Zealand authorities will claim one-time internet tycoon Kim Dotcom is a flight risk and should be sent to jail to await his extradition hearing. The Crown quizzed Dotcom on his finances, contacts and even his online gaming habits this week. Authorities argued he had breached bail conditions by trying to sell a Rolls Royce and having contact with former Megaupload colleagues. Dotcom is wanted in the US on criminal copyright violation and racketeering charges.

38 of 166 comments (clear)

  1. authorities? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the same authorities who are on hook for damages if doesn't get sent to USA? and probably on misconduct shit even if he does get sent.

    where would he take a flight to anyways? bahamas?

    and wtf - why should he be isolated from former megaupload workers, seems like a proper defense wouldn't be possible without coordinating with them somewhat.

    1. Re:authorities? by bytesex · · Score: 2

      It's much worse. If the NZ authorities fail to turn over Kim DC, the filming of the next Tolkien epic won't be allowed there.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  2. Not a fan but come on by Mistakill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a kiwi, I'm not a fan but this is ridiculous... hes been charged with no New Zealand crime... the search warrant was ruled by a New Zealand judge to be illegal and excessive. He's not exactly an average looking person... he would stand out

    1. Re:Not a fan but come on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You've never been to Alabama, apparently.

  3. Bail terms - no more money making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He can't sell a car? He can't talk to people to help him get money? His bail terms must be to sit and do nothing until they get him in jail permanently. He's screwed, and it shows the law means nothing if they have a grudge against you.

    1. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by bloodhawk · · Score: 4, Informative

      The car was part of the assets under seizure, so no he can't sell it. compared to what most people go through in such a criminal trial where the assets may be considered illicit gains he has actually been treated unbelievably well. He was able to keep his money to spend on his legal bills as well as a political campaign, gambling and even a ridiculous music venture and a monthly rent bill that was $80,000. seriously that is nearly a million a year he was spending on rent.

    2. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The car was part of the assets under seizure,

      Seizure again without due process on the theory that he is a "fugitive from justice in the United States". Being a fugitive is somewhat of a stretch considering that he is a German citizen and has never been in the United States to start with. So they are are seizing and freezing all his assets because he is a "fugitive" from the U.S., and the U.S. justice system is wired in a way that you only get to see justice (or the closest approximation to it you will see there) if you can fork over lots of cash for your defense.

      Don't take me wrong: I consider Kim DotCom a douchebag, but compared to the douchebagginess of the U.S. prosecution and its New Zealand lapdogs as shown here he is a cute little puppy.

    3. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree, it's amazingly hard to pick sides in this battle. Is there any way that we could make both of them lose?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A former Brazilian Politician (of the 50s IIRC), once said:

      "For friends, everything; for enemies, the Law."

      The Law is a good instrument to promote all kinds of injustice. Can't really say anything else, because the present case proves there's no Freedom of Expression. Not in the US and neither overseas. I hope I can still say that...

    5. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No matter how much of a douche he is, being a douche isn't a criminal offence or worthy of being locked up and deprived of your assets because America says so.

      Defending freedom often means defending scoundrels, but it's a price worth paying.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by silas_moeckel · · Score: 2

      Yup a "fugitive" as in fighting extradition. Those pesky assets might let him mount a functional defense.

      I'm sorry but seizing somebody assets so he can no longer mount a defense is entirely contrary to fair or just.

      Because another country will not extradite does not make him a fugitive. Nations have these sovereign rights for a reason so that we do not have some world law, so that they may pick what is right and wrong and to what extent internally.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    7. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

      Citizenship is irrelevant to the question of whether he broke US laws. Like every other country, US laws apply to actions and jurisdiction, not to citizenship. The important question is whether he acted in a way that broke US criminal copyright laws. The FBI has convinced the NZ government that they have a substantial case so they executed arrest and search warrants against him and he has strangely been able to drag out extradition procedures against him for more than two years.

    8. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by TropicalCoder · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The story at Ars has a video of an candid interview Kim Dotcom did with the press a couple of days ago... http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...

      I listened to the whole thing, and found it very interesting. Kim Dotcom gave fairly straight forward responses, and came off for me as an intelligent, not so bad guy. For sure it would be easy for us to envy his wealth, but IMHO he came about it by exploiting loopholes in the law, not by breaking the law.

      Instead of pursuing Kim Dotcom to the ends of the earth (Sorry, NZers), why doesn't the US DOJ expend their effort prosecuting the crooks on Wall Street whole defrauded the whole world of a trillion dollars selling those bogus Credit Default Swaps that led up to the crash of 2008? Not one has been prosecuted, nor will they ever be.

    9. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by Filter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have almost certainly broken sharia law of many nations, how would you feel about defending your self there. Should you be extradited? Should your assets be frozen so that you have no chance of financing a reasonable defence?

      --

      "better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07

    10. Re:Bail terms - no more money making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      I was discussing the way laws actually work. What are YOU talking about?

      Why are you being so hostile? Fitter's point stands. Merely existing as a non-Muslim in accordance with the harshest varieties of Sharia law, which takes the stance that all of God's creation is their jurisdiction, you could be charged with crimes punishable by beheading (among worse things) merely on the suspicion of guilt.

      Would you find your assets being seized and extradited to defend yourself against such criminal accusations an acceptable outcome? You broke their law in their jurisdiction, therefore that is precisely what should be done based on your "logic" alone.

  4. Keep in mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The evidence for extradition is tainted because it was obtained by illegal surveillance by the NZ spy agency against a New Zealand resident, they also promptly handed the evidence over the US without court approval, so its all very dodgy legally at this point. Even before we consider if conspiracy to commit a copyright infringement is an actual legal thing, let alone an extraditable legal thing.

    So they're trying for a shit throwing exercise to see if they can throw enough shit and see if any of it can stick.

    1. Re:Keep in mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't worry. We're about to fix the law to get rid of pesky "illegal surveillance" problems with the new bill currently before parliament. 48 hours of surveillance without a warrant. I wonder how many times the 48 hour period will begin just in the nick of time to catch something that would have previously been illegal surveilance? There will no longer be a disincentive to carry out illegal surveillance because everything will be admissible within the right 48 hour window.

  5. Welcome to the arbitrary power of the court. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You (insert your name here) are hereby accused of (unstated) crime. It doesn't matter what, but it was serious enough to threaten (insert multinational corporation here) profits.

    Your plea is irrelevant. Your evidence is irrelevant. Your refutation of our evidence is irrelevant. Precedent is irrelevant.

    Go directly to jail. Forfeit all assets. And get your mind right.

    1. Re:Welcome to the arbitrary power of the court. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ... this is someone that belongs in a jail cell ...

      How nice to have a verdict without a trial. 'Presumption of innocence' is a legal fiction created to counteract the thuggery of the police. Once someone says that fiction doesn't count, the accused cannot win. Because the police no longer have to prove they're correct.

      ... being clever to get around the law ...

      So the cops are allowed to be criminals too? Approving police thuggery never helps.

      ... who is actually guilty as hell ...

      Then the police can find evidence the old-fashioned way.

    2. Re:Welcome to the arbitrary power of the court. by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First they came for the scumbags ... but I'd already done a Godwin so I didn't care.
      Nobody should be above or below the law, even scumbags. He doesn't belong in a jail cell until they charge him with something that could put you or me in a jail cell.

  6. No Cash Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I do not htink it is a coincidence that he is low on cash and now seems to be at risk of going to jail.

    No money=Guilty.

    Lots of money=Not Guilty, or at least it was till this point at question whether he was or not.

    1. Re:No Cash Left by mr_exit · · Score: 2

      The guy has got buckets of money. He just managed to spend $4.5M on a splashy political campaign in NZ. In a country of 4 million people that's a very expensive campaign.

      He's been spending mountains of money on lawyers to delay and delay his extradition hearings. Anyone without his resources would have been deported by now, not living in a mansion on bail.

      --

      -------
      Drink Coffee - Do Stupid Things Faster And With More Energy!
    2. Re: No Cash Left by Trepidity · · Score: 2

      Did he really spend his last millions on the political campaign, and not save any for legal costs? That seems unlikely / not very smart.

  7. Deportation next? by seoras · · Score: 2

    I thought that the recent revelation that his original NZ residency application failed to disclose a dangerous driving conviction left it open for him to be deported?
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11350895

    So the whole "illegal" raid, dodgy handling of his arrest and application for his extradition could be a moot point now.
    He's seriously pissed off the NZ power's that be after the Internet-Mana, mud slinging, campaign in the recent election.
    That and putting John Key's mate, and ex-Mayor of Auckland, Banks in jail for failing to disclose Dotcom's donations fully.

    A man with few friends, no money and a lot of powerful enemy's.

  8. Re:Who? by future+assassin · · Score: 2
    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  9. Re:why why WHY? by quax · · Score: 2

    Dang it, I moderated this as 'Funny' but it still shows as "Informative" which it really isn't.

    Now I have to write this comment just to role back the moderation.

  10. Passport should be enough by dbIII · · Score: 2

    Passport should be enough - not many ways out of New Zealand.

  11. Re:He's not in jail, despite admitting guilt by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And if he was giving away all his ill gotten gains then I would support him instead of condemning him for the scumbag he is. At the moment he is little more than a Robber Baron, robbing from the rich to make himself richer.

  12. Re:He's not in jail, despite admitting guilt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    And what of the ruling National Party, then?

    The same party who, when sued for using an Eminem song without permission settled with the publishers rather than having their own houses raided, being held at gunpoint and having all their assets seized?

    Seems rather hypocritical, to me. But then, they are the big money, changing the nation's laws to suit American interests.

  13. Re:Moral of the story is... by penix1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Where you gettin all that free money, Tex? Obamacare fraud?

    No... He works for Bank of America...

    which brings this back on topic...

    Here you have someone whose offense had zero effect on the economy yet those who brought the world to its knees got billions and never even saw the insde of a court room much less a jail.

    --
    This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  14. Re:He's not in jail, despite admitting guilt by raymorris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, the confiscated emails where he explicitly says they need to get more Hollywood movofies in order to make more money. That THE textbook example of criminal copyright infringement. Whether the seizure was the legal the courts will decide. We've seen the the emails, so we know that he intentionally committed another crime. Apparently you feel that you've benefited from this type of crime, so just be honest and say that. To pretend he didn't do the things he brags about doing is silly.

    > More than two and a half years have passed since they shut this whole Megaupload down and did this big Hollywoodesque showoff at his mansion. Where is the due process in this?

    I'm not quite following your complaint here. You are bothered that his team of lawyers has been given every opportunity to delay the hearing, over and over? You feel that due process requires that his motions for continuance and various prehearing motions be denied?

  15. Re:He's not in jail, despite admitting guilt by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 4, Informative

    Whether the seizure was the legal the courts will decide.

    NZ courts have already decided that the seizure was illegal.

    Oh wait, you mean the US of A courts, the ones who claim to have legal authority over a German living in New Zealand whose company was registered in Hong Kong?

  16. A flight risk? by stevez67 · · Score: 2

    I didn't know Kim Dotcom could fly. Float, maybe.

  17. And so misinformed by popo · · Score: 2

    Well in New Zealand and everywhere else. copyright infringement is a civil offense,

    Will somebody please tell the ignoramuses at ZDnet that there's no such thing as a "criminal copyright violation"?

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  18. Re:Now we will find out by gweihir · · Score: 2

    It has. Depend on it. There will be enough immoral scum in the NZ government that they can buy and coerce quite a few people. Politicians are routinely the worst the human race has to offer, with very few exception that may qualify as people of average decency. The real question is whether they will use it for this purpose.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  19. Re:Moral of the story is... by penix1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have always said fining a corporation does no good since it simply becomes a "cost of doing business" usually with their customers footing the fine.

    Want to really punish a corporation? Revoke or suspend their corporate charter. Remove the protections they, and more importantly, their shareholder's enjoy. Let them feel the pain when a company does something illegal. They want to be thought of as a person, then let's treat them as a person and remove the entitlements they receive by being corporations.

    --
    This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  20. Re:He's not in jail, despite admitting guilt by Tom · · Score: 2

    [...] over a German living in New Zealand whose company was registered in Hong Kong?

    Who is not living in both Germany and Hong Kong anymore because of previous conflicts with the law, including being convicted of crimes?

    Why is it so difficult for most /. readers to understand that there can be two assholes in a fight, and rooting for one of them just because you personally dislike the other isn't the answer?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  21. Re:He's not in jail, despite admitting guilt by Tom · · Score: 2

    It's not so difficult to understand that both of the players in this game are fuckers. You don't need to pick one or the other. "much bigger deal" doesn't make much sense unless you are distributing limited resources. When you're the police dispatcher and you have exactly one car available and one person phones in a murder and the other his neighbours being loud, the question makes sense to decide where to send it (first). But "not being ok with something" is not a limited resource. You don't have to focus on the legal system issues and drop the Kim is a fucker part.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org