nav search
Data Center Software Security Transformation DevOps Business Personal Tech Science Emergent Tech Bootnotes BOFH

back to article
Kiwi judge rules Kim Dotcom can be extradited to USA

That's because the District Court is not New Zealand's ultimate jurisdiction. The High Court has that distinction and Dotcom's lawyer, one Ron Mansfield, said in the presence of The New Zealand Herald that an appeal to that court will be lodged on this very day.

No, the Supreme Court has that distinction. District Court, High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court. Provided leave is given to appeal, Dotcom et al are currently three more hearings away from exhausting legal recourse.

12
0

I agree with

The many commenters who are disagreeing with the decision for extradition. OTOH, he made his pile of money in an unethical way.

... but, looking at the photos, what I really want to say is

HE SHOULD CHANGE HIS NAME TO

Jabba the Dotcom

or

Kim the Hutt

or

Dotcom the Hutt.

Strong the resemblance in this one is!

Not joking on this point, the similarity of countenance is clear. Almost a dead ringer.

5
15

Re: I agree with

KimtheHutt@jabba.com

For all of the downvoters, sorry, from the chest up at least, Kim is a lookalike for Jabba.

What the USA is doing sucks, NZ judiciary collaborating is rotten (although I doubt they will continue to do so as the case goes to higher courts).

That said, Kim/Jabba's fortune is plainly based on a very dirty business model.

1
6
Silver badge
Coat

Re: ckdizz

".....Dotcom et al are currently three more hearings away from exhausting legal recourse." Or maybe that's three more hearings away from a fast, fat-wobbling sprint for the nearest Ecuadorean consulate?

/Kim's coat is the XXXL one.

1
6
Black Helicopters

Asylum not needed

Kim has multiple nationalities and he has the German one. So he can waddle into the German embassy and stay there.

Germany does not extradite nationals and as born citizen they cannot revoke his citizenship. But they prosecute for crimes made outside if the US does make their case within the German justice system and it is a crime in Germany.

As last line Kim should consider this, as his charges would lead to at most 3-4 years unless the US has more on him than they showed and the evidence is admissable.

Mine is the coat with the summons for Schöffen duty for the district of his last known address in Germany (Jury on steroids/ Lay Judges for criminal cases). I want a front side seat.

1
0
Meh

Re: I agree with

Uh, jeeze. You are not familiar with modern business models, are you?

0
0
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Disgusting

It's a disgusting decision, but what we have come to expect in extradition cases.

27
5

A little bit of rational thought please

We're seeing a lot of polarised crap, including many of the posts here.

On the one side: the "I want all the free stuff I can get from the Intertubes" folks to whom Dotcom is a sort of hero no matter what he does.

On the other side: the "Dotcom is a rich fat bastard that has I dislike because he's made money when I haven't" folk to whom Dotcom is just a person to be kicked in the balls no matter how guilty/innocent he is.

If you really want to talk anything less than rubbish, then acquaint yourself with the case:

https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/united-states-of-america-v-dotcom-and-ors/at_download/fileDecision

1
1
Bronze badge

It's a perfectly cromulant decision. The hearing isn't to determine if he's guilty or not, but if there is a sufficiency of evidence for him to face trial.

Now we (as in NZ) get two or three more years of entertainment out of this as it gets appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. I look forward to more IANAL bleatings on how unfair it is.

10
18
Anonymous Coward

Hmmm

I find your cromulant less than cromulent.

21
0
Thumb Down

Southern? Cross?

I'm glad that you're finding entertainment in the fact that your country is joining the ever-growing list of those voluntarily accepting that US jurisdiction applies in your territory. You must be so proud!

Perhaps some of those new flag designs you Kiwis were showing off recently, to highlight your shared cultural heritage should have incorporated more 'starsy' and 'stripey' motifs?

37
8
Bronze badge

Re: Southern? Cross?

You are aware of just how long the legal principle of extradition had been around right? This is not some completely new interpretation made up in the basement of the FBI's Washington DC headquarters just to get DotCom and Assange™. Even once he's in the US there is still the small matter of actually proving beyond reasonable doubt before the courts and a jury.

People get extradited all the time to face all kinds of charges to places all over the world. An Australian got extradited back here the other month to face historic kiddie molesting charges. Australians don't go ranting about Kiwi's taking over Australia's legal jurisdiction over that and rightly so.

What will keep me entertained over the next years mostly won't be the continuing legal dramas, but the frothing of fanbois who think this is unique in history.

17
27
Silver badge

@GrumpyKiwi

It's not quite that simple. Now, the decision is not actually up to the courts, of course, it's up to the politicians, but the courts have the responsibility of determining that the case is sound.

That means that the court must agree that the evidence presented by the requesting party (the US) is sufficient to bring him to trial in the US. But the important part is that the US is making their case based on FRAUD and not copyright infringement and thus the Judge's decision that the 'facts speak for themselves' is not saying that there is plain evidence of copyright infringement but of fraud.

That's relevant because the extradition treaty doesn't cover copyright infringement. So the Judge is not just saying that there is sufficient evidence that Kim et al did X, Y & Z, but that X, Y and Z qualify as fraud.

21
0
Silver badge

Re: Hmmm

The real question here is - will he get a guest spot on The Simpsons?

(I can see him in the next halloween special.)

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Southern? Cross?

What will keep me entertained over the next years mostly won't be the continuing legal dramas, but the frothing of fanbois who think this is unique in history.

The entertainment lies for me in the fact that the guy has been doing something that everyone knowns full well to be a crime (and no, I'm not talking about fraud, but he's been an idiot for leaving that door open too) or at least morally dodgy, but insists on pointing at the US for being the baddy and protect Dotcom as a sort of proxy for themselves. Hypocrisy, thy name is Internet.

5
14

Re: Hmmm

> The real question here is - will he get a guest spot on The Simpsons?

That's still a thing?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Southern? Cross?

"The entertainment lies for me in the fact that the guy has been doing something that everyone knowns full well to be a crime (and no, I'm not talking about fraud, but he's been an idiot for leaving that door open too) or at least morally dodgy"

So you agree that it isn't fraud. So what is it? If it is "morally dodgy", that's not illegal, and so no extradition. If it's copyright infringement, it's a crime, but not an extraditable one (and it shouldn't be!) so no extradition. But then magic happens and extradition.

Where did the crime happen? The Internet isn't a place, and it certainly doesn't lie in the US. So why is the US able to get their grubby paws on the guy?

16
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Southern? Cross?

So you agree that it isn't fraud.

Err, no, I did not. Read again: I'm not talking about fraud, but he's been an idiot for leaving that door open too isolates the copyright aspect as the topic I want to address, but notes that KD has been stupid by leaving himself open to accusations of fraud. I have no idea if those charges are real or not, nor any inclination to speculate.

0
4
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Southern? Cross?

@ GrumpyKiwi

"once he's in the US there is still the small matter of actually proving beyond reasonable doubt before the courts and a jury."

Yes, I was brought up with that nice idea too about reasonable doubt before the courts and a jury. "Twelve brave men" and a mindset in that direction. But things have changed, the reality become different.

I don't give a shit about a fat prick who decided to call himself Dotcom. This is all about a legal system and a legal system that is not legal at all, and about extraditions. Somehow I don't think NZ will extradition inhabitants to Thailand if they make a joke about the King's parrot, nor do I expect the NZ legal system to extradition women who drive cars to Saudi Arabia. In short who the hell do those elected to represent the people in NZ believe they where elected to represent.

We have looted the world from the very beginning, some more successfully than others. but never in human history has any country been as successful in looting its own people as the USA. Never in human history has so many had so little reason to celebrate so few. I would not support even extradition of Americans to that legal system.

Still this is WhateverMas, and as long as we are able to laugh and be cynic, merry and awful lets not forget that the worst is still to come.

9
0

Based upon my fron space, what is must be taken into account is will he get a fair trial in the US, based upon what has happened to date, the chances of that happening are zero, also US law does not treat foreigners equally to US citizens in court or in detention, they are treated more like animals, rather than human beings.

The US has made a real mess of all this and publicly treated New Zealand like lambs ready to have their hind legs shoved in the front of US gumboots and ready to be ridden. The New Zealand governments behaviour has been quite nauseating, reality is, if they believe a prosecution should occur than the New Zealand government should do it.

Foreigners do not get justice in US courts, they get rail roaded, abused, threats of infinite sentences, tortured, basically prosecution as persecution. Most Western countries should seriously block extradition to the US for non-US citizens.

2
1
Silver badge

@ GrumpyKiwi

Holy mackerel, 17 downvotes!!

Why? Wrong? No, grumpy? not really, must just be anti-ratite bigotry.

1
0
Mushroom

Turd Reich

"...I'm not talking about fraud, but he's been an idiot for leaving that door open too) or at least morally dodgy, but insists on pointing at the US for being the baddy and protect Dotcom as a sort of proxy for themselves. Hypocrisy, thy name is Internet..."

The nature of the "crime" fatso allegedly committed isn't the point. The point is that the USA believes its laws apply to *anyone* *anywhere* in the world, even if the 'accused' isn't an American citizen, has never set foot in America and the alleged "crimes" were not committed on US soil.

The US also believes it's legally acceptable to use kidnapping [sorry "Extraordinary Rendition"], torture [sorry "Robust Interrogation"] and detention without trial in pursuit of this global jurisdiction.

And what is the rest of the world doing about this?

Are national governments howling about threats to their sovereignty? Are they refusing to extradite because of the USA's human rights record? Are resolutions of censure being debated at the UN? Are trade sanctions being imposed? Nope. Everyone's just bending over and saying "Fuck me harder, Big Boy!" —because it's the good ol' US of Grandma's Apple Pie and they've got lots of money and shiny things and they say "freedom" and "democracy" a lot and speak the same language as us. So they can't possibly be evil, can they?

That might not bother you, but it frightens the shit out of me!

3
1

Re: Southern? Cross?

We will know full well it is or was a crime when he is declared a criminal.

The last I heard is that he was willing to work with the people who own the FBI these days (or at least the only corporations I have ever heard of including the British in 1941) that were/are able to get the FBI to do something. (Unbelievably getting them to invade new Zealand.)

0
1
Silver badge
Devil

Is there a Ecuadorian embassy in NZ?

Asking for a friend...

26
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Is there a Ecuadorian embassy in NZ?

....and do they have a large-ish couch?

11
0
Silver badge

Huh, Wha'?

"Dawson feels a prima facie case exists against Dotcom ... The judge found that Mega coined it, big-time, with Dotcom pocketing over US$40m"

So, have I got this straight? the judge ruled it's OK to extradite him, not because there's any evidence he committed a crime (or that what he's accused of was even a crime in New Zealand), but because he ran a profitable business?

Mind boggled. So are they shipping out the rest of their successful business men to any foreign court that demands it as well?

23
4
Holmes

Re: Huh, Wha'?

No. the american movie and music people got to FBI to assist with defending copyright from various people whose servers where used to shift on copies of said stuff without authorization from owners, Kim being one of those. The FBI is asking the Kiwis to allow Kim to be removed to the US where the complaints were laid. if thats right or wrong i couldn't say

the complication is that Kim foolishly involved himself in NZ politics (such as they are) and as such the NZ govt will quietly and administratively gut him, could take a while but it will happen.

7
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Anonymous Coward

Re: Huh, Wha'?

HILLARY for PRISON !

OK, time for your meds, and then it's back to the nice, comfy padded room for you.

3
0
Silver badge

Re: Huh, Wha'?

"The FBI is asking the Kiwis to allow Kim to be removed to the US where the complaints were laid. if thats right or wrong i couldn't say"

Ooh, good. That means that, since Donald Trump's speeches are broadcast in the UK, we can put out an arrest warrant for hate speech, and ask the US for extradition? No?

21
1

Re: Huh, Wha'?

So Assange should be removed to Sweden, where the complainants got laid.

Clear enough.

2
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Huh, Wha'?

Ooh, good. That means that, since Donald Trump's speeches are broadcast in the UK, we can put out an arrest warrant for hate speech, and ask the US for extradition? No?

Maybe we could just extradite the hair?

1
0

Re: Huh, Wha'?

Ooh, good. That means that, since Donald Trump's speeches are broadcast in the UK, we can put out an arrest warrant for hate speech, and ask the US for extradition? No?

YES. DO IT NOW. TAKE HIM, PLEASE.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Huh, Wha'?

Ooh, good. That means that, since Donald Trump's speeches are broadcast in the UK, we can put out an arrest warrant for hate speech, and ask the US for extradition? No?

YES. DO IT NOW. TAKE HIM, PLEASE.

Ugh, no thanks. We already have Pierce Morgan and Tony Blair, we ought to really avoid collecting the full set of reprehensible beings (yes, I left the word "human" out, to avoid contamination).

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Huh, Wha'?

"Pierce Morgan"

Is that typo a Freudian slip?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Huh, Wha'?

"Pierce Morgan"

Is that typo a Freudian slip?

I think it's called "subconscious vocalisation" by psychologists :)

0
0
Silver badge
Big Brother

Just look at him: guilty, I say, guilty!

Does the prima facie argument remove the requirement to follow due process? From what I read in the past, the extradition documents seemed to be a bit sketchy. But maybe that's not so relevant in this case.

14
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Just look at him: guilty, I say, guilty!

Does the prima facie argument remove the requirement to follow due process? From what I read in the past, the extradition documents seemed to be a bit sketchy. But maybe that's not so relevant in this case.

Look, as soon as they start talking Latin you ought to pay attention. Or watch Life of Brian :)

3
0
Anonymous Coward

As was the case with Assange, he is made appear as a James Bond Villian ...

... so should we expect him to be held to the same level of prejudicial account?

3
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: As was the case with Assange, he is made appear as a James Bond Villian ...

A butt banging was always going to be the outcome for Dotcom, the US decided he had offended their Empire and only touching his toes will suffice and no amount of fake due process will avert that end.

Kim your are about to feel the Dark Side of The Force.

3
4

Prima facie does not mean 'the facts speak for themselves'. You're thinking of 'res ipsa loquitur'.

Prima facie means 'on the face of it' - the plaintiff has supplied sufficient evidence that there appears to be a case to answer. The respondent is not required to produce rebuttal evidence at this stage, so it does not mean the plaintiff will win, only that they have sufficient cause to proceed.

26
0

Thanks, Mike - I was getting to the point of thinking no-one else was going to post that correction, so I'd have to do it myself!

0
0

Actually, the reason there is prima facae evidence

is that Mr Technical Genius and his buddies boasted about how they were breaking the law in un-encrypted Skype calls and emails, which were then subpoenad and presented to the Judge.

Turns out hubris is not directly illegal, but the actions taken under the influence of it quite certainly are.

As Herr Schmitz is quite fond of saying to others: "Don't hate us because we beat you, thank us because we educated you".

(reference to the evidence below, just in case you want facts to get in the way of your ideological rants)

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/

6
1
Silver badge

Re: Actually, the reason there is prima facae evidence

Anyone feeling the urge to blurt on the rights or wrongs of this would do well to read that arstechnica article first....

2
0
Anonymous Coward

IANAL, nor yet a Latin expert

but my understanding is that "prima facia" means "at first sight" meaning that the case _appears_ to be worth trying in a court while not delving into the deep issues (after a mere x years).

When it's obvious the phrase might be "res ipsa loquitur" (?sp) meaning "the thing speaks for itself"

6
0
Anonymous Coward

Fair Trial

I don't know if Kim is guilty or not but I doubt he will get a fair trial.

So would a jury of Kim Dotcom's peers be arranged? Or will he get a jury of flag waving xenophobic Luddites no matter how long he goes through jury selection?

In a way I feel sorry for him. He has had this hanging over him for roughly a decade and that stress alone would make anyone mentally and physically ill.

Would I of used everything I had to fight a fixed system or just given up to get it over with?

I suppose you could apply the above, with differing values of guilt, to Lastrange and Snowdon.

6
2
Silver badge

Re: Fair Trial

"I suppose you could apply the above, with differing values of guilt, to Lastrange and Snowdon."

Both Assange and Snowden are different though: Assange was in the countries at the time his (one alleged, one certain) were committed, namely rape and jumping bail. Snowden was/is? a US citizen, and was in the US when he committed a crime. Although you might or might not agree with whether it should be a crime, it is, and he is guilty.

Dotcom wasn't in the US and has committed no crime there. This is like the Natwest Four, who were shipped over to the US by the supine UK government despite their 'crime' not existing in the UK, or the CEO of the betting company (Betonsports?) that was arrested while transiting on a trumped-up charge where the US loves its extra-territoriality so much the whole world is its jurisdiction.

The only way this sort of bullshit would be curtailed is the cancellation of extradition treaties with the US, and tell them no Safe Harbour replacement, etc.

6
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Fair Trial

Kim Dotcom: Either guilty of enabling piracy or a highly visible whipping boy for the entertainment sector's interests, and being made a public example as well as a warning to others.

Julian Assange: Either guilty of rape under strange circumstances or a trumped up charge to force him into US extradition, a short stop in a kangaroo court before being shipped to the latest version of Guantanamo Bay.

Edward Snowdon: Either guilty of espionage or a whistle-blower following the letter of law concerning the Nuremberg Principle IV.

In all of these cases the US seems to be acting in a draconian and empirical manner.

14
1
Silver badge

Re: Fair Trial

"Julian Assange: Either guilty of rape under strange circumstances or a trumped up charge to force him into US extradition, a short stop in a kangaroo court before being shipped to the latest version of Guantanamo Bay."

OK, you should keep the conspiracy theories to yourself. If Assange were sent to Sweden on the charges, then in order to be extradited to the US he would need to go through both the Swedish and UK judicial systems, and both would require consent for extradition. Without the rape charges, the US could put an extradition request in with the UK authorities. The rape charges make it harder for the US to get him. Now, they could be to discredit him, but that's a different claim.

Edit:

"Edward Snowdon: Either guilty of espionage or a whistle-blower following the letter of law concerning the Nuremberg Principle IV."

Ooh, that's a tough one to persuade me, and indeed anyone else, of. "Moral" is a difficult concept, and according to your strict reading, for example this would allow people who believe in Salafism to get away with murder, literally, because in their morality drunkenness should be punishable by death. Their moral code says that's the right choice. You probably want to explain how this is different to that, and you might well succeed, so I can come up with another one. This is why we use the word 'reasonable', and the question of whether what Snowden did is reasonable. It's a difficult question, but I think classifying not releasing all those files as a war crime would be a bold move.

2
6
Silver badge

Re: Fair Trial

> Julian Assange: Either guilty of rape under strange circumstances or a trumped up charge to force him into US extradition, a short stop in a kangaroo court before being shipped to the latest version of Guantanamo Bay.

You forgot jumping bail.

1
2

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing