Kiwi judge rules Kim Dotcom can be extradited to USA

1. 1. 1. 1. Thursday 24th December 2015 18:02 GMT gnasher729
        
        Re: Fair Trial
        
        "Now, if there are no plans to extradite Assange to the US then what harm would there be to sign a legally binding agreement to not do so during the duration of the rape trial?"
        
        Harm would be done if an extradition request appeared, supported by evidence that means the request should be granted. It would be illegal and idiotic to sign a legally binding agreement that in such a case the UK laws wouldn't be followed.
        
        And why would anyone do that anyway? Because Assange wants it? If Assange wants a pony, do we buy him a pony?
        
        1 1 Reply
        
        Monday 28th December 2015 19:19 GMT Matt Bryant
        
        Re: Dewix Re: Fair Trial
        
        "....if there are no plans to extradite Assange to the US then what harm would there be to sign a legally binding agreement to not do so during the duration of the rape trial?...." Because to do so would be a subversion of Swedish law, as Asshat and his lawyers well know. This is another one of the zombie myths that Assange fanbois endlessly repeat no matter how many times they are debunked:
        
        http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/Media/The-Assange-Matter/Can-Assange-be-extradited-from-Sweden-to-the-USA/
        
        http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/08/18/would-sweden-ever-extradite-assange-to-the-united-states/
        
        http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition
        
        Please read the above links and stop pushing zombie myths, they only make you look ill-informed and stupid (or, IMHO, like an Assange supporter).
        
        0 1 Reply
    2. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 14:51 GMT Androgynous Cupboard
      
      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 Reply
    3. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 21:02 GMT a_yank_lurker
      
      Re: Fair Trial
      
      @Dewix - I doubt any of them would get a fair trial is the US. The various powers want them to made an example of as a warning not to expose the criminal antics of the Feral Government and its cronies. Their common mistake was to think the Ferals and cronies are fundamentally ethical.
      
      7 0 Reply
    4. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 21:16 GMT Steve Knox
      
      Re: Fair Trial
      
      In all of these cases the US seems to be acting in a draconian and empirical manner.
      
      So their actions are entirely based on observable facts? No worries,then!
      
      Perhaps you meant imperial or imperious?
      
      3 0 Reply
      1. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 23:19 GMT Anonymous Coward
        
        Re: Fair Trial
        
        Re: Steve Knox
        
        Doh.
        
        Wordy meanings at a loss there.
        
        Thanks for the correction.
        
        2 0 Reply
  2. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 23:49 GMT gnasher729
    
    Re: Fair Trial
    
    "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."
    
    You don't have to be in a country to commit a crime there. A crime is "committed" in the place where it has effect. You could send a letter bomb from New Zealand to the USA which explodes somewhere in New York - the effect of the crime would happen in the USA, so that's where the crime is committed. Assuming that Americans in the USA downloaded illegally from his site, that would count as "happened in the USA".
    
    About the "Natwest four" - I don't know the details, but the requirements for extradition should be: 1. It would be prosecuted in the extraditing country if the roles were exchanged (if Dotcom was in the USA, and Kiwis downloaded from his site, would a court in New Zealand want to prosecute? ). 2. There is enough evidence that he should go to court (is there enough evidence that New Zealand would prosecute if it was the other way round?), not necessarily enough evidence to convict. 3. Will there be a fair trial? If these guys didn't do anything that would have been a crime if it had happened in the UK, then an extradition was wrong.
    
    2 0 Reply
    1. Thursday 24th December 2015 20:39 GMT I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects
      
      Re: Far Trail
      
      > Assuming that Americans in the USA downloaded illegally from his site, that would count as "happened in the USA".
      
      I have heard of that law, that if you were unwise enough to lend a friend a car and he used it to commit theft you could go to gaol for a long time.
      
      But I thought that only applied to black men: The clue is in the word Black. Good men would never have been coloured like that obviously.
      
      Therefore anyone who up/downloaded legally/illegally from his site, would be Americans in America wouldn't they and black men too by definition?
      
      Send the Sheriff of Youtube around to shoot them & save the tax payers or Hollywood or whoever they like the bother
      
      0 1 Reply
Wednesday 23rd December 2015 12:33 GMT Anomalous Cowturd

Domum!

Um.

0 0 Reply
Wednesday 23rd December 2015 13:25 GMT Anonymous Coward

"Don't tell him your name Pike!.....er...Kim!"

Over here in Blighty a handful of cases were dropped when the defendants refused to give their names in court!

Give it a go son, you never know your luck:)

1 0 Reply
1. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 13:31 GMT Valerion
  
  Re: "Don't tell him your name Pike!.....er...Kim!"
  
  And then presumably the defendants were slapped with Contempt of Court, and possibly Perjury charges?
  
  3 1 Reply
Wednesday 23rd December 2015 17:55 GMT Cynic_999

Why the U.S.?

Copyright violation is usually a civil matter, but becomes criminal (in most places) when the violation was used for profit. e.g. selling pirated DVD's, or fake Rolex watches. In this case Megaupload charged people for watching pirated movies, and the owners profited very handsomely from that model - millions per year, so it is easy to see why it might be considered a criminal rather than a civil violation.

It is not however clear to me why the criminal act should be judged to have taken place in the U.S. rather than the country he resided in while carrying out the alleged criminal activity.

2 0 Reply
1. Wednesday 23rd December 2015 21:10 GMT Matt Bryant
  
  Re: Cynic_999 Re: Why the U.S.?
  
  ".....It is not however clear to me why the criminal act should be judged to have taken place in the U.S. rather than the country he resided in while carrying out the alleged criminal activity." I would expect it is because the illegal activity was the viewing of copywrit material by people in the US, which MU enabled as a service for money. I also expect a charge of racketeering to be throw at Kim Dot Dumb because his emails and messaging seem to show concerted effort to organise the criminal acts (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Racketeering).
  
  0 1 Reply
Wednesday 23rd December 2015 19:03 GMT Anonymous Coward

As ye sow...

Fat Boy will get his due sooner or later. You can only screw over so many people before someone gets even.

1 7 Reply
Wednesday 23rd December 2015 21:55 GMT Chris King

"Newton reported that the hearing was delayed for a few minutes because a stapler malfunction"

Was somebody tacked to a desk, screaming "HELP ! HELP ! STAPLER MISFIRE !" ?

(Can't find the appropriate Dilbert for that one)

1 0 Reply
Wednesday 23rd December 2015 22:35 GMT Anonymous Coward

What fair trial?

What trial, he will be given the option of go to trial with a guilty verdict earning you multiple life sentences and full federal deepest darkest dungeon or just admit to guilt and get a handful of years in a more reasonable establishment.

Plea bargaining makes a mockery of the US trial system.

They just want to make a point not really have a trial.

0 1 Reply