Kim Dotcom loses ruling in New Zealand's top court
 

Hope he enjoys his bag of dicks in prison.

That fat boy needs to hit the gym.

who would have guessed that profiting off of massive theft to the tune of 100 million or so would land you in hot water?

:2 cents:

I have a feeling Kim is going to find out that if the US Government wants a piece of your ass eventually they get what they want.

Wait, is Kim American? If not - how come he can be extradited there?

He does appear to be a douchebag who has repeatedly flaunted the law, but from reports it sounds like the US and NZ governments have, too.

He is not an American, but he is accused of committing crimes against American companies. That is why they want to extradite him to the US to stand trial.

He did nothing wrong, so surely he shouldn't be worried about having his day in American court :)

Imagine being accused of a crime and courts deny showing evidence against you. They just rule. How can you defend yourself?

That's not really what is happening here.

The law says (at least my understanding of it) for an extradition they only have to prove that they have enough evidence to put forth a reasonable case against him. He wants them to hand over every last shred of evidence they have as if it were the actual trial so he can challenge every shred of it.

This would mean his lawyer would likely file countless briefs challenging every last line of every last document and drag this proceeding out forever.

If he loses these rulings, which he has for the moment, he still has the actual extradition hearing in July. If he loses then then he will end up in the US for the actual trial and there will be plenty of opportunities for him to refute all the evidence they have against him.

I understand, but keeping evidence from a defendant means there is no way for him to know all charges. Looks very fishy to me. They might get him extradited for this, but then bring other charges against him once he is on US soil. It's similar to the problems Wikileaks people and international bankers are facing.

I suppose they could add charges once they have him on US soil, but I don't know if that would have changed things as far as the extradition went. At this point they only have to show that they have enough evidence to make a case against him.

I suppose if the added charges violated his basic human rights, or they went against the extradition laws of the country he was extradited in it could be a problem, but I think the likelyhood of that happening are pretty small.

Personally, I think if the US wins and he is extradited he will likely end up cutting a deal. I think the government will get one of his guys to agree to testify against him and that will force Dotcom to realize he is screwed so he will try to cut the best deal he can.

When he is arraigned he will be told the charges against him and he can plead guilty or not guilty. If he pleads not guilty he has every right to see the evidence against him; that right is guaranteed him. He hasn't gotten to the part where he gets to see state's evidence yet.

He isn't a defendant yet.

Correct. He is innocent so he has nothing to worry about. He is a Good Samaritan and I am sure he is looking forward to having his day in court!

He was ranked #1 in Call of Duty, he'll be fine

If this were in fact true and he will be found innocent of all charges against him then why is he spending so much time and money fighting to keep from having his day in court?

Why is he avoiding appearing in court to hear the charges and defend himself?

If you are to believe those that spew propaganda about justice Kim is wealthy and should have no issues buying his desired form of justice.

I think he was being sarcastic.

Just asking the hypothetical questions everyone else should be asking themselves.:1orglaugh

There is a hint of sarcasm in all 3 of the sentences I posted also.:thumbsup

I know, right?

Hey guys, wait a minute please!

For example there is a death penalty for pornography in Iran, Saudi Arabia and some other countries. So what if they will request YOUR extradition for the crimes (porn production/exposure) that was seen (maybe even copied!) by some of their citizens? Will you be extradited or not? If not, how is it different to the Kim's case? Just cautious...

He's german right? Why doesn't he move back to Germany. Germany never extradite their citizens...

I suppose they could charge someone, but they would have to provide evidence of the crime and then they would have to convince a judge that the extradition was valid.

There is a big difference between that and what Kim has done. A guy running a website just puts the site up. The site is, in theory, legal where it is operated. If a citizen of Iran sought out the site and looked at the porn, in theory they sought out something that is illegal where they live. They weren't forced to look at it and the site isn't being run in Iran.

Kim, according to the allegations,actively and knowingly committed criminal activity. What he was doing is illegal where he was located (and the site originated) and where he is not being charged. He likely was also actively seeking out US users and likely paying US affiliates.

Most Werstern countries do not extradite citizens if these suspects faces death penalty in that country... But... i highly respect countries that never extradite thier citizens anyway.

So what if they provide it in full?

Ok. What if it wasn't a death penalty but just a prison time. For example, in China? Will you be extradited there? If now, what's the difference to Dotcom's situation?

BTW, my own country does not extradite its citizens at all.

He has been arrested multiple times in Germany and once fled that country and faked his own death to avoid prosecution there.

I have a feeling they might not trip over themselves to defend him.

I guess it would depend on what form that evidence took. I think they would have to show that the person knowingly and willingly promoted that site to the Iranian people.

Also, being a death penalty case I think it would be difficult for them to provide enough evidence to convince a US court to send someone their to stand trial for porn with death as the sentence.

If the site is based in the US where is protected by the US Constitution they are going to have to put on one hell of a case to get the government to turn someone over to them.

I think my country doesn't have extradition-treaty with China because of human rights situation in that country. But i get your point and think extradition is tricky. Here there once was a woman (who had legal custody over her child) who's child was abducted by her foreing ex husband. He took that child back to his home country. She went to that country and took her child back. Later court rules she was to be extradited to the country of her ex husband for kindnapping her own child there. Good for you your country protects you!

They still have to protect him... by law...... but, indeed, i guess that fatfuck has reasons to not come back Germany then...

Sure, there are laws that are in place no matter how they feel about him. My understanding is that Germany does have an extradition treaty with the US, they just tend to be very protective. Dotcom might not get the best they have to offer when it comes to defense.

Well if this is something that concerns you perhaps you should block IPs from those countries.

Or are you concerned that your bottom line would be affected when you lose all the sales from Iran and Saudi.

:thumbsup

That's an excellent argument and yet to be answered in this thread.

Add United Kingdom to this list. This issue is not limited to Iran and the Emirates.

Just a one single link for everybody to think at: http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/news...software-55430 :2 cents:

There's a similar story in Japan when few years ago 2 developers wrote the code for a completely anonymous p2p software. They were sentenced to death. Thats in Japan, not China.

Sorry for the off-topic but is p2p software forbidden in Japan or there was something else they did?

If I recall well it was the "anonymous" element that created the problem.

One of the main differences is that he is an Iranian citizen (I assume since it says he was born in Iran and now living in Canada) and he returned to Iran to visit family.

So there was no extradition here. He was arrested in his home country.

Do I agree with the law? No. I think it is barbaric and ridiculous. However, it isn't like he was sitting in Canada and the Iranian government petitioned to have him sent back to Iran to stand trial and face the death penalty for this.

It's an apples and oranges situation.

Thanks Perry :thumbsup

Yes it is. But what if Iran has requested his extradition officially? Would Canada give him up?

I wonder what the cost to US tax payers is on this one? Would be easier to shut the sites and leave him alone right?

CyberSEO:
It may be the case that what he did is just as illegal in Australia? So question is not whether some law was broken, but where to hold the trial... and since in theory the crime took place in the US, all the evidence is in the US, all the victims are in the US, etc... it makes most sense to hold the trial in the US?

and your analogy may be slightly off, better analogy would perhaps be: you are a businessman that exports cookies to Russia... it turns out that the cookies are contaminated and 10,000s of Russian citizens die... What do you think should happen in that situation? Nothing? that businessman's home country should protect him, case closed?

Yep. This is the post that stood out for me.

Do you really think it is a better comparison? Personally I don't think so and many here will agree with me, because Dotcom's acuity was legal in New Zealand (where he gonna be extradited from).

But if you really want to talk about "poisoned cookies"... well, here we go: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...rope-asia.aspx



Any extraditions followed, ah?

P.S. Yes, I know it's an off-topic, but I just had to answer to the woj's post.

the point is not whether the analogy is better or not... but what do you think should happen in that situation?

let me give you another one: US hacker hacks the Moscow stock exchange which results in Russian companies losing Billions... it's obvious who the perpetrator is, plenty of evidence against him, he even brags about it acting like a big shot, etc...

what should happen in that situation? obviously nothing would happen :1orglaugh, but in an ideal world how should it play out? should he get extradited, or US should protect him and nothing should happen?

The local police will report him to FBI so he'll get a prison time for that in the States. It's like in those cases when Russian children were murdered in the US foster cares (e.g. Dima Yakovlev). Do you have any more "better" examples, of we will get back to the my one?

In other words, I don't remember any cases of extraditions of non-Russian citizens to Russia in order to get them sued here. Of course this does not apply to Russian criminals that are trying to hide from the Justice on Cuba on somewhere else. This should be obvious, isn't it?