10 ms·
Kim Dotcom Will Go to the US in Exchange for Legal Funds
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- ktizo 14y agoSo at least he is culturally prepared then.
- drivebyacct2 14y agoYeah, how dare he want access to his illegally seized assets. He doesn't deserve it because he's arrogant and doesn't conform. (edit, parent deletes comment only to write another comment that's being downvoted, nice)
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- danielweber 14y agoAnd funds for "living expenses." What's that bill come to for a guy with his own fleet of Ferraris?
- ori_b 14y agoHis accounts were frozen by the FBI, so he has no accessible money right now. He's not asking the government for a handout, but for them to unfreeze the money he already owns. To quote the tweet the story is based around, “Hey DOJ, we will go to the US. No need for extradition. We want bail, funds unfrozen for lawyers & living expenses,”
- mbreese 14y agoWell, to be fair, he's not asking the government to cover his costs, but to unfreeze assets so that he can pay them. It's a shrewd move. The US can skip an extradition hearing if he can pay his legal team.
- thebmax 14y agoThe FBI had all his bank accounts frozen so he has limited access to cash to pay for his legal defence. Now they have started to delay the extradition hearing and case from moving forward. This is, unfortunately, a common tactic of Federal prosecutors - they throw the book at defendants and if they realize they may actually lose the case, they keep delaying any trial as long as possible so the accused does not have a chance to get their money back or clear their name. Defendants are left defending themselves against charges the government won't allow to be brought to trial. See the case of Gibson Guitars as another example. They had their factory raided and property seized 3 years ago and has still not had their day in court and have not had their property returned.
- mtgx 14y agoSo the US's Government's tactic is to delay the extradition trial until he's left with no money to defend himself...and then win by default. Is that what they call "justice"?
- hkmurakami 14y agoWhat was that line... "There is no good and evil, just winners and losers" ? :(
- vwoolf 14y agoRead Tom Wolfe's novel The Bonfire of the Vanities if you want a great example of the legal process portrayed in fiction.
- alan_cx 14y agoYes. That is exactly what the US government call "justice". You cannot beat "the man".
- gscott 14y agoEven when you 'win' it costs you so much it feels like loosing. The Government has an unlimited amount of money it can print and spend.
- thaumasiotes 14y agoI guess that's technically true in terms of absolute numbers, but it's fairly meaningless. What did unlimited amounts of printed money do for Zimbabwe?
- joering2 14y agoSnake house. If they (US gov) cannot win, they will delay as much as possible just to warn others: even if we are completely wrong and fucked up, we still can messed up your life for X months or years!!
- 14y ago
- w1ntermute 14y agoToo bad he caved. There's no way he'll get a fair trial, not in the Land of the Free.
- SoftwareMaven 14y agoLook at his options: 1. Get bled until nobody will offer legal services to him because they know he can't pay. Get extradited with a public defendant (if he's lucky). Have a trial with a lawyer being provided by the DoJ (who happens to be the ones putting him on trial). 2. Get extradited with a team of really good lawyers who truly represent him. There really aren't any options that don't end with him extradited. Why wouldn't he want to be extradited on his terms rather than the government's. It also isn't rocket science that, regardless of whether the government is intentionally trying to get his legal team to desert him, delays are better for the government than they are for Dotcom. As a US citizen, this case makes me sick to my stomach. It reeks of America strong-arming other countries to pursue an agenda that is in only its best interests. It is made worse by the high-level collusion between the government and Hollywood. It is topped off by a stinking pile that is a lack of respect for anybody's intellectual property except Hollywood's and a rotten cherry of government seizure that prevents somebody from defending themselves in court. (I suppose there is a 3rd option where he goes completely underground, but, again, with no money, that's going to be a tough thing to do.)
- kiba 14y agoAs a US citizen, this case makes me sick to my stomach. It reeks of America strong-arming other countries to pursue an agenda that is in only its best interests. It is made worse by the high-level collusion between the government and Hollywood. Best interest of the United States? What do the US gain from this other than getting votes for those elected in office and pleasing an insignificant and corrupt industry we called hollywood?
- Achshar 14y agoUS as an entity does not gain anything. The hollywood spends a lot of money on lobbying, so the people who run US get money for "pleasing an insignificant and corrupt industry we called hollywood"
- briandear 14y agoYou can blame Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. We all know who Hollywood gives the majority of their money to, and the people that receive it do their bidding. Hollywood isn't the problem any more than Google or Facebook's lobbies are the problem. Follow the money and vote the opposite. Their contributions aren't secret. We the people have access to the contribution records, yet people continue to vote for the people getting the money.
- picklefish 14y agoWhen I saw that the extradition was postponed to March 2013 I figured it was another move by the US to draw this saga out as long as possible. It makes sense for Kim and his team to respond "screw that we're coming over now and you hurry this shit up so we can win our case and start our business back up." His lawyers must believe without a doubt that they have this case in the bag. It seems fairly obvious that from the beginning this case was designed to take a long time in court, in order to keep megaupload down as long as possible. By keeping their assets frozen and postponing court dates the US is continuing to "win" this battle.
- yardie 14y agoI'm curious to know if he waived his right to speedy trial? If he hasn't, his US legal team is ready, and the prosecutor isn't this will be over in 30 days.
- Kelliot 14y agoAre the DoJ scared of an innocent man and a team of highly skilled lawyers?
- cjensen 14y agoHe is willing to face trial if they give him money first? That's not how Justice works in any modern country. His lawyers presumably told him as much, so this is just another bizarre plea for attention.
- dangrossman 14y agoHe's asking for access to his money in his bank accounts that the US had frozen so that he can pay his lawyers.
- cjensen 14y agoAnd? Lots of people get their assets frozen. They don't get to make demands as a precondition of submitting to justice. Asking for special conditions that are never granted can only mean one of two things: either he is utterly ignorant of how law works or he is just trolling for more attention. I choose to view him as non-ignorant, but since my view is not fawning, apparently I get a massive karma downgrade. I'll live.
- ktizo 14y agoWell, actually he has precedent in his favour. CFTC v. Walsh: District Court Releases Funds Frozen in Civil Case to Pay for Attorney in Parallel Criminal Case: http://www.columbialawreview.org/articles/comment-cftc-v-walsh-district-court-releases-funds-frozen-in-civil-case-to-pay-for-attorney-in-parallel-criminal-case http://www.columbialawreview.org/articles/comment-cftc-v-wal... Also, how else do you get to have funds released other than through petition? And he has already submitted to the justice system, otherwise he wouldn't be turning up in court.
- cjensen 14y agoI don't disagree with what you said. But the topic was in regard to someone refusing to submit to justice unless their conditions were met. The point is, he must submit to the court before the court can grant his petition.
- Jach 14y agoIf his Biden assertions have any merit, then this is coming straight from the top. It makes perfect sense to delay the case until after elections. (Not to mention all the other legal tactics mentioned here.)
- J3L2404 14y ago"Prosecutors and Dotcom’s lawyers agreed to the delay" - Washington Post Looks like his lawyers sold him out.
- MrBlue 14y agoHow do you equate that sentence with him being sold out?
- J3L2404 14y agoShouldn't he have had his lawyers protest the delay so he can be quickly exonerated by his overwhelming innocence.
- obto 14y agoHe had 2 options: 1. Agree to the trial being delayed for 9 months so the US can return the evidence... which really should only take a couple days 2. Go forward with the trial without the evidence proving he's innocent. I really wouldn't say they sold him out
- sp332 14y agoAn earlier story quoted his lawyers saying that a delay was pretty much inevitable, they totally saw it coming and expected it. Kim then went whining to twitter about how the US is using "delay tactics".
- rickmb 14y agoIt's a cheap challenge, because he knows it will never be answered. He'll be lucky if the DOJ gives some generic statement about the quality of justice in the US, but most likely it will be ignored completely. Even acknowledging this challenge would be stepping into a minefield, and the DOJ is not that stupid.
- ldargin 14y agoIANAL: If he wants a speedy trial, and is concerned about legal fees, he should just go the U.S. on his own. Any delay at this point only helps the prosecution, giving them more time to research the case.
- trotsky 14y agoIf the funds are subject to asset seizure the DOJ would never release them in a situation like this. If they got a conviction there'd be nothing left - all paid to his surprisingly expensive legal team based in the caymans. Even the dumbest feds ever would see that coming a mile away.
- josteink 14y agoSo lets not give the man a chance to a fair trial with his own attorneys paid with his own money, because by the law we are innocent until proven guilty, and we know he is a slimeball who will screw us. Yeah. That sounds reasonable. The US is fucking this one up. Not a single move so far has followed due process. Every move has been corrupt or illegal, ruled so by a judge. Not a single statement issued so far reassures that they will start following the rules. I think we can safely say which side of this story is the dishonest and convicted one and it's not Dotcom.
- mixmax 14y agoThere's something I don't quite understand. If you're accused of a crime in the US how can all your assets be frozen by the government and your website taken offline? Aren't you innocent until proved guilty? If the answer is that it's suspected that all the money comes from illegal activity and therefore frozen until a judge rules on whether this is the case or not what would stop the US government from prosecuting, for example, Larry Page, take all his money and shut down Google until he has been to court? Which he can't pay for because he doesn't have any money. Can you really just indite someone and convince a judge to freeze all his accounts before there has even been a trial?
- J3L2404 14y agoIf the country you are in agrees.
- briandear 14y agoThe Comprehensive Forfeiture Act of 1984 allows it and US v. Monsanto upheld it. Since this is being prosecuted under RICO, it's lawful and Constitutional. Let's not forget that the US is only one of at least five countries involved in this case. No one has accused or has evidence that Larry Page has done anything illegal. But if there was evidence that page is violating RICO, then try can take his stuff until trial as well. As far as innocent until proven guilty, that actually isn't in the Constitution, it's based in English Common Law -- Dotcom's right aren't being violated as he is getting due process. Of course, te current situation of extradition requires a much lower standard of proof, the standard here is whether or not there is evidence that warrants a trial; effectively like a grand jury deliberation.
- briandear 14y agoI wonder why the most common HN post on this topic comes from torrentfreak -- certainly they're objective in this case.
- batgaijin 14y agoHas anyone ever double checked the megaupload business model? Like, comparing how much s3 would cost to store all the data, and how many customers? I couls never get it to work out...
- nsns 14y agoWhile I support his fight, I believe this simply adds to a long tradition in politics of offering "tempting" concessions the other side can never accept, for publicity and other purposes.