Extradition Trial For Kim Dotcom Pushed Back Again

from the stalling,-stalling dept

It’s not entirely clear why this is happening, but it appears that the hearings concerning Kim Dotcom’s extradition have been postponed yet again (apparently for the 4th time). It mostly seems to have to do with this whole issue of getting access to the evidence against him, which the US has been fighting.

His extradition hearing has already been delayed several times due to legal action relating to an illegal raid on his home and disclosure of evidence relating to his case.

A hearing in August has now been put off until April next year.

But a tentative date has been set for November, just in case a final ruling on whether his lawyers should have access to evidence, is quickly made.

Either way, it seems like this case may drag on for quite a while.

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: megaupload

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Extradition Trial For Kim Dotcom Pushed Back Again”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
55 Comments
That One Guy (profile) says:

Enough already

With all the stonewalling the US and DoJ has done with this mockery of the legal system, you’d think the NZ judges would grow a spine long enough to tell them ‘You have until the following date to comply with past and current court orders involving this case, otherwise your extradition request for Kim Dotcom will be denied, with no possibility to appeal this ruling until you can show sufficient evidence of having complied with the court’s orders.’

horse with no name says:

Predictable

It seems that Kim’s entire defense plan is to (a) create as many delays and diversions as possible, and then (b) come back a week later and bitch about being held hostage by the legal system. My guess is Kim will issue this sort of statement in the next few days, saying that justice again being delayed, while not admitting that it’s his own fight against extradition that is keeping this from moving forward in the US courts.

horse with no name says:

Re: Re: Predictable

Justice is just… but Kim generally plays it both ways. He has his laywers file motion after motion, delay after delay, and then has the balls to come out and complain about delays!

His entire tactic appears to be to avoid justice for the real crime, and instead to play the extradition game for as long as he can keep that ball in the air. He is just avoiding justice, and that is not just at all.

Internet Zen Master (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Predictable

…And what ‘real crime’ has Kim committed again?

Last I checked, running a site like MegaUpload was not a crime. In fact, the 38 files DOJ keep holding up as examples of his guilt are the ones that they told MegaUpload not to mess with until further notice (they were related to NinjaVideo case) or get charged with tampering of evidence.

So… what was Dotcom guilty of again (Other than having an ego the size of the Sun)?

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Predictable

No, it’s more like they’re using the wrong word – they want retribution, not justice. They’ve already decided guilt and want quick and swift punishment. They get frustrated because actual justice includes things that don’t make that possible – assumption of innocence before guilt, due process, the right to a fair trial, prosecution based on actual evidence with the right to a defense, punishment in proportion to the crime, etc.

They get frustrated because others call for actual justice rather than the witch-hunt they truly desire.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Predictable

That sense of retribution isn’t even their own. They’re too ignorant to actually see the details and they just repeat the same tantrums the big companies throw when they don’t get their way.

I think that’s the reason why they never address how disturbing it is that the government would bend over backwards for these corporations.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Predictable

Yes, he should just roll over and accept the foreign country attacking him, one whose agents have shown no qualms thus far in breaking their own laws to get him. A country where neither he nor his company was located at the time of the “crimes” should get to drag him through their courts without opposition.

This is what you people actually believe. That personal liberty, rights, and even the laws of the country you’re actually operating from should be trashed just because another country doesn’t like what you’re doing and fear for their corporations’ profits. That government agents breaking their own rules at the behest of private corporations should be able to dictate where and how justice is served. That’s scary.

Sorry, the rest of us respect jurisdiction, rule of law, the right to fair trial and due process. If at the end of this, Dotcom receives a fair trial and is found guilty, then so be it. But, he’s going to exercise his rights in the meantime, and if it’s the media circus aspect you dislike, well it’s the **AAs and their lackeys who created it to begin with.

DP says:

Re: Predictable

Why should it move forward in the US courts when everything that should lead up to that event has been botched in spectacular fashion? I do include charges which are probably trumped up, an illegal house raid – the list goes on. OOTB would love to by-pass all these things, obviously, and just throw the guy in jail with no due process. Whatever you may think of Dotcom, he deserves the same fair treatment as everyone else from the legal system and, quite plainly, he has not had it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: the 25 seconds of NSA outrage is OVER

“sorry I just don’t care about Prenda or Dotfatpig at all”

So why are you commenting on articles about them? If a subject truly doesn’t interest me, I skip over the article and move onto something that does. I certainly don’t click and start attacking other people, and calling the subject of the articles stupid childish names.

Why do you do this?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: the 25 seconds of NSA outrage is OVER

Funnily enough if you didn’t want to discuss Prenda, you shouldn’t have mentioned them in a completely irrelevant article to begin with.

But I suppose even simple acts of logic like this are beyond the mind of a jackass like you, who hates Fair Use in Australia and think you hold above average intelligence over most Australians.

out_of_the_blue says:

How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

It’s another mystery like “How Can NSA Surveillance Leaks Both Be No Big Deal And Put Us All In Danger?”, and: How can anyone be against the surveillance state yet support Google?

ACTUALLY, of course, those are sheerly words that attempt to support an underlying agenda. We all know that Clapper of the NSA is flat out lying. Now you kids can try to come up with some rationalization that covers Mike’s contradictory positions on the other two points.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

Give us a concrete example where KDC stole something that was copyrighted? maybe the FBI, CIA, NSA or Homeland Security can show us this proof but they refuse to do so.

And doesn’t it strike you as odd that they all say “Yes, there is a smoking gun, it’s got KDC’s fingerprints all over it” And yet, THEY REFUSE TO SHOW IT TO US!!

Doesn’t that strike you as odd?

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

“How is it Mike both “supports copyright” and defends Kim Dotcom?”

I sincerely hope you’re being sarcastic there, because in case you haven’t realized, there is such a thing as a shade of grey. Copyright isn’t a you-support-it-as-is or don’t-at-all scenario, you can be like Mike and support the idea of copyright but be completely against what it’s become today: the default tool that people grab onto when they want to censor others.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

“in case you haven’t realized, there is such a thing as a shade of grey”

No, these guys don’t realise that, which is why their arguments consistently fail. Everyone has to support copyright unquestioningly, or want to remove it completely – no middle ground. Everyone has to either be a 100% legal purchaser or a pirate – no middle ground. Everyone has to support the major labels unquestioningly or support illegal channels – no middle ground.

Actual nuanced arguments frustrate and confuse them – which is why half their posts devolve into childish namecalling or “why won’t Mike state his position on something he’s talked about for the last 10 years” despite having done just that.

Niall (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

Either you support loss of all rights to fight ‘terrorism’, or you are a filthy terrorist (sympathiser).

It’s like when you see various so-called Christian sects throwing around accusations of other sects following their man below for not being One True Christians…

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

It’s possible to support the basic premise of copyright while opposing the undisputable abuses and acts of extortion that you seem to support.

Supporting copyright doesn’t preclude opposing terrorism instead of wanking over it like you do.

It’s about what’s right, which is pretty much the opposite of what you want.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: How is it Mike both "supports copyright" and defends Kim Dotcom?

Still running off-topic to attack things like Google, I see. Point of fact, this article has nothing to do with copyright. This article is actually about due process and not trying to bend the law to the will of corporations. The better question should be ‘how can out_of_the_blue hate corporations so much, and still want to support their too-far reaching bids for power?’

Anonymous Coward says:

You can tell when there is something out that makes the corporations look bad. The trolls come out of the woodwork in an attempt to derail the topic.

They have no serious logic, apparently no ability to back up what they want to claim with references, rarely read the article beyond the title, and have no conception of justice beyond the lynch mob mentality they espouse.

I agree with the poster that said the judge on this case in New Zealand should lay down the law that there will be no extradition until the US meets the demands put on it by the New Zealand justice department. That failure to do so timely would result in the end of the process of extradition.

The US DOJ has been the one holding up the extradition process by the illegal acts they have committed during the evidence presented to have SWAT teams no less create a raid. This is not to mention all the illegal activities that have been revealed to have happened in New Zealand.

Somehow our trolls conveniently don’t want to talk about that. I wonder why not? Justice is supposed to be about what is just, not government witch hunts.

Anonymous Coward says:

is there anything else that the US DoJ can or is going to be able to dream up to be able to continue with this case? they’ve made one of the most glorious fuck ups ever and instead of dropping all charges and backing quietly away into a dark corner and hiding, they keep on making bigger and bigger prats of themselves! they need to admit that what they tried to do was not only illegal but unwarranted as well. they need to admit who got them roped into this shit storm and make sure it doesn’t happen again. this and all other law enforcement agencies are not there to be the private police force for any single industry and they are supposed to be the best example of what law enforcement is all about, not some slap dash body that roars into a situation, with no legitimate evidence, just because some big named, jealous and greedy individual(s) tells you to!!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »