Posts by Sacha
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to FletcherB,
I thought the emails were presented in support of the seizure warrants
Me too. I presumed from intercepts in US - but maybe NZ in light of GCSB and SIS involvement?
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to DexterX,
Not sure. There were also US-based seizures.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to Matthew Poole,
The Feds got warrants, seized computers, gathered evidence
So the emails were intercepted in the US?
-
Juha Saarinen has a story in Wired examining the Police planning documents for the raid.
According to the documents, the preferred option for the police was to drop a “primary arrest team proximate to the dwelling” with STG and AOS officers in “lower standard of dress” following in vehicles on ground.
However, police were concerned that their actions could be seen as “heavy handed” and the use of helicopter as “possibly seen as over the top use of resources”.
Furthermore, police also questioned the scale of the operation, as Dotcom and associates faced only fraud offences and asked “why a tactical intervention?” in the planning documents.
Due to “the international interest this warrant execution may bring” police officers were to dress and interact “in as lower [sic] key manner as possible” the planning documents dictated.
Police classified the entire operation as “Low Risk” even though the documents said there would be firearms on the premises.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to Lucy Telfar Barnard,
of course, he may feel that the invasion of his privacy is worse than being extradited to the US, but somehow I doubt it, or at least I know which I'd prefer, if it were me.
You do need to factor in a heavily-armed raid on your family and home by a few dozen men in black and some helicopters landing in your yard unannounced. Bonus points for wife in late stages of pregnancy.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to Steve Withers,
the offending that did occur wasn't committed by the site itself
At the time of the raid there was mention of evidence to the contrary to be presented in (US) court, including emails between the arrestees. Now wondering how those were obtained..
-
Gordon Campbell writes about the signifcant limitations on Neazor's role as Inspector General of our Security Services. Doubt the govt has much to worry about from his report, somehow.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to Thomas Beagle,
True. Yet that's not what most reporting has concluded over the last year. Seemed the whole 'MegaUpload Conspiracy' angle was pushed pretty heavily by agencies too.
-
Why were we only told on Monday?
Those 'other reasons' seem pretty persuasive to us non-lawyers - principally the timing of the visit by Panetta.
-
Police can obtain interception warrants under the Crimes Act 1961, but they are basically limited to terrorism, serious violent offences, and offences of organised crime.* Which I don't believe is alleged.
Doesn't the whole extradition case hinge on an alleged criminal 'conspiracy', given that copyright violation on its own is not serious enough?