Saturday, February 13, 2016


You gotta be joking.   The CrimdotCon appeal is set down for 29 August in the High Court with eight weeks set aside for the hearing.   Remembering too that the appeal can only be on points of law.

In the jurisdiction I am involved with appeals to the High Court are normally concluded within three/four months.    Seven months to the hearing date; two months for the hearing; an almost guaranteed 'reserved decision' and all this in respect of a decision by Dawson R which many legal commentators described as 'particularly robust'.

CrimdotCon's legal team of Messrs Mansfield and Cogan and Ms Wild will be pulling out all the stops in arguing black is white.    Just goes to show what money can do ... hold on, the bugger continually claims he is living in a state of penury.


Updated ... the Law Commission has just recommended an extensive overhaul of the extradition process designed to avoid the inordinate delays occasioned by appeals and judicial reviews.   You can access the document here


Ghost Of Greenwood said...

The amount of time and public money spent on this fellow must be huge.

The depths to which our government will belly-crawl across broken glass with their flys unzipped in order to kiss the asses dodgy characters like Dotcom & Liu, because they boast of fat wallets, is utterly contemptible.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Fixed it for you, Ghost

"The depths to which our Labour and Greens opposition belly-crawled across broken glass with their flys unzipped in order to kiss the asses dodgy characters like Dotcom & Liu, because they boast of fat wallets, is utterly contemptible. "

Anonymous said...

Aw come on you claiming haven't twigged there is one Justice system for those with means and another for those without in NZ?

The Veteran said...

Ghost ... I am quite sure that once due process is done and dusted it will take the Minister of Immigration all of 30 seconds to sign-off on the extradition documentation.

In that case the best CrimdotCon can hope for is the election of Bernie Sanders as President.

Care to put me right. Weren't aware of any National, ACT, UF or Maori Party MPs wending their way to the Coatsville Manor come election time in search of dosh and/or an electoral understanding but can't say the same for Labour, Greens, Winston First and of course the Mana Party.

Ghost Of Greenwood said...

"Care to put me right"

Sure. Documents declassified and released through the OIA showed the SIS tried to block Mr Dotcom's residency application. It described him as a "bad but wealthy man" who was being investigated by the FBI for alleged copyright crimes. However, the SIS dropped its objection 90 minutes after being told there was "political pressure" to let Dotcom into the country.

Put simply, if Dotcom wasn't afforded special treatment and not allowed to stay on, all of this expensive fiasco could've been avoided.

The Veteran said...

Ghost ... reference those documents please and particularly that there was political pressure to let him into the country ... and, if he were so bad, why did your mob go crawling to him for dosh etc, etc

Anonymous said...

I have a healthy Anglo Saxon skepticism of authority and an innate trust in society's ability to monitor itself. Extradition treaties are like trade agreements, they only work with equal partners. Our present laws work well with our equals in law Aust and the UK.

The US is another thing entirely and the introduction of the UK/US treaty in 2007 which was negotiated by the Blair Govt. is so one sided that it is now the subject of review.
Quite simply the US system of plea bargaining and horrendously long prison terms if you don't, along with not having to present Prima facia evidence only reasonable suspicion, is not compatible with our justice system (Google: National Westminster three).

Whether Mr Dotcom is a "crim" is not the point. He has never set foot on US soil and like so many people has fallen foul of either intellectual property rights or online trading misdemeanors.

The US is trying to extradite people from the UK, who never been to the US for "crimes" that are not an indictable offense in the UK.

Given the extraordinary lengths that Hollywood and the FBI have gone to in this matter along with subverting our own sovereignty by using the SIS illegally and the clearly over the top police reaction I ma firmly of the opinion that he should stay until such time as the US supplies more compelling evidence.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... not sure you understand process. Extradition takes place when the Courts are satisfied the alleged offense is covered by the treaty in force and whether there is, prima facie, a case to answer. The Court does not make a determination on whether the accused is guilty or not guilty.

As I said in the post, many legal commentators have described the judgement by Dawson R as particularly robust. I have read it and that's my lay view too.

His decision will now be tested in the High Court and probably further. So, unless you are of the view that the Courts are subject to political interference the matter will be determined in accordance with the law and that is how it should be. If, at the end of due process, the Courts determine extradition should proceed then it's over to the Minister to sign-off on the matter. Looking at the time-line and I guess there's a real chance matters may not be concluded until after the next election. Were there to be a change of government then all those visits to the Coatsville Manor may not have been wasted.

But again, that's process. Can it be enhanced? Well the Law Commission certainly thinks so, hence their report. For myself, I would urge the Government to take careful note of it.

Ghost Of Greenwood said...

As I said, if Dotcom wasn't afforded special treatment and not allowed to stay on, all of this expensive fiasco could've been avoided.

The Veteran said...

Ghost ... thank you for that. So it is confirmed that the SIS had no interest in Dotcom from a national security pov but did alert INZ that the FBI had an interest in him. Dotcom gained residency under the 'high roller' programme and I agree that one can say, in hindsight, this was an 'unfortunate' decision.

As to the 'political interference'. The statement from INZ makes it clear this was in the general sense of wanting the matter expedited. The Minister was advised after the event in accordance with the'no surprises' policy.

Ghost Of Greenwood said...

Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once . . .

If Dotcom wasn't afforded special treatment and not allowed to stay on, all of this expensive fiasco could've been avoided.

BTW: Why did Maurice Williamson lose his ministerial warrant ?

Anonymous said...

Lets look at the great international "crim's" track record. Insider dealing in Germany which now is scrubbed due to the clean slate program, something we have to respect as we have the same program so the offence has disappeared.

Insider dealing..every stockbroker I know has indulged and most still have a bottom drawer full of pay as you go mobiles for one time use.

Did not register a company in Hong Kong. Whether through oversight or deliberate we will never know but it was not considered serious as he was fined NZ$1500.. The amount says it all and I don't believe it was criminal offense, just civil. (Might be wrong on that so you check)

Lied on his citizenship application saying he had no driving convictions when he was pinged for dangerous driving four days before. Excuse..he thought that the question referred to his time before NZ...haven't seen the wording on the form so can't comment.

As for his current woes he has broken no NZ law or caused this country any harm except to expose the shennagins and ineptitude of the SIS, the police high command's slavish devotion to US television programs and showed our present crop of politicians for what they are.

My main problem is a man of your undoubted political ability unable to recognise a smear campaign when you see one. Try using the telescope with the other eye.

Success has many friends but failure is an orphan.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... thank you for your trashing of Ghost's argument.

What 'shennigans (sic) and ineptitude' of the SIS are you taking about. My reading of the file is that they said CDC posed no security risk but rather that the FBI were gunning for him ... all of which was true.

Ghost is arguing he should not have been allowed in. You are arguing that the right decision was made. As it happens I agree with Ghost.

Angry Tory said...

CDC - the useless STG should have just done the job they trained to do, just like they should have done in Operation 8.

Angry Tory said...

TRUMP would just have droned the f**ker, "Very good friends" or not.

And frankly you can see why.

Angry Tory said...

As for his current woes he has broken no NZ law or caused this country any harm

apart from trying to buy an election, and torment sedition and terrorism, and corrupt on the record many government ministers and opposition leaders?

In Oregon they'd have shot him out of hand.

Anonymous said...

Angry Tory: I would love to engage in a battle of wits with you but it has always been one of my principles never to fight an unarmed man.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

Anonymous said...

Veteran..monitoring NZ citizens without a court order is not only illegal its stupid and shows a failure of accountability.

Lord Egbut

Unknown said...

Believing in yourself is the first secret to success. Thanks for sharing your knowledge :)