Dotcom https://truthvoice.com Wed, 22 May 2019 11:31:39 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1 https://i0.wp.com/truthvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/cropped-truthvoice-logo21-1.png?fit=32%2C32&ssl=1 Dotcom https://truthvoice.com 32 32 194740597 NZ Government Refuses to Follow U.S. Police Orders to Seize Dotcom Assets https://truthvoice.com/2015/07/ng-government-refuses-to-follow-u-s-orders-to-seize-dotcom-assets/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ng-government-refuses-to-follow-u-s-orders-to-seize-dotcom-assets Sat, 04 Jul 2015 11:31:39 +0000 http://truthvoice.com/2015/07/ng-government-refuses-to-follow-u-s-orders-to-seize-dotcom-assets/

dotcom mega

Internet tycoon Kim Dotcom has claimed the New Zealand Government informed the High Court it won’t pursue the registration of United States forfeiture orders against his assests, worth $100 million.

The Megaupload founder tweeted tonight: “Breaking: NZ Govt just informed High Court that they won’t pursue registration of U.S forfeiture orders against my assets (for now) #VICTORY.”

 

Mr Dotcom is appealing to the US Court of Appeal to regain control of the $100 million worth of assests he forfeited.

His mansion north of Auckland was raided by police in 2012 on behalf of US authorities – with cash and other property seized, including luxury cars – claiming they were obtained through copyright and money laundering crimes.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) won a default judgment on the contested assets in a district court in Virginia earlier in 2015.

Mr Dotcom attacked the ruling saying the judge was not adequately prepared for the case.

“The recent filing demonstrates again how the entire Megaupload case is built on quicksand,” he told website Torrentfreak.

“It’s a slap in the face of the DOJ and the judge they picked for his Disney CV.”

One of Megaupload’s lawyers, Michael Elkin, claims Mr Dotcom was wrongly branded as a fugitive for legally fighting extradition to the United States.

“The district court’s denial of their basic rights to defend against asset forfeiture under a fugitive disentitlement doctrine amounts to a violation of basic due process,” he said.

Tagged with

]]>
3576