NRT: Muppets

33 comments on “NRT: Muppets ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Draco T Bastard 1

   30 September 2015 at 4:59 pm

   Mr Dotcom’s lawyer Ron Mansfield pointed out the documents were not date-stamped and asked Ms Parkes if she knew whether any originals existed.

   Someone correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t it a legal requirement for them to be dated? As in, they become invalid if they don’t have it as allowing undated legal forms opens the system up to abuse?
   • McFlock 1.1

     30 September 2015 at 6:14 pm

     that’s why she said in court that they “appeared to be copies of the extradition requests.”

     Not notarised as accurate copies.

     So the contents of the documents might have all the required information, the court just doesn’t know they’re accurate copies of that information.

     Think about a search warrant – it needs particulars like dates, addresses etc. But a photocopy of an arrest warrant doesn’t mean it’s the same as the original warrant, unless it was notarised at time of copying.

     I suspect that if they don’t have the original paperwork, some very interesting questions will end up being raised.

     Definitely muppets. Makes one wonder how many non-millionaires have been incarcerated based on “appeared to be” copies…
   • tracey 1.2

     30 September 2015 at 7:21 pm

     not being date stamped leaves open the assertion they were not issued at the time claimed or even produced much later
     • savenz 1.2.1

       30 September 2015 at 7:41 pm

       Disgusting. I guess now that it is in a real court not ‘the herald and TV3 news beat up’ real evidence needs to be established and some American Hollywood fake email can not be used. It could all have been avoided as Sony lawyers wisely knew it was a waste of time as a similar case had been bought against You Tube and they were found not guilty of copywrite infringement. File sharing is not a crime.

       When 70 armed defender abseil into someones home for a copywrite case and scare a young family and young kids, then something is defiantly wrong.

       When they repeat the mistakes with illegal spying, illegally seizing assets before guilt has been found so someone does not have the funds to defend themselves, and further try to increase the charges to money laundering to justify handing them over to the American justice system for a show trial then this is not justice.

       I
2. Pat 2

   30 September 2015 at 5:21 pm

   a question…..is it really possible the Crown would pursue these proceedings without such an apparently basic level of preparedness?…or is another agenda at play?
   • northshoredoc 2.1

     30 September 2015 at 5:53 pm

     Having dealt with crown law on a number of occasions I can confirm they are more than capable of this level of incompetence.
     • tracey 2.1.1

       30 September 2015 at 7:22 pm

       ditto.

       and sometimes they pursue stuff without best legal foundation cos someone asks them to
     • Pat 2.1.2

       30 September 2015 at 7:37 pm

       good grief
       • savenz 2.1.2.1

         30 September 2015 at 8:08 pm

         Don’t worry it’s not ‘real’ money it is just tax payer money to be squandered!

         You know like 11 million Sheep brides, or 200 million for Sky City.
   • NZJester 2.2

     30 September 2015 at 6:10 pm

     They did the raid without being properly legally prepared, why would they change that lack of thinking something through now?
     The whole Justice system is so under funded they most likely had a lot of inexperienced underlings doing the bulk of the work. The originals are most likely misfiled or misplaced.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2.1

       30 September 2015 at 6:41 pm

       The originals are most likely misfiled or misplaced.

       Or perhaps they were procedurally invalid in some way and were then surreptitiously altered and photocopied to conceal the alterations. Let’s not forget Wormald’s perjury.
       • Draco T Bastard 2.2.1.1

         30 September 2015 at 7:30 pm

         Or simply didn’t exist until someone realised the mistake and quickly filled them in – except for the date.
       • Macro 2.2.1.2

         30 September 2015 at 7:30 pm

         Let’s not forget Wormald’s perjury.
         Exactly! It gets very very fishy.
         • savenz 2.2.1.2.1

           30 September 2015 at 8:09 pm

           It could have just been a golf game handshake. No paperwork necessary.
           • Macro 2.2.1.2.1.1

             30 September 2015 at 10:01 pm

             Isn’t that how we do business? Sky city /Hollywood law changes, TPPA deals – u piss in my pocket – i’ll piss in urs?
3. ianmac 3

   30 September 2015 at 6:56 pm

   When the Crown has spent millions of taxpayers money on prosecuting the FBI case, surely there is one little person who guards the critical documents. Wow
   • mickysavage 3.1

     30 September 2015 at 7:07 pm

     Those damned back office jobs the nats keep wanting to cut are slightly more important than they thought.
     • Grindlebottom 3.1.1

       30 September 2015 at 9:23 pm

       They sure are. Enjoyed Lisa Owen taking Anne Tolley to task on that very point on The Nation last week when Tolley blathered on and on about CYFs caseworkers being overburdened with paperwork and unable to focus on the needs of their clients.
     • Steve Withers 3.1.2

       30 September 2015 at 10:48 pm

       BOOM!! Nailed it.
4. Gristle 4

   30 September 2015 at 7:00 pm

   I hope you all remember that the Police have had to issue a “guarantee” of up to $2B to Dotcom et al in the event of the chain of prosecutions failing. Any bets on whether the house will have to make a payout on the jackpot.
   • mickysavage 4.1

     30 September 2015 at 7:06 pm

     Citation?
   • tc 4.2

     30 September 2015 at 8:24 pm

     Sounds like BS Gristle provide evidence of such a claim. The police charge to convict I’ve not heard of any situation where they agree a damages figure before they commence.
     • Gristle 4.2.1

       30 September 2015 at 9:16 pm

       tc, tc tc… if only you had scrolled down just a bit more and read Pasupil’s sourcing. Then you would not had to show to one and all that you don’t read very much before jumping to print.

       But I agree with you that it is extremely unusual for the Assist Com of Police to have give the Court this sort of undertaking. Which of coarse is why it was memorable. If had been me signing up to the undertaking, I would be feeling nervous that Sony had abandoned the litigation.
       • mickysavage 4.2.1.1

         30 September 2015 at 9:23 pm

         Um I have never heard of a similar situation occurring before. I would agree with TC.

         The fact that Marshall signed an undertaking in this case shows how unusual it is …
5. Pasupial 5

   30 September 2015 at 7:16 pm

   This may prove to be a very costly omission in the paperwork, from the (millions of dollars…) link above:

   then-police commissioner Peter Marshall signed the “undertaking in respect to costs and damages” – the agreement which would allow Dotcom to sue New Zealand if it emerged the FBI case against him was unfair and unfounded…

   Dotcom has claimed the loss of Megaupload cost him more than $2 billion although others have argued the impact is far less…

   The requirement to give an undertaking to the court to meet any damages was a factor which put Sony off joining a civil case seeking to claim Dotcom’s assets, emailed hacked and released last year revealed. Sony’s top copyright lawyer, Aimee Wolfson, said it was “not at all unimaginable” Dotcom would avoid extradition or even successfully defend himself in the United States.

   The studio is not a participant in a case in NZ courts with discussion in the emails showing potential exposure to a legal suit from Dotcom concerning executives.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11514563
   • tracey 5.1

     30 September 2015 at 7:31 pm

     of course he may begin to enforce it and then settle for an apology from key and collins in a form he writes… or resignation in return for not suing.

     seems VERY odd to omit 2 such important things. In my experience court officials are pretty i dotty and t crossy…
6. xanthe 6

   30 September 2015 at 7:41 pm

   Damn i really was looking forward to seeing those pandas
7. maui 7

   30 September 2015 at 8:16 pm

   Makes me want to watch an old episode of Rainbow, I think I know now whose playing the character of Bungle.
   • savenz 7.1

     30 September 2015 at 10:08 pm

     Love it Maui
8. savenz 8

   30 September 2015 at 10:38 pm

   Man accused of stealing $5 in snacks died in jail as he waited for space at mental hospital

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11521633

   ‘Justice’ in the USA!
   • joe90 8.1

     1 October 2015 at 12:43 am

     Man dies in debtors prison.

     http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/family-sues-after-man-dies-while-in-jail-for-unpaid-parking-ticket_56044469e4b00310edfa778b
9. emergency mike 9

   1 October 2015 at 2:57 am

   No original? ‘Appeared to be copies’? Not notarized? No date stamp? (Good luck getting a WINZ benefit like this.)

   Gosh what is that smell?
10. northshoredoc 10

    2 October 2015 at 10:34 am

    Originals found.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/285802/dotcom-case-crown-finds-original-extradition-notices

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS