Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government United States Technology Your Rights Online

Kim Dotcom Wins Case Against NZ Police To Get Seized Material Back 111

New submitter Mistakill writes "It seems the case against Kim Dotcom for the NZ Police isn't going well, with Kim Dotcom scoring another victory in his legal battles. Police have been told they must search everything they seized from Dotcom and hand back what is not relevant to the U.S. extradition claims. Justice Helen Winkelmann told police their complaints about the cost and time of the exercise were effectively their own fault for indiscriminately seizing material in the first place. She wrote, 'The warrants could not authorize the permanent seizure of hard drives and digital materials against the possibility that they might contain relevant material, with no obligation to check them for relevance. They could not authorize the shipping offshore of those hard drives with no check to see if they contained relevant material. Nor could they authorize keeping the plaintiffs out of their own information, including information irrelevant to the offenses.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kim Dotcom Wins Case Against NZ Police To Get Seized Material Back

Comments Filter:
  • by slashmydots ( 2189826 ) on Friday May 31, 2013 @09:53AM (#43871905)
    I disagree. In this level of douche vs douche, I automatically side with absolutely nobody and just hope it's as large of a train wreck as possible. The fact that this is getting sorted out is really unfortunate.
  • Re:Cost (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CanHasDIY ( 1672858 ) on Friday May 31, 2013 @09:57AM (#43871965) Homepage Journal

    I don't think that would fly since, as you quoted, the judge pointed out that the expenses were their own damn fault.

    Now, if the citizens of NZ decided to sue their government for wasting so many resources on a personal vendetta against a single individual... THAT I can see making it to court.

  • by nedlohs ( 1335013 ) on Friday May 31, 2013 @10:29AM (#43872443)

    Yeah sure. From the boring point of view justice and so on.

    From the entertainment side though, not so much.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 31, 2013 @10:34AM (#43872529)

    In this level of douche vs douche, I automatically side with absolutely nobody

    One douche is a threat to no one. Another douche is a threat to you, me, and pretty much anyone in the world. (Wow, how often do you get to say something that grandiose and sweeping without it being an exaggeration?!)

    Root for the first douche, this time. It's ok for him to lose, but it really is important that the second douche lose much worse, publicly and with the most exposure and embarrassment possible. The second douche needs to know that all societies and laws hold them in utter and complete contempt. (The first douche, otoh, already knows that.) And any politician who ever hopes to be elected in the US, needs to know that "fire those guys" absolutely must become a part of his platform. If someone can run for next President or next term of Congress without publicly stating they intend to clean house at the DoJ, then we aren't making enough noise.

  • . . .because rich people own governments anyway.

    For example, the current administration is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Goldman-Sachs. The previous administration appeared to by owned by a combine of Halliburton and the major Defense contractors.

    The question is, which of our Corporate Masters will own the NEXT administration . . .

  • by swb ( 14022 ) on Friday May 31, 2013 @12:22PM (#43873971)

    Failure to abide by the decision may influence the court's decision to extradite him.

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Working...