I remember reading somewhere that the policemen in the raid did not know what were going on, or even who the target was. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought they were taking down a terrorist cell, given that the personal used was the counter-terrorism special tactics Group.
Reading the Wikipedia article about the task force, their job is in dealing with high risk situations involving armed offenders and possible terrorism related events. They also train with New Zealand Special Air Service Commandos. In that context, the raid makes much more sense in how it was conducted, with silencers, helicopters, dogs and 20-30+ personal. The real question then comes to who in the command structure decided to use such group for serving a warrant, and collecting evidence for an assisting copyright infringement case. Given the nature of the crime, the low threat level (admitted in court), this is rather uniquely in history. One might also wonder how much influence the FBI had in the decision.
I obviously don't know much but it seems stupid to not tell your team who they're going after. They would use that information to plan the breach and I'd suspect a good squad leader would demand to know before going in.
I was wondering about it some more, and tried to find where I could had read it. Sadly, I can't find it so take the statement with a bit of salt. Might just been a comment someone made regarding the officer who asked the nanny if she had any weapons or bombs. (http://gizmodo.com/5882967/watch-how-the-special-forces-bust...)
Or it maybe my memory is a bit faulty and what I remember is regarding the search warrant used by the police. (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/06/mega-victory-kim-...) The article describe how police officers didn't know what they were looking for when executing the warrant. As the judge put it, the people executing the warrant "were not the investigating officers and had limited knowledge of the operation," despite being briefed before the raid went down.
If I do find the article, I will post it. Maybe its was in the court document.
The audio from the helicopter features radio reports from the ground team with words to the effect "target secured" (ie. they knew they were after Kim specifically, once he was restrained that was their objective completed).
I believe by what belorn meant regarding the police not knowing who the target was, was the they didn't know they were after a guy for copyright infringement as opposed to a armed and dangerous individual.
Why the distinction? Schmitz was armed when he was found. Also, he was arrested not only for copyright infringement, but also for racketeering and money laundering. Those are serious crimes, usually the domain of organized crime.
False. The bodyguard had a licensed shotgun, locked inside a safe. [1] Schmitz didn't own one, nor did he carry it. You could claim he knew someone who owned a gun, but that's about it.
> Also, he was arrested not only for copyright infringement, but also for racketeering and money laundering.
The NZ judge does not agree with your assessment. Maybe the judge is wrong, but: charges in the indictment relating to money laundering, racketeering and wire fraud are not separate criminal acts but dependent on the claim of criminal secondary copyright infringement[2].
The FBI claims that a website that offers users monetary rewards for uploading content, such as YouTube does, are conducting racketeering, money laundering and wire fraud if said uploads constitute copyright infringement. The judge did not rule if such legal claims are correct, but noted that any such claims depend on the copyright infringement and are not separate crimes to be considered.
[1]: (http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/6298389/Judge-res...)
Meanwhile, Dotcom's head of security, Wayne Phillip Tempero, is facing firearms charges for providing Dotcom with the semi-automatic shotgun which was found in Dotcom's safe room when police cut their way in during his arrest. Tempero said that the gun had been purchased under a valid New Zealand license, and Davidson told the court that the saferoom and gun were for the safety of Dotcom's family.
But yes, the safe was apparently open. I did try to find if Wayne Tempero case of gun possession was concluded, but I can't find any news article about it.
Thanks for following up. As for the firearms charges, I only read the allegations, I hadn’t found the bodyguard’s response. Your quote leads me to believe the bodyguard had at least some kind of license (if he didn’t have proof, it would be foolish to state so in court), whether that license covered the semi-automatic shotgun remains to be seen.
The parent comment is either ill-informed or deliberate misinformation. Kim wasn't armed. There was a fully licensed rifle in the premises, but it wasn't with him. There was no warrant granted to arrest him, no due process, and the prime minister of the country has given him a personal apology for the event, which has been admitted to be a gross perversion of lawful policing.
Somewhere along the line he realized it was a police raid, but chose to wait in the panic room anyway, with the door open, to avoid startling anyone and putting himself at risk of being shot. Even so, and despite knowing of the existence of the room, it took police 13 minutes to find him, and when they finally did they weren't particularly gentle in apprehending him. Dotcom claimed he was punched in the face and kicked to the floor, and that one officer stood on his hand once he was down.http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118975-Kim-Dotcom-...
“Despite our staff clearly identifying themselves Mr Dotcom retreated into the house and activated a number of electronic locking mechanisms. While Police neutralised these locks he then further barricaded himself into a safe room within the house which officers had to cut their way into. Once they gained entry into this room they found Mr Dotcom near a firearm which had the appearance of a shortened shotgun.”
I assume that gun cabinet was kept locked and you couldn’t get in. Schmitz’s safe was open. Schmitz was hiding in his panic room, refused to come out for the police, and had a shotgun with him in that room. If not technically armed, he certainly created a high risk situation.
“The gun in question [...] was a type never seen before by arms experts in New Zealand.”
“She said a police arms officer said the weapon must have been modified. "It couldn't be cut off any further back because of the position of the magazine," she said. To get a license for that type of gun in New Zealand it would have had to be granted a permit.”
That's ridiculous tabloid journalism. They attempt to claim that expired passports represent multiple identities and a flight risk, drag up unrelated dirt from Kim's past, slanderously characterise MegaUpload as "a repository for films, TV shows and books, where users could watch content without charge". At least they are honest with some further amusing tidbit about the gun: Davison said the gun found in an open safe in the "panic room" with Dotcom had never been used and only had a rubber bullet.
I don’t see any signs of that. It’s a report of what was said at one of the court hearings. If you have a more verbatim version of what transpired, I’d love to read it.
> MegaUpload [is a] "a repository for films, TV shows and books, where users could watch content without charge"
That sounds like a charitable description of what Megaupload was. They could’ve easily characterized it as a child porn and terrorism information ring.
"The real question then comes to who in the command structure decided to use such group for serving a warrant"
"such group" needs practice similar to how firemen use controlled fires to practice their skills. As such it makes total sense that you would use this as an opportunity to hone the groups skills for a time when the target is much more important.
I've seen cases where the NYPD sends officers overseas to (sorry can't find a link) help with matters that have nothing to do with NYC at all. I assume this has to do with some kind of practice for when they need the same at home.
Oh geez the point is they use it for practice. Nobody is advocating (and it wasn't the point of my comment) that a situation is setup for that purpose.
Nobody is advocating (and it wasn't the point of my comment) that a situation is setup for that purpose.
I think you missed my point. When firemen want to practice they set up a fake fire at a safe location. When paramilitary police forces want to practice, they should and do set up a fake raid at a safe location, rather than practicing on some random non-violent offender's home.
Reading the Wikipedia article about the task force, their job is in dealing with high risk situations involving armed offenders and possible terrorism related events. They also train with New Zealand Special Air Service Commandos. In that context, the raid makes much more sense in how it was conducted, with silencers, helicopters, dogs and 20-30+ personal. The real question then comes to who in the command structure decided to use such group for serving a warrant, and collecting evidence for an assisting copyright infringement case. Given the nature of the crime, the low threat level (admitted in court), this is rather uniquely in history. One might also wonder how much influence the FBI had in the decision.