Kim Dotcom used Kiwibank, BNZ

Megaupload founder used Kiwibank and BNZ accounts, documents alleging massive copyright infringement and money laundering show

23rd Jan 12, 12:27pm by Bernard Hickey

Kim Dotcom posing in front of his NZ registered Mercedes with the number plate "guilty."

Kim Dotcom, the New Zealand resident accused of copyright infringements worth US$500 million and money laundering worth up to US$175 million, had bank accounts with Kiwibank and the Bank of New Zealand.

A 72-page indictment from a Grand Jury in the US District Court of Virginia was issued over the weekend showing Dotcom's financial affairs. The indictment was published after Dotcom and six of his colleagues from his Megaupload company were arrested in raids on the Dotcom mansion property they occupied near Coatesville north of Auckland.

The indictment showed US$50 million had been seized from bank accounts around the world, including "Kiwibank, Account No. XX-XXXX-XXXX922-00, in the name of
Megastuff Limited Nominee Account No. 1 and Bank of New Zealand, Account No. XX-XXXX-XXXX200-04, in the name of Cleaver Richards Trust Account for Megastuff Limited."

The indictment alleges Dotcom used New Zealand and bank accounts in New Zealand to launder money obtained from selling subscriptions to and advertising on a range of Megaupload sites that allowed users and subscribers to upload copyrighted material such as movies and music and then share it with with other users and subscribers.

"On or about March 15, 2010, a member of the Mega Conspiracy created Megastuff Limited, a New Zealand company, that has facilitated the transfer to New Zealand of
millions of dollars in illicit proceeds and assets for the personal financial gain of DOTCOM and other conspirators, as well as to facilitate additional operations of the Mega Conspiracy," the indictment said.

The indictment also showed Dotcom had bought New Zealand government bonds and held them through Computershare.

Stuff reported that Dotcom obtained New Zealand residency in 2010 after buying NZ$10 million worth of government bonds. Immigration NZ said Dotcom had disclosed his previous convictions and jail sentences in Germany for insider trading when applying for residency, but it had used clauses in the Immigration Act allowing it to exercise discretion in allowing residency.

This article was first published in our email for paid subscribers this morning. See here for more details and to subscribe.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

42 Comments

by Gareth Vaughan | 23rd Jan 12, 12:32pm 1327275125

I wonder if he has a gun licence?

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Jan 12, 12:34pm 1327275256

You can just upload them.

Doubt he'll be shooting through, though.

by Andrewj | 23rd Jan 12, 12:46pm 1327275964

Discretionary entry normally means the Immigration Minister had his finger in somewhere, did he donate to any political parties?

Its very odd that he had fraud convictions and was allowed residence, I guess money talks.

by goNZ | 23rd Jan 12, 12:59pm 1327276745

If 'e gets bail it could provoke a Diplomatic Incident with USA . If 'e dosent get bail and gets shipped off to US (G-Bay for a bit of surfing?) the 'Uman Rights boys wont b 2 happy. Option 3 could be he stays in clink here on the Condition he Pays a Contribution to the IRD of say $2 Billion , to help pay for the cost of Parliament Debate when this hits the fan.

by SmoKey | 23rd Jan 12, 3:57pm 1327287455

Or he could stand for election....or set up a Super PAC, like the ones Americans have for contribution to political campaigns ?

by Troy | 23rd Jan 12, 1:06pm 1327277165

R.I.P. Coud Storage (??-2012)

We barely knew you!

by Mark Hubbard | 23rd Jan 12, 1:11pm 1327277504

Before I start, I believe copyright is a legitimate property right, so should be defended by law, just as for any other property. That is, I am a libertarian, not a thieving anarchist.

That said, in this case, given I see opposition politicians have already jumped to the conclusion these men are guilty, I would ask of those politicians (while we, you know, wait for a trial to prove their guilt or innocence) the following:

If I build a private toll road between two major cities, not only am I likely to suspect, but I know for a certainty, that at some stage that road will be used to commit criminal acts, be it to transport stolen goods from a burglary of a house on that road, or whatever.

Am I liable for such crimes because I built a road that gave a burglar a getaway route? If so, why?

Do I have any responsibility to police my road for such criminal behaviour? If so, why?

(And after that, just as an aside, even if guilt is proven, the power of the State, in collusion with the US, shown here is frightening: from the obvious snooping of these mens' electronic communications, to the brute force of the police raid. I'm not comfortable with either side of this story).

by Bernard Hickey | 23rd Jan 12, 1:34pm 1327278877

Tribeless.

Read the 72 page indictment.

You may not make the road argument then.

cheers

Bernard

by Mark Hubbard | 23rd Jan 12, 1:56pm 1327280216

You may well be right Bernard. I'm on neither side of this issue, just trying to point out assuming guilt here you have to answer those two questions of mine with satisfaction.

I don't have time to read 72 pages on anything at the moment: do the charges include these men actually downloading copyright material themselves, or just that their site allowed others to do so? (If the latter, then both my questions are relevant, even if they were aware of this).

My other point was that opposition MPs' have just assumed guilt here, which is downright irresponsible from people in their position: innocent until proven guilty, and QC Paul Davidson certainly seems to think innocent:

Quote:

In a strong bail application, Mr Dotcom’s lawyer Paul Davidson QC has said that the US government, including the FBI, have completely misunderstood the reality of Mr Dotcom’s business.

Mr Davidson told the court the business did not involve the illegal downloading of copyright films, television series or music.

by Gareth Vaughan | 23rd Jan 12, 2:22pm 1327281754

I'm assuming that's actually Paul Davison QC. If so, he's one of the better defence lawyers going around.

by Mark Hubbard | 23rd Jan 12, 2:45pm 1327283116

Yes he is. These guys can afford the best, and the 'best' doesn't see guilt here, just, by inference, a bunch of oaffish State thugs throwing around their weight. It will be interesting.

Again, the State should only be going for individuals sharing files illegally, not the owners of a legitimate site for file sharing, even if - per my questions above - they may have had knowledge that by its nature, some of the traffic on their site was illegal. The only reason for this raid should be if there is hard evidence that each of these four men illegally downloaded copyright files - per 72 pages indictment, is this the case?

by scarfie | 23rd Jan 12, 5:28pm 1327292915

It will be a fascinating case to watch. I have skimmed it and 13, 14, 22-25 & 69 don't look good for them if there is sound evidence to back up the summary in the indictment. I only skimmed and there seems an awful lot of waffle in there that doesn't seem relevant.

The use of the term 'Mega Conspiracy' seems a bit out of order, as does 'engaged in criminal copyright infringement'. That is for the court to decide and the emotive language makes me suspicious of the standard of evidence they have.

I would say there will be a significant battle over admissibility of evidence and whether it has been lawfully collected.

At worst they seem to have 'aided and abetted' rather than commited the crimes alleged, but that is still criminal intent.

by bob | 23rd Jan 12, 2:50pm 1327283406

Did you get permission from the original authors of the indictment to link to their document - you may have aided a copyright violation that will see interest.co.nz raided by the FBI

by speckles | 23rd Jan 12, 9:17pm 1327306662

BH, I've seen a few indictments in my time..I would reserve judgment until you see the weight of evidence.

Still I'm sure they will get them on something, I would not want to be fighting in court concerning electronic evidence...... given the technology out there.

The whole aspect of our human rights as NZ residents in this situation leaves me cold and yet few seem to care.

by JP | 23rd Jan 12, 1:09pm 1327277386

Megaupload guys know this case will be thrown out or settled out of court. I'm surprised they were based here. Then again NZ has the best system to hide and launder your money.

by Bernard Hickey | 23rd Jan 12, 1:35pm 1327278912

Again.

Read the indictment.

cheers

Bernard

by iconoclast | 23rd Jan 12, 1:21pm 1327278115

The idiot. Should have changed his name (again) to Wiremu Waikikamukau and kept his head down.

by goNZ | 23rd Jan 12, 1:57pm 1327280247

Will he qualify for the Accomodation Supplement if the yanks kill his income ?

by scarfie | 23rd Jan 12, 5:35pm 1327293323

Perhaps they could bail him to Hotchin's place to cut down on costs.

Mind you my neighbour works for dotcom and he apparently has 50 odd personal staff at the address, so maybe they should do it the other way around and bail Hotchin to his address.

by Basel Brush III | 23rd Jan 12, 2:04pm 1327280684

Yanks trying to own our justice system ?

by Chairman Moa | 23rd Jan 12, 3:01pm 1327284076

The chinese has already done it with the Taxi driver case

by Kakapo | 23rd Jan 12, 2:36pm 1327282617

off topic, but Gummy Bear Hero shouldn't miss seeing this:

http://www.etsy.com/listing/44757849/gummi-bear-version-of-the-scream-a…

by Gummy Bear Hero | 23rd Jan 12, 4:23pm 1327289004

Worth every penny of the $US 375 price tag , for art of such quality , grandeur , .. .. and flavour .....

....... thankyou , Mr Kakapo .

by Kunst | 23rd Jan 12, 4:35pm 1327289745

GBH – what a nonsense – that is when real art gets hammered by some “plaster- idiots” so called casual bakers - breaking copy rights with cheap copies – by people who probably never went to art school - zh, zh.

by Gummy Bear Hero | 23rd Jan 12, 4:54pm 1327290843

How many of these album covers were designed by you , Walter ?

www.designer-daily.com/25-worst-album-covers-2968

# 15 is my favourite , I'm convinced that the " chick " on the far right is actually British comedian Stephen Fry in drag !

by Kunst | 23rd Jan 12, 5:00pm 1327291210

Gummy - with some of my political collages (never published) I can do worse then that.

by OMG | 23rd Jan 12, 5:22pm 1327292566

Don't just look at numero uno, when you can listen while you throw up!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaNk2zu4lLU

( nothing much to do here in HK on New Years Day - Year of the Dragon, LOL!)

Gotta go - the tribe's just turned up for a feed.

by Gummy Bear Hero | 23rd Jan 12, 5:28pm 1327292939

The hairy beary legs are a sight ot behold ......

...... but what jugs , man ...... hot hooters !

by scarfie | 23rd Jan 12, 5:32pm 1327293142

Ahh the answer to my comment below. No.

by scarfie | 23rd Jan 12, 5:31pm 1327293094

Are the state of those legs my imagination?

by Gummy Bear Hero | 23rd Jan 12, 5:47pm 1327294074

.... they'll be running through your dreams tonight ..... those hot chunky hairy legs , coming for you ... faster & faster ....... hot , sticky & hairy ...... beads of perspiration ......

... but you're rooted to the spot ! ..... can't move , as those amazonian legs come pumping toward you , hair trailing in the breeze .....

.. and no cut-throat razor to hand just when you most need one .......

aaaaaarrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !

by Chairman Moa | 23rd Jan 12, 5:32pm 1327293137

"breaking copy rights with cheap copies – by people who probably never went to art school - zh, zh."

Well I do know of one well known NZer who signed off an artwork that was done by someone else. But then she's now doing very well in NY so I guess she can say "stuffed the arts scene - there isn't any money in it!"

by Farky | 23rd Jan 12, 6:07pm 1327295274

So it would appear that "they" have taken his money from bank accounts before he is found guilty. What happens if he is found innocent or NZ refuses extradition.. Will he get his money back? Can he sue Kiwibank for his missing assets? Something wrong with all this.

by Wolly | 23rd Jan 12, 6:18pm 1327295898

"Something wrong"....jeez farky you don't actually think your loot in a bank is.... well....your loot do you....?

by happyfunball | 23rd Jan 12, 6:29pm 1327296560

At first blush I thought he might be a victim of unreasonable anti-priracy legislation, but after reading a bit about what they were up to I'm frankly surprised he didn't end up in jail sooner.

How many international criminals are we harbouring here?

I guess we really are just Mexicans with cellphones after all !

by robby217 | 23rd Jan 12, 7:56pm 1327301771

I don't know if we're that bad.

Wasn't it drug money providing the liquidity to the US banking system in the crisis of '08?

by Farky | 23rd Jan 12, 6:30pm 1327296653

Yes!!

A bank manager once told me that if you get money from a customer that you think is going broke, you should deposit it in a new account, Wait till it clears, remove the money and close the account. That way the receivers cant just debit your account for the money. Which apparently they are allowed to do.

by Wolly | 23rd Jan 12, 6:42pm 1327297360

So for a dotcom wizzbangwallop german he is kind of dumb...right.! ....his loot is frozen and his toys are gone...now he's feeding the lawyers....

by Chairman Moa | 23rd Jan 12, 7:13pm 1327299236

er ist nicht so schlau wie wir denken, er ist

by scarfie | 24th Jan 12, 7:39am 1327343989

The small lesson I saw in this was that with all that money he still got caught, depsite having a full time security professional that was armed.

It gives a good indication that civil unrest develops from the OWS movement, then those with the assets they wish to protect will need significant means to defend them. Dotcom has just showd that a couple of hundred million isn't enough. Those that think they are rich, well how rich really are you?

by rastus1 | 24th Jan 12, 9:46am 1327351604

.......I wonder what the situation will be as regards the Proceeds of Crime legislation that we have in NZ? Can we (NZ) not sieze his assets for ourselves. Bring out the legal teams!!!

by JB | 17th Oct 13, 2:46pm 1381974417

Hollywood - The big picture ..

Hollywood supported Obama and the Democrats big time $ wise last election, but there's no free lunch out there so now it's payback time. They were losing big bucks to his site.

Won't be long before KDC's on his way to the land of the free where he is assured of a fair trial and many years behind bars.

Just remember the extradition is simply so he can face trial - not his guilt or innocence and we were very happy to use the arrangement we have with the US when it suited us.

If you think that having a prominent QC argues for ones innocence - on that basis every murderer in the country is innocent. Yeh Right.