Police justify extreme raid of DotCom's mansion by saying they thought he had an internet "Doomsday - Polidicks

[IMG]http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201232/SCCZEN_A_20012012HOSDSDOTCOM2_460x230.jpg[/IMG] [quote]Anti-terrorist police stormed Kim Dotcom's mansion to search for a "Doomsday" device the FBI feared would [B]wipe out evidence of internet piracy around the world. [/B] The High Court at Auckland heard yesterday, during a judicial review of the police raid, that they did not find one, then for an hour left a prime target with exactly the sort of device the FBI believed could be used to set off the deletion mechanism. Thirty armed police stormed Dotcom's Auckland home by road and air to find the device in the FBI-inspired raid in January. Almost 30 other officers followed to search for evidence using a warrant since ruled invalid. The fate of evidence gathered is to be decided after a hearing this week in the High Court. Dotcom's lawyer, Paul Davison, QC, lambasted police for a "disgraceful performance". "What this comes down to is a woefully incompetent and inept performance by the New Zealand police at all stages and at all levels of this operation," he said. "Those responsible for planning are shown to be deficient in their judgment to a serious degree." But Detective Inspector Grant Wormald, who oversaw the operation for the Organised and Financial Crime Agency, (Ofcanz), said the operation - part of a global raid on Dotcom's Megaupload filesharing company - was an example of the "thorough and professional execution of a search warrant". Again, Mr Davison questioned police claims a helicopter gave a critical speed advantage to halt the destruction of evidence. The move led to the involvement of the special tactics group (STG) as the only police trained to operate from helicopters. Mr Wormald said he was told by the FBI that Dotcom "carried a device with him to delete servers around the world". Earlier evidence stated no such device was ever found. Mr Davison, who had called it a "Doomsday" device, was told the device could have been triggered in seconds from any computer, laptop or phone in the possession of about 20 people on the property. The QC then quoted police evidence which showed one of the men facing extradition was left with his iPhone for almost an hour. [B]"The potential destruction device had been left in his pocket."[/B] Mr Wormald replied: "It happens to be something that shouldn't have happened at the time." The officer also denied that police instructions setting out the process for involving the £ were compulsory. The rules state that operations using the elite unit "must" be approved by the head of national operations, Assistant Commissioner Nick Perry. Instead, the operation was approved by Assistant Commissioner Malcolm Burgess - also the head of Ofcanz, the agency that wanted the £ involved. Mr Wormald said the police manual gave officers "a jolly good steer" and police headquarters was a flexible environment. Mr Davison asked about the people who watched the operation unfold on video from the North Shore policing centre on the day of the raid. The United States' most senior law enforcement officer for cyber crime, Jay Prabhu, was present with Mr Wormald and Crown Law Office staff watching a video feed. Asked where the broadcast was from, Mr Wormald refused to say. In response to a question from Chief High Court Judge Helen Winkelmann, Mr Wormald said he rejected the option of arresting Dotcom after he left a recording studio about 4.30am, saying: "We were trying to delay as long as we could them making a call to a lawyer." After Dotcom was advised of his rights he could phone a lawyer. "You give him a phone and he makes that phone call in private, the cat's out of the bag."[/quote] Courtesy of [URL="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10826176"]The New Zealand Herald[/URL] Funniest fuckin' thing I've read all week.

It's like they hardly even know what the internet is...

That holds slightly less credibility than "the dog ate my homework" as an excuse.

IT Crowd pops into head = The Internet ? [IMG]http://puu.sh/QJpM[/IMG]

Why would anyone who got rich off the internet would want to destroy it? Pure logic.

Too bad I captured the device before they got there, tonight I hold the internet hostage!

...[B][I]WHAT?[/I][/B]

We must invade Dotcom's house, [B]he has WMDs![/B]

reminds me of "weapons of mass destruction"

[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;37182755]It's like they hardly even know what the internet is...[/QUOTE] Man, this internet thing sounds really bad. We need to find the guy who has it soon!

I don't know what to think of this, did they ACTUALLY think that or is it a poor excuse?

[QUOTE=usaokay;37183019]Someone should make a device that deletes all the internet porn in the world.[/QUOTE] I will! EDIT: Guys this is a joke.

that seems like something a villain from austin powers would have...

kim dotcom just wants to steal all of the internet for himself!

It seems like the FBI all saw The Dark Knight Rises recently and were all "That'll be our excuse - Dotcom is Catwoman! He was looking for the Blank Slate! That's why we had to stop him, because he's Catwoman!"

Create massive DDOS network to target all porn sites: Hold internet hostage.

When in doubt, blame WMDs.

[QUOTE=draugur;37183120]Create massive DDOS network to target all porn sites: Hold internet hostage.[/QUOTE] Good luck finding all of them.

World Wide WMDS

Those were some pretty serious WMDs, too: [img]http://www.fileinfo.com/images/icons/files/128/wmd-1057.png[/img]

They used a similar excuse when prosecuting Kevin Mittnick. The prosecutor said that by just whistling in to a phone he could launch a nuclear missile.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37184099]They used a similar excuse when prosecuting Kevin Mittnick. The prosecutor said that by just whistling in to a phone he could launch a nuclear missile.[/QUOTE] They're basically playing off the ignorance of the general public. Though this...I don't know anyone foolish enough to believe that an "internet doomsday device" is an actual thing.

I think this alone proves that nobody knows anything about the internet in this piracy case I mean come on, a 10 year old knows that it's a massive steaming pile of bullshit

Sensationalist headline indeed, there was nothing "extreme" about the raid.

[QUOTE=Daring_Robin;37184086]Those were some pretty serious WMDs, too: [img]http://www.fileinfo.com/images/icons/files/128/wmd-1057.png[/img][/QUOTE] I can picture a detective screaming at Kim DotCom "Where are the WMDs!?" As Kim points to his laptop with Windows Media Player opened "They're right here!"

It wasn't a device to bring down the internet (eye-rolling etc etc), but something that'd destroy computer evidence. Way to sensationalize it.

[QUOTE=scout1;37184317]It wasn't a device to bring down the internet (eye-rolling etc etc), but something that'd destroy computer evidence. Way to sensationalize it.[/QUOTE] But the servers was seized by the FBI before the raid.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;37184279]Sensationalist headline indeed, there was nothing "extreme" about the raid.[/QUOTE] They treated him like he was a drug lord, or a terrorist leader, which is completely excessive and honestly a bit disgusting. Christ, they approached this like they were taking down Bin Laden.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;37184361]They treated him like he was a drug lord, or a terrorist leader, which is completely excessive and honestly a bit disgusting. Christ, they approached this like they were taking down Bin Laden.[/QUOTE] They treat him like the money launderer and fraudster he is accused of being, a man who gained millions off advertising a pirate haven and has a past of embezzlement and insider trading. Personally I think it's great the police have stopped treating "white-collar" crime with such laxness.

[QUOTE=scout1;37184439]They treat him like the money launderer and fraudster he is accused of being, a man who gained millions off advertising a pirate haven and has a past of embezzlement and insider trading. Personally I think it's great the police have stopped treating "white-collar" crime with such laxness.[/QUOTE] They aren't though, it's only against 'pirates' that this occurs.