Theresa May to review UK extradition treaty with US

February 22, 2012

The Guardian on February 22, 2012 released the following:

“Home secretary to lead thorough review of extradition treaty following anger at recent deportations, David Cameron says

Nicholas Watt, chief political correspondent

Theresa May, the home secretary, will conduct a “proper, sober, thoughtful review” into Britain’s extradition treaty with the US amid anger at a series of deportations, David Cameron has announced.

The prime minister told MPs the home secretary would take account of the views of parliamentarians after he was asked about the case of Christopher Tappin.

The retired company director from Kent is due to be flown to the US on Friday to face allegations of selling arms to Iran. Tappin, 65, admits shipping batteries that can be used in Hawk air defence missiles but says he thought they were for use in the car industry. He said he had no idea about their eventual destination.

Tappin’s case was raised by his MP, Jo Johnson, at prime minister’s questions on Wednesday. Johnson, the MP for Beckenham and brother of the London mayor, Boris Johnson, said: “US marshals will on Friday escort my 65-year-old constituent Chris Tappin from Heathrow to a jail in Texas, where he will face pressure to plea-bargain in order to avoid lengthy incarceration pending a financially ruinous trial for a crime he insists he did not commit.

“Could the prime minister say what steps he is considering to reform the US/UK extradition treaty that been so unfair to the likes of Gary McKinnon and now my constituent, Mr Tappin?”

The prime minister indicated the government would not block the extradition of Tappin. He said: “I quite understand why [he] raises this case of his constituent. In the case of Chris Tappin obviously he has been through a number of processes including the magistrates court and the high court. The home secretary has thoroughly considered his case.”

Cameron cited an independent report last year by Lord Justice Scott Baker, which said that the 2003 Extradition Act was not “lopsided” or biased against British citizens. Critics have said that the act, drawn up in haste after the 9/11 attacks, is unfair because British citizens do not enjoy the same level of legal protection as US citizens.

Gary McKinnon, the alleged computer hacker who has Asperger’s syndrome, faces extradition under the treaty.

The prime minister said: “[Jo Johnson] raises the point more generally of Sir Scott Baker’s report into the extradition arrangements, which he has made and we are now considering. He did not call for fundamental reform.”

But Cameron said May would lead a thorough review of the extradition treaty. “The home secretary is going to carefully examine his findings and also take into account the views of parliament that have been expressed in recent debates.

“Of course balancing these arrangements is absolutely vital. But I think it is important that at the same time we remember why we enter into these extradition treaties, which is to show respect to each other’s judicial processes and make sure that people who are accused of crimes can be tried for those crimes and Britain can benefit from that as well. So a proper, sober thoughtful review needs to take place and this case shows why.”"

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

US Attorney General assures India of help in 26/11 probe

February 22, 2012

Daily News & Analysis on February 22, 2012 released the following:

“With India seeking extradition of David Headley and Tahawwur Hussein Rana, the US has assured it of all possible help in bringing to book culprits of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

The assurance was given to Indian ambassador Nirupama Rao by US Attorney General Eric Holder in a meeting on Tuesday.

Rao met Holder and underlined the importance of cooperation in the investigation of the Mumbai terror attacks, in which India has sought extradition of the two accused who are currently lodged in a US prison.

“Attorney General Holder assured all possible assistance as provided within the framework of US law in this regard and underscored the importance the US attached to counter terrorism cooperation with India,” Indian Embassy spokesman, Virander Paul, said.

“Underscoring the crucial importance of cooperation in the investigation of the Mumbai terror attacks, Ambassador Rao expressed the hope that a few important aspects of the request for assistance in this regard would be fulfilled soon,” Paul added.

An Indian court last week ordered the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to produce Headley and Rana?- the two 26/11 accused lodged in a Chicago jail? before it on March 13.

Headley, who conducted surveillance operations in Mumbai for LeT targets, entered a plea bargain with the US authorities under which he would not be extradited to a third country.

Holder and Rao also discussed the growing India-US cooperation in diverse fields including counter-terrorism and mutual legal assistance in crime-related matters.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and India here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

US will ‘struggle’ to extradite Kim Dotcom

February 16, 2012

3news.co.nz on February 14, 2012 released the following:

“By Imogen Crispe

Internet piracy-accused Kim Dotcom could avoid extradition on a legal technicality, a previous benchmark case shows.

The US is currently looking to extradite the Megaupload founder but charges central to the case may not be sufficient to send Dotcom back.

Copyright infringement, one of Dotcom’s main charges is not covered in the US-New Zealand extradition treaty, and a 2002 case shows racketeering is not either.

In the historic case Bob Cullinane faced US charges of racketeering, visa fraud, alien smuggling and harbouring.

The case took two years and went to the Court of Appeal before Cullinane was discharged.

It concluded that racketeering and other offences were not extraditable offences under the Treaty.

The Treaty on Extradition lists many serious charges a person can be extradited on back to the US, including murder and assault.

Chapman Tripp partner Matt Sumpter told the National Business Review the US government would “struggle to extradite” on copyright and racketeering charges.

However, Philip Morgan QC, the lawyer for the accused Cullinane in the 2002 case, says racketeering and copyright infringement could be covered by the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime.

This could potentially override treaty laws between the US and New Zealand.

But Lowndes Jordon partner and copyright law expert Rick Shera told National Business Review the other charges seemed to rely on the copyright infringement charge.

He says this makes any extradition laws around the subsequent charges irrelevant.

Dotcom is currently being held in the Auckland Remand Prison after failing to get bail.

His lawyers last week appeared in the High Court at Auckland to fight restraining orders around Dotcom’s assets.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and New Zealand here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

Israeli judge: Fugitive can’t be deported unless U.S. prison provides kosher food

February 14, 2012

Haaretz.com on February 14, 2012 released the following:

“Jerusalem judge apparently did not try to ascertain whether Lawrence Seth Wayne, who had been sentenced by a Florida court to 19 years in prison for a 1998 hit-and-run, is actually religious.

By Tomer Zarchin

An American hit-and-run driver who was finally found in Israel last year, after fleeing Florida over a decade ago, may not be extraditable because Florida does not allow its prisoners to receive kosher food.

Jerusalem District Court Judge Ben-Tzion Greenberger on Sunday ruled that Lawrence Seth Wayne, who had been sentenced by a Florida court to 19 years in prison for the 1998 road accident, could not be extradited to a state that would violate his right to practice his religion.

Greenberger thus accepted Wayne’s argument that sending him back to Florida would violate Israel’s Extradition Law, which forbids extradition to a foreign country if this is liable to “harm public policy or a crucial interest of the State of Israel.”

If he was not assured kosher food, extraditing Wayne would constitute “a serious violation of his most basic rights to freedom of religion and worship,” Greenberger said.

He could only be extradited if Florida provided him with kosher food in prison, or allowed him to serve out his sentence in one of the 35 U.S. states that do provide its prisoners with kosher food, Greenberger said.

Florida has refused to allow Wayne to receive kosher food in prison even if he pays for it privately, and insists he must begin serving his sentence in Florida while awaiting the proceedings to transfer him to another state.

In February 1998, Wayne, a twice-convicted drunk driver, was again driving drunk when he slammed into Donald Cantwell’s pickup truck in Delray Beach, mortally injuring him. Wayne fled the scene but was apprehended by police. Cantwell died two days later.

Wayne was convicted of DUI manslaughter and sentenced to 19 years, but was let out on $50,000 bond while he appealed the case. He lost the appeal and fled the country before he could be brought to prison.

He entered Israel in 2000 using a forged passport and an assumed name. He was located and arrested last year after a decade-long manhunt conducted by the FBI that was finally concluded with the help of the Israel Police.

Apparently Greenberger did not attempt to ascertain whether Wayne, who has married and started a family here, is actually religious or whether he was trying to use the kosher food problem as an excuse to avoid extradition.

His attorney, Eric Bukatman of the Public Defender’s Office, said on Monday he didn’t know how long Wayne had been observant. Since taking on the case last year, he has always seen Wayne wearing a knitted kippa and the matter was not raised in court, he said.

The Supreme Court in several instances has recognized the right of those being extradited to be able to observe religious tenets – including kosher food, prayers and the right to wear a kippa – in the requesting country.

Two years ago, for example, Supreme Court Justice Elyakim Rubinstein conditioned the extradition of a suspect to Ukraine on his receiving kosher food, even though the suspect wasn’t Jewish, because only his father was Jewish. The Ukrainian authorities complied.

In the past Florida had an arrangement for supplying kosher food to prisoners, but canceled it, even though it recognized that this would violate some prisoners’ rights.

When this was challenged in a federal court, the court accepted the state’s arguments that the inconvenience to individual prisoners was reasonable when balanced against the expense providing kosher food entailed. The court also cited the risk of disorder that could occur in a prison when some prisoners are seen receiving special food that might be better than what the others receive.

Greenberger said he had examined the rulings of the Supreme Court in similar cases and “could not find a single case in which it was declared so unequivocally that the fugitive would not receive kosher food if extradited to the United States.”

But the case is not necessarily closed. “The country requesting [Wayne's] extradition is not the state of Florida, but the United States of America,” Greenberger noted. “It is in its power to provide a simple and fitting solution to his legitimate need for kosher food, if not in Florida, then in one of the 35 states, or in the federal system, where kosher food is provided to kosher-observant prisoners.”"

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Israel here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

US cites United Nations treaty in Megaupload case

February 13, 2012

Computer World on February 13, 2012 released the following:

“Judge in bail hearing questions whether Dotcom extradition is lawful

BY MICHAEL FOREMAN

The United States government will be relying on a United Nations treaty aimed at combating international organised crime as the legal basis of its extradition to the US of Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom and other co-accused.

While the extradition hearing is scheduled to take place on February 22, some of the legal arguments that will be made at that hearing were foreshadowed at a bail-refusal appeal heard at Auckland High Court on February 3.

During the bail appeal, Dotcom’s lawyer Paul Davison QC, said the US was seeking to have Dotcom and other employees of Megaupload extradited in relation to charges of conspiracy to commit racketeering, money laundering and copyright infringement.

At this point the judge, Justice Raynor Asher interrupted Davison, asking him: “These are extradition offences? I assume you have satisfied yourself on that?”

Davison replied that criminal breach of copyright was not a scheduled offence [under New Zealand’s extradition treaty with the US]. The racketeering charge was said to have a similarity with a scheduled offence however “everything is derivative” from the copyright infringement charge.

“The funds which were derived from the business activity and the involvement of a group of people around the business activity is the basis of the allegation that this was racketeering … the movement of business proceeds and funds then becomes an allegation of money laundering, but the whole thing is pinned back to the existence of a criminal breach of copyright.

“I am not able to advance a position at this stage which would be as strong as to say that there is no strength to the US government’s case. But suffice to say that there is a substantial challenge to it, and it’s not at all clear that this is an extraditable situation.”

Asked whether he had discussed these matters with Crown prosecutor Anne Toohey, Davison said he had been waiting for ten or 12 days for the prosecution to respond to his request for documents.

“I have been frustrated by being unable to get access to a range of documents that underpin the steps that were taken to issue the provisional [arrest] warrant.”

“I have been requesting the Crown to provide me with the requisite documents, I have been told that the police hold the requisite documents and the police will respond.”

Davison said that the legal basis of the extradition request “may give rise to another proceeding”.

“It is a fundamental matter, it’s not being overlooked, and it is likely to be litigated,” he said.

Fergus Sinclair, a lawyer with the Crown Law Office who appeared as co-counsel with Toohey on behalf of the United States, said that while it was true no copyright offences were named in the extradition treaty, certain crimes where they involved trans-national organised crime, were subject to section 101b of the Extradition Act.

Under this section any offence which was punishable by a prison sentence of more than four years was deemed to be extraditable, and under the New Zealand Copyright Act the distribution of an infringing work could be punished by up to five years in prison.

Sinclair cited the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (TOC), which was passed by a UN general assembly resolution in 2000, as the basis of invoking the organised crime provisions of the Extradition Act.

Under the terms of TOC Sinclair said an “organised criminal group” had to consist of a structured group of three or more persons acting in concert with the aim of committing serious crime.

He said there were seven defendants in the Megaupload case, and that according to US grand jury indictment of January 5 members of the Megaupload conspiracy engaged in criminal copyright infringement and money laundering on a massive scale with estimated harm to copyright holders in excess of US$500 million.

Since the bail appeal hearing, several legal commentators have expressed the view that the Megaupload extradition case could be appealed to the New Zealand Supreme Court.

IT lawyer Rick Shera said that Davison’s submissions reinforced his opinion that the extradition case would be complicated.

“My view has always been that there’s a clear issue as to whether the extradition treaty is the end of the story or whether section 101b of the Extradition Act would be involved. Whatever happens you still go back to the [New Zealand] Copyright Act where differences between the NZ and US legislation may become significant.

“I would expect that after the first or second round, one or other of the parties will appeal.

“There hasn’t been a case like this in New Zealand before and, as far as you can you look at it from a general perspective and considering what is at stake, you would want it to be heard by the Supreme Court.””

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates, Extradition | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

Christopher Tappin to be extradited to the US within days

February 13, 2012

BBC on February 13, 2012 released the following:

“A former businessman will be extradited to the US within 10 days over charges of conspiring to sell batteries for Iranian missiles, his lawyer has said.

Retired Christopher Tappin, 64, of Orpington, denies unlawfully attempting to export batteries for Hawk air defence missiles.

His lawyer, Karen Todner, said his plea to the European Court of Human Rights had been rejected.

Mr Tappin has previously said he was the victim of an FBI “sting”.

In January his attempt to block the extradition through the UK courts ended when High Court judges Lord Justice Hooper and Mr Justice Cranston refused to allow him to take his case to the Supreme Court.

Mr Justice Cranston said time would now begin to run for his removal to the US.

Following the rejection from the court in Strasbourg, Ms Todner said: “The European Court of Human Rights has confirmed that they will not grant Rule 39 relief to Mr Tappin.

“Therefore his extradition to America will take place within the next 10 days.

“We truly hope that the UK Government will see this case as an example of the gross injustice to British citizens by the UK/USA extradition treaty and, as they declared in Opposition, they will now act quickly to make the necessary amendments.”

Mr Tappin, from south-east London, is wanted in El Paso, Texas, on a charge of conspiring to export defence articles without licence or approval and aiding and abetting the attempted export of defence articles without the required licence.

He is also accused of intentionally and unlawfully attempting to conduct financial transactions from the outside to a place inside the US, with the intent to promote the carrying on of a specified unlawful activity.

If convicted, Mr Tappin could face up to 35 years in jail. The extradition request says Mr Tappin had been involved in the conspiracy since April 2006.

‘Exporting car batteries’

He was charged in 2007 following an investigation by the US Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Mr Tappin, the former director of Surrey-based Brooklands International Freight Services, said he believed he was exporting batteries for the car industry in the Netherlands.

Arguing in the Strasbourg court for Mr Tappin, Edward Fitzgerald QC said that extradition would now be oppressive under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which protects private and family life, because Mr Tappin was responsible for taking care of his sick wife.

The judge rejected the submission saying “serious offending” was alleged against the retired businessman.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and United Kingdom here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

Russia asks for extradition deal

February 12, 2012

UPI.com on February 10, 2012 released the following:

“MOSCOW, Feb. 10 (UPI) — Russian officials Friday asked the United States to sign a bilateral extradition treaty or join existing international conventions.

“The Justice Ministry proposes either signing bilateral treaties on the extradition of criminals and repatriation of convicts. The second variant for the U.S. is to join the existing convention mechanisms, we will try to persuade our U.S. partners to do this too,” Russian Justice Minister Alexander Konovalov said Friday.

Currently, the two countries have no extradition deal, RIA Novosti reported.

“We raised these issues more than two years ago, during the first visit of a justice ministry’s delegation to the U.S. So far, frankly speaking, the U.S. side remains reluctant to accept our proposals,” the minister said. “But, on the whole, we hope to persuade them and we aim to do our best.”

Konovalov said relations between the two countries have been strained by legal proceedings against Russian nationals in the United States who were extradited from abroad without Russia receiving timely notification.

“Such practices are absolutely unacceptable to us. We, of course, think that it is understandable. … But people should not be abducted on the territory of third states, they should not be extradited illegally. Legal instruments and mechanisms should be used, and we are going to further discuss the issue with the Americans,” Konovalov said.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

US Govt ‘throwing everything’ at Dotcom

February 11, 2012

The New Zealand Herald on February 11, 2012 released the following:

“By Michael Dickison

The United States Government is throwing “everything in the book” at Kim Dotcom, say top forensic accountants. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is even expected to sign the final extradition request.

Charges against the founder of Megaupload, a file-sharing website, go beyond copyright infringements and include money laundering and racketeering.

PricewaterhouseCoopers director of forensic services Alex Tan said it followed a tendency by US prosecutors to take a “very wide interpretation of the law”.

“It’s a case that has demanded the world’s attention. If they’re going to do this, and spend all this money and go through governments, it’s not for a two-month jail sentence.

“They’re going to throw everything in the book and be very good at applying laws,” Mr Tan said.

An extradition request was part of a reciprocal treaty and not out of order – but it was nevertheless delicate and conducted at the highest levels, he said.

“It’s not done at the local level. It’s most likely that the Secretary of State – Hillary Clinton – personally signs it.

“Between the FBI and Hillary Clinton, it goes past a thousand eyes because they’re asking a sovereign country to put somebody on a plane.”

The final request would have to be robust, Mr Tan said.

“You’re not going to give Hillary Clinton a bunch of dud papers to sign, because it makes her look silly.”

Dotcom is in custody as he awaits a February 22 callover, having had requests for bail declined.

His heavily pregnant wife – who has been described as in a “frail” condition – is living at their house in Auckland with their three children.

Most of the family’s possessions have been seized by authorities.

The indictments for Dotcom and his co-defendants have been made available, but the official extradition request is yet to be lodged.

The deadline is March 5.

Mr Tan said the money-laundering and racketeering charges had been devised on the back of the alleged copyright infringements.

Money-laundering charges applied to any transactions of money made from serious crime – even where there was no attempt to conceal it, he said.

“A guy hits a grandmother over the head and steals her handbag for $30, then buys a pack of cigarettes with it – if you deal with it in any way at all it becomes money laundering,” he said, though he added that the original crime must be serious, usually carrying a jail term of at least five years.

As part of the charge, the indictment against Megaupload lists a series of payments to the firm hosting its servers.

Elsewhere in the document, the prosecutors allege that the website concealed its criminal activity because it withheld copyrighted files from its search results.

Mr Tan said the racketeering charge could be applied where a group of defendants faced two crimes out of a list of 35, which included copyright infringement and money laundering.

The charge had been “extremely successful” in elevating penalties and dealing to organised crime and the Mafia.

There was no direct equivalent to the charge in New Zealand, Mr Tan said, although various fraud charges could add up to something similar.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and New Zealand here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

Singapore court says four suspects can be extradited to U.S.

February 10, 2012

CNN on February 10, 2012 released the following:

“From Elizabeth Neisloss, For CNN

Singapore (CNN) — A Singapore court ruled Friday that four people can be extradited to the United States to face conspiracy charges after electronic components from a U.S. company were smuggled to Iran and ended up in explosives in Iraq.

The case is part of an effort by the U.S. to link Iran with attacks on its forces in Iraq.
The four Singaporeans — three men and a woman — were arrested in late October. They contested the extradition proceedings, and have 15 days to appeal.

U.S. authorities indicted them, as well as an Iranian citizen, on charges of funneling thousands of radio frequency modules from the United States to Iran. The Iranian citizen, Hossein Larijani, remained at large at the time of the indictment.

The United States alleges that 16 of the radio frequency modules were later found in improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Iraq that had not detonated. The explosive devices are often the weapon of choice for militants in Iraq, who regularly used them to attack U.S. and coalition convoys.

David Adelman, the U.S. ambassador to Singapore, welcomed the ruling.

“This ruling reflects the strong spirit of cooperation between the United States and Singapore in combating transnational crime, including the illicit trade in arms and equipment that can pose significant threats to the United States and the international community,” Adelman said in a statement.

Following the court’s decision Friday, two of the Singaporeans — Lisingm Yong Nam and Wong Yuh Lan, the female suspect — will be extradited to be charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States in relation to the radio frequency modules.

The other two — Lim Kow Seng and Hia Soo Gan Benson — will be sent to the United States to be charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States regarding the smuggling of dozens of military antennas, like those used on military aircraft and ships, from the United States to Hong Kong.

Lim Yong Nam, Lim Kow Seng and Hia plan to appeal, their lawyer said. Wong’s lawyer said he needed to talk to his client before saying whether she would appeal.

In making a decision on the extradition, the judge, Chia Wee Kiat, weighed the evidence provided by the U.S. indictment, citing emails, documents and affidavits from the U.S. case.

Chia said that if the alleged acts had indeed been committed, they would also be considered “conspiracy and cheating under Singapore law.”

He noted that the Singapore court’s role in considering the extradition request had been “to decide whether there is a prima facie case.” Chia said that “the task of resolving doubt and weighing the evidence should be left to the trial judge.”

The U.S. indictment alleges that the Singaporeans conspired to buy 6,000 radio frequency modules from an unidentified company in Minnesota and ship them through Singapore to Larijani in Iran.

The United States has in the past noted that Singapore — a major global transshipment port — needs to tighten its export controls, in particular of so-called “dual use” items, which can have both a civilian and military purpose

In this case, the radio frequency modules from the U.S. company have various commercial applications, including wireless local area networks to connect printers and computers in offices.

The United States says that radio frequency modules from the same U.S. company were recovered in 2008 and 2009 by coalition forces in Iraq as part of remote detonation systems for improvised explosive devices.

Prosecutors allege that the defendants told the Minnesota company that Singapore was the final destination for the components they were buying and also filed false paperwork with the U.S. government, saying the parts would be used in a Singapore telecommunications project.

The Singaporeans have been held without bail since their arrest, except Lim Yong Nam, who was released on bail on medical grounds.

They will all remain in prison until their extradition, except Lim Yong Nam, the judge said Friday.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Singapore here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

Russia to seek Bout’s extradition

February 9, 2012

The Voice of Russia on February 9, 2012 released the following:

“Russia will pull all levers to bring home convicted arms dealer Viktor Bout, who is currently being held in a US prison. This came in a statement by Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Aleksandr Lukashevich.
Following Viktor Bout’s conviction on November 2, his attorney Albert Dayan filed several motions to appeal the jury’s verdict. Viktor Bout appeared in court Wednesday afternoon to find out that all motions to dismiss the verdict have been rejected.

Albert Dayan, Bout’s attorney, continues to claim Bout is innocent.

“I still believe that Viktor Bout is innocent and that the law under which he was prosecuted is inapplicable to here.” – Albert Dayan

Bout, a Russian citizen, was arrested in Thailand in 2008, and then extradited to the United States two years later. Bout was convicted in a US court on four counts of conspiracy charges, ranging from killing US citizens to exporting surface to air missiles. What led to his arrest were several meetings with undercover DEA informants posing as members of the Columbian FARC. Their intention was to persuade Boot to sell them arms. However in court, Bout claimed he had no intention of doing so, and that he didn’t even have the capabilities to attain any weapons at the time. Throughout the trial, Dayan questioned the motives of the DEA agents, claiming they fed off misinformation and propaganda prior to pursuing their goal of capturing Bout and bringing him to the United States.

“The ultimate question is: why is he here? We believe that he was targeted based upon his reputation. And that reputation was not accurate as well. That reputation was created by media, by politics. And he’s prosecuted not because he did anything on this case, this case was created by the agents. It wasn’t alleged that he did anything wrong. The agents in this case created a case, they created a scenario that would pull him in”

During the trial, it was revealed that the undercover informants approached Bout several times to discuss a possible deal. The deal included arms and airplanes. Bout claims that his intention was to persuade the fake FARC to buy his remaining two planes that he had leftover from his previous business, but as it was revealed in the hours of recorded conversations, arms were part of the deal as well, at the request of the DEA informants. Bout claims he was going to simply sell two planes, and nothing else. The jury thought otherwise.

Following the courts rejection of Bout’s appeal, Judge Scheindlin took time to discuss another matter, the conditions under which Bout is held in jail.

Since his arrival to the US back in November 2010, Bout has been held at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York. Unlike the majority of prisoners there, Bout has been held in solitary confinement the entire time.

“He’s confined in a very small cell that has a bullet proof window. He has no indication of natural sunlight. His daily routing is taking several steps forward and several steps back. He has no contact with any human beings at all except for sporadic attorney visits.” – Albert Dayan

On February 3rd, Dayan submitted a letter to the judge requesting that Bout be transferred out of solitary confinement and placed into general population where he can be around other prisoners and enjoy the privileges of going outside. In the letter, Dayan outlined the conditions under which Bout was being held, and during Wednesday’s hearing Judge Scheindlin responded, “it seems harsh, its seems brutal, it seems unnecessary. It seems like something should be done.”

Despite Bout’s inhuman imprisonment, Dayan said Bout is surprisingly doing well.

“He’s keeping strong willed. He reads a lot, he thinks a lot, he writes a lot, so he keeps himself strong but how long could that last? That is the question.” –Albert Dayan

Bout faces 25 years to life in prison, and his sentencing date has been scheduled for March 12. Dayan Hopes to have Bout transferred prior to the sentencing.

The trial of the United States Government v. Viktor Bout has been watched closely by Russia. Russia still feels that Bout was extradited illegally and was tried not in accordance with international law. Alexander Otchaynov, the Vice Consul of Russian Consulate General in New York, said Russia’s opinion has not changed.

“Our position remains the same, our Russian citizen is innocent. I agree with the attorney and the judge that the process in which he is being held is inhumane, especially when it is a citizen of Russia that has not been convicted of any crime by an international court.” – Alexander Otchaynov

Bout’s attorney said he will try to persuade an international court to look into the case. In the meantime, Viktor Bout will most likely be transferred to a maximum-security prison in Colorado following his sentencing, where he will serve at least 25 years.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

Leave a Comment » | Extradition, international extradition, International Extradition Attorneys - McNabb Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by McNabb Associates, P.C.

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 337 other followers