“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.

“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.

“Written by Steven Dudley

A legal safeguard built into Guatemala’s justice system is being used to stall the extraditions to the United States of some of the country’s most notorious suspected drug traffickers.

The writ of amparo — which is something along the lines of an injunction in the United States, or “accion tutela” in Colombia — provides widespread “relief” or “protection” for the appellate who feels that a statute, law or government action is violating his rights under the country’s constitution.

The amparo is a broad measure that can also be used to reclaim rights as well, such as the right to obtain government-generated documents (equivalent to the Freedom of Information Act in the United States). As such, it is a sacred legal tool.

However, lawyers of some of Guatemala’s most notorious suspected organized crime figures are repeatedly employing the amparo in what appears to be an effort to indefinitely delay the extradition of their clients.

There at least nine high-profile suspects awaiting extradition who have used the measure.

1. Waldemar Lorenzana, alias “The Patriarch,” the long-time head of the Lorenzana clan, a diverse and powerful trafficking group that has been accused of working with both the Sinaloa Cartel and the Zetas.

2. Elio Lorenzana (pictured above), the son of Waldemar, and a suspected trafficker in his father’s organization.

3. Juan Ortiz Lopez, alias “Chamale,” the Guatemalan contact for the Sinaloa Cartel in the San Marcos state along the Mexican border.

4. Mauro Salomon Ramirez, a top lieutenant for the Chamale organization.

5. Alma Lucrecia Hernandez, Salomon’s replacement after his arrest in 2010.

6. Edgar Leonel Estrada, arrested for importing large amounts of pseudoephedrine, the raw material for methamphetamine, for the Mexican criminal organization Familia Michoacana.

7. Victor Emilio Estrada Paredes, who worked closely with his half-brother Edgar.

8. Byron Linares, a long-time drug trafficker who was captured then released in the early 2000s, then recaptured; Linares allegedly has connections in Colombia and sells illegal drugs to the Sinaloa Cartel, among others.

9. Alfonso Portillo, Guatemala’s ex-president who is accused of embezzlement, and has been tied to a group of ex-military intelligence personnel that facilitates drug trafficking, human smuggling, illegal adoptions, and other criminal activities.

The frivolous nature of the amparos has US authorities wringing their hands. In one case, the suspect’s lawyer filed an amparo contending that the words “United States” was not specific enough language to know who the accuser was, and that it could be confused with “the United States of Mexico.”

Others have made references to conflicts of interest within the court system, as this account from elPeriodico illustrates, attempting to sideline judges they deem unfavorable.

The most common amparos challenge the constitutionality of extradition (for example, see pdf version of what Elio Lorenzana’s lawyers filed in 2011, following his capture).

Guatemala allows extradition for cases that have been resolved or in cases in which the suspect is not wanted for a crime in Guatemala. But only Portillo and Linares still faces charges in Guatemala. Once those are settled, their lawyers are likely to file more amparos.

In the case of Portillo, this may be futile. Guatemala’s former president Alvaro Colom, in one of his last big decisions as head of state, authorized the extradition of one of his longtime political rivals just months after the courts, in a shameful ruling, absolved Portillo, and two of his accomplices, of several charges.

The amparo has also been employed against other judicial bodies seeking to prosecute organized crime figures, most notably the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), a United Nations-sponsored project that assists judicial and police authorities in investigating high-profile crimes.

The legal tactics go beyond amparos. On February 1, the day a court was to decide Elio Lorenzana’s fate, his lawyers resigned, leaving him without a defense and leaving the court with little choice but to suspend the hearing.

Traffickers in other countries have employed amparos as well, most notably in Mexico and Venezuela, where high-profile figures have argued extradition violates the constitution and their rights under it.

Amparos in extradition cases are not new, and US Congress has discussed their use in public hearings in the past. They have long been filed if the accused can face longer or more harsh sentences in the United States for their crimes than under their own countries’laws.

Some of the most significant Guatemalan traffickers, such as Otto Herrera and Mario Paredes, alias “El Gordo,” were captured in other countries, making their extraditions or deportations easier. Both Herrera and Paredes were tried and sentenced in the United States.

However, the Guatemala-based cases can take months or years, and US authorities have no option but to wait.”

————————————————————–

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 Guatemala 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.

“(AP) ST. JOHN’S, Antigua — An Antiguan judge on Monday upheld a decision paving the way for the U.S. extradition of a former financial regulator indicted in an alleged $7 billion swindle by Texas financier R. Allen Stanford.

High Court Judge Mario Michel on Monday rejected Leroy King’s challenge on a magistrate’s 2010 ruling.

The decision to extradite is now in the hands of Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer, who also serves as the Caribbean country’s external affairs minister. He made no immediate comments about King.

King was fired in 2009 as Antigua’s top financial regulator after being accused of accepting bribes to turn a blind eye to irregularities in Stanford’s financial empire. He also allegedly wrote false and misleading letters to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Dane Hamilton, King’s attorney, would not comment about Monday’s ruling, except to say that his client is “exploring other legal options.”

King, who remains under house arrest at his beachfront condominium just outside the capital of St. John’s, had led Antigua’s Financial Services Regulatory Commission. He has been indicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and obstruction of the SEC.

U.S. prosecutors allege Stanford orchestrated a massive Ponzi scheme by advising clients to invest more than $7 billion in certificates of deposit from the Stanford International Bank in Antigua.

Stanford’s attorneys contend the financier was a savvy businessman whose financial empire, headquartered in Houston, was legitimate.

At Stanford’s trial in Texas last week, the financier’s former finance chief testified that bribes of at least $10,000 to $15,000 were allegedly paid every three months to King.

King helped tip the financier off in 2005 when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission began investigating the CD program, Davis testified. Stanford help write the response King sent back to the SEC in 2006 saying his agency had found nothing wrong at the bank, he 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

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Antigua and Barbuda 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.

Robert Booth

“Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is to enter the final stage of his legal battle to avoid extradition to Sweden to face questioning over sex crime allegations.

After failing to persuade a magistrates and the court of appeal that the cross border warrant issued for his arrest was invalid, the Australian’s legal team will appeal to the supreme court in London to prevent his deportation.

Assange is wanted for questioning in Sweden over claims of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion made by two women he met on a visit to Stockholm in August 2010. He denies the claims.

The supreme court’s two-day hearing is unlikely to focus on the detail of the allegations against him, but the legal issue of whether the Swedish prosecutor who issued the European arrest warrant in December 2010 can be considered a valid judicial authority. Assange’s legal team, which will include Dinah Rose QC, an expert in civil liberties and European Union law, argues that it isn’t.

In Britain, as in the United States, only judges can normally approve arrest warrants. In Assange’s case, the warrant was issued by Sweden’s public prosecutor. Assange’s lawyers argue that the Swedish system is unfair because it puts the power to issue arrest warrants in the hands of the same people who are prosecuting him.

Seven judges rather than the usual five will hear the case “given the great public importance of the issues raised”, the court said. Their decision is not expected for several weeks.

Legal observers have suggested Assange faces an uphill struggle. Karen Todner, an extradition specialist at Kaim Todner Solicitors, said Assange’s lawyers were unlikely to overcome the benefit of the doubt usually afforded to other European countries’judicial systems.

British judges “absolutely defer” to their European counterparts’justice systems, she said, adding that she would be “very surprised” if Assange’s team won the day.

“I don’t think he’ll succeed,” said Peter Caldwell, an extradition barrister based at Dyers Chambers.

European arrest warrants are difficult to beat, and Caldwell argued that while Assange’s case was “well-argued … it doesn’t get beyond the obligation of the UK to give effect to European law.”

Julian Knowles QC, a specialist extradition barrister based at Matrix Chambers, has said an Assange win would mean that until the law was rewritten, extradition to Europe would become very difficult if not impossible.

In the background is the US investigation into WikiLeaks, which could potentially see Assange charged with espionage or other offences. His supporters fear that extradition to Sweden could be a prelude to an extradition to the US.”

————————————————————–

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.

Reporting by Gyles Beckford and Rebecca Hamilton

“Jan 25 (Reuters) – Efforts by the United States to extradite the mastermind of an alleged Internet piracy scheme from New Zealand to face copyright infringement and money laundering charges are likely to be long and complex.

Kim Dotcom, a German national also known as Kim Schmitz, will be held in custody in New Zealand until Feb. 22 ahead of a hearing of a U.S. extradition application.

U.S. authorities claim Dotcom’s file-sharing site, Megaupload.com, has netted $175 million since 2005 by copying and distributing music, movies and other copyrighted content without authorization. Dotcom’s lawyers say the company simply offered online storage and that he will fight extradition.

“It could take some considerable time to get through the whole thing,” said senior New Zealand lawyer Grant Illingworth, adding there were rights of appeal and procedural review to both sides.

Dotcom, 38, and three others, were arrested on Friday after a police raid at his rented country estate, reputedly New Zealand’s most expensive home, at the request of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Under New Zealand’s extradition law the prosecution must show there is enough evidence that would substantiate charges against Dotcom and the others accused of breaching local copyright laws.

“What the judge has to do is decide whether there is a prima facie case that would justify the person being put on trial if the offence had occurred in New Zealand,” Illingworth said.

“If the evidence doesn’t make out, what under New Zealand law amounts to a prima facie case, then the person walks away.”

A 1970 extradition treaty between the United States and New Zealand gives the U.S. 45 days from the time of Dotcom’s arrest to request extradition. The New Zealand Extradition Act, passed in 1999, gives the United States preferential status to access a streamlined process for making its request.

The judge who refused Dotcom bail said he could not assess whether the United States had a strong enough case against Dotcom, nor whether he had a good defense.

“All I can say is that there appears to be an arguable defense, at least in respect of the breach of copyright charges,” Judge David McNaughton wrote in his judgement.

CIVIL MATTER

Copyright infringement and illegal file sharing are normally civil matters in New Zealand, but there is a provision for criminal charges and a maximum 5-year jail term for serious breaches.

Rick Shea, a partner at Lowndes Jordan in Auckland, said there were some differences between New Zealand and U.S. copyright law, in terms of knowledge, that could be an issue.

Douglas McNabb, a U.S. lawyer who specializes in extradition defense, said extraditions to the United States have to meet probable cause – the same standard that is required for making arrests in the United States.

Although the extradition hearing is not a test of guilt or innocence, McNabb said Dotcom’s lawyers may argue they should be allowed a limited discovery process to show that probable cause has not been met.

Prime Minister John Key said the issues raised were serious and New Zealand would co-operate with the U.S. authorities.

“This is the largest, most significant case in Internet piracy so New Zealand is certainly going to work with the United States authorities to allow them to extradite Kim Dotcom,” he said on TV3.

According to Shea, New Zealand has never had an extradition proceeding involving copyright law. “I wouldn’t expect this to be sorted out quickly,” he said.

AGGRESSIVE CHARGES

Anthony Falzone, Director for Copyright and Fair Use at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, said it was too early to comment on the strength of the case, but questioned whether some of the allegations in the indictment would actually push Megaupload outside the safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

The indictment “pushes some pretty aggressive theories”, Falzone said.

The most recent Supreme Court case to deal with similar issues was in 2005. In MGM v. Grokster, the U.S. court highlighted the importance of intent in determining if an Internet firm was liable for its users infringing copyright.

“A lot of the Megaupload case may also rise and fall on the question of intent,” said Falzone.

With MGM, the court found the intent of the Internet company from the beginning was to build a tool to facilitate illegal sharing.

“Maybe that’s what the Feds (FBI) think they have here, too,” said Falzone.

The case is USA v. Kim DotCom et al, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, no. 1:12CR3.”

————————————————————–

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.

“By Associated Press

NEWARK, N.J. — A Portuguese man facing a sentence in his home country for plotting to kill his ex-wife has been ordered to be returned to Portugal, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

Manuel Albert Soares has fought extradition since he was detained in New Jersey last year.

A trial court acquitted Soares in 2007, but Portugal’s Supreme Court of Justice reversed the acquittal and sentenced him to four years and six months in prison.

By the time authorities issued a warrant for his arrest in 2009, Soares was in the U.S. Last year, the warrant was discovered when he was pulled over on the New Jersey Turnpike for driving in a carpool lane without the requisite number of passengers.

Soares and his attorney argued in U.S. District Court in December that the Portuguese court’s decision hadn’t been based on enough evidence to meet the burden of proof required to extradite someone from the U.S.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office contended it wasn’t the role of the U.S. courts to retry the case or consider evidence from the trial in deciding whether he met the criteria for extradition.

Thursday’s ruling upheld the decision of a U.S. Magistrate in Newark last May.

Soares was charged with attempted aggravated homicide in Portugal for trying to hire two hit men in 2006 to kill his ex-wife, Maria Teresa Franqueira Mourao, after Soares was fired from a business the couple jointly owned, according to court papers. The men he had tried to hire reached out to police and cooperated with authorities to continue negotiations with Soares on the hit, which was partially paid for but never carried out.

Soares, a native of Newark who holds dual American and Portuguese citizenship, has denied the charges.”

————————————————————–

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 Portugal 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.

“By Associated Press

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Honduras’ congress has approved legislation to allow extradition of its citizens charged elsewhere with drug trafficking, terrorism and organized crime.

Starting Feb. 1, the Central American nation will be able to sign extradition treaties with other countries, including the United States, which has sought the change.

Lawmakers agreed Thursday that Hondurans charged with high-level crimes can be prosecuted elsewhere. Honduras has barred extraditing its nationals since 1982.

The action comes four days after all 158 Peace Corps volunteers left Honduras because a wave of violence and other drug-related crimes posed a high risk for them. The U.S. is sending personnel to analyze security problems.”

————————————————————–

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 Honduras 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.

“By Marina Sysoyeva

Jan. 19 (Bloomberg) — Russia’s Foreign Ministry said it’s “alarmed” that Swiss and American authorities didn’t inform it about the extradition to the U.S. of Vladimir Zdorovenin, who’s accused of online fraud.

“Unfortunately, it’s not the first case when U.S. security forces organize a detention of our nationals in third countries, often on dubious grounds and using a provocation,” Alexander Lukashevich, a ministry spokesman, said today in an e-mailed statement. “This concerns improper exterritorial application of U.S. legislation against Russian citizens.”

Zdorovenin was arrested last March in Zurich and arrived in New York on Jan. 16 after extradition by Swiss authorities, according to a statement from the office of U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan. His son Kirill is also wanted and remains at large. U.S. prosecutors charged the two Russian nationals with taking part in a scheme to gain illegal computer access to American bank accounts through bogus e-commerce websites.

At his Jan. 17 arraignment before U.S. Magistrate Judge Gabriel Gorenstein, Vladimir Zdorovenin pleaded not guilty to the charges through his lawyer, Sabrina Shroff. She declined to comment on the case after court.

Russia has insisted consular officers are granted access to Zdorovenin in the U.S. to guarantee his rights, according to Lukashevich.”

————————————————————–

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 Switzerland 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.

The Sydney Morning Herald on January 21, 2012 released the following:

“Kirsty Johnston

AN INTERNET multimillionaire accused of online piracy who allegedly headed up the global file-sharing website Megaupload.com from his luxury mansion north of Auckland faces extradition to the US after he was arrested yesterday by armed police at the request of US officials.

The FBI yesterday shut down Megaupload.com, one of the world’s most popular file-sharing websites, after filing an indictment in a US court earlier this month alleging its founder, Kim Dotcom, 37, (also known as Kim Schmitz) and six others, dubbed the ”Mega Conspiracy”, engaged in racketeering, copyright infringement and money laundering.

Schmitz, a former computer hacker, and six others were arrested on five charges laid in an indictment by a US grand jury in the state of Virginia.

The US Justice Department and the FBI who led the crackdown said Megaupload.com and other related sites generated more than $US175 million ($A168 million) in criminal proceeds and caused copyright holders more than $US500 million in lost revenue from pirated films and other content.

Megaupload is based in Hong Kong, but some of the alleged pirated content was hosted in the US on leased servers in Ashburn, Virginia, which gave US authorities jurisdiction, the indictment said.

Megaupload has boasted of having more than 150 million registered users and 50 million daily visitors, according to the FBI indictment. At one point, it was estimated to be the 13th most frequently visited website on the internet.

Schmitz founded the Hong Kong-based Megaupload website in 2005, which distributed a myriad of copyrighted works including movies, television programs, music, software and books. Megaupload also offered financial incentives for users to upload popular content and drive web traffic to the site.

Schmitz made $US42 million from Megaupload and other associated websites in 2010, according to the FBI’s indictment.

Despite opposition to the site’s operations from record labels and other copyright holders, many celebrities and artists backed its work – with chart-toppers Kanye West, Will.i.am and P. Diddy starring in a support video last year.

The US indictment paints a picture of a sprawling multinational operation, with more than 20 search warrants executed in nine countries, including New Zealand and the US.

When he appeared in Auckland’s North Shore District Court yesterday, Schmitz, a flamboyant German computer hacker who has past convictions from his home country, said he ”had nothing to hide” when appearing alongside three of his co-accused. ”We don’t mind if there’s press coverage if people want to photograph us, let them,” he said, overriding his lawyer, Auckland QC Paul Davison.

Detective Inspector Grant Wormald said it was ”likely” the men had also breached New Zealand copyright laws, although police had no intention of laying charges in the country.

The men face copyright infringement charges in the US which carry sentences of up to 20 years.

Schmitz is no stranger to being on the wrong side of the law, with a list of convictions including insider trading, credit card fraud, hacking and embezzlement. Schmitz also holds Finnish citizenship, and has Hong Kong and New Zealand residency.

Schmitz was granted New Zealand residency, reportedly after investing $NZ10 million ($A8 million) in government bonds and making a generous donation to the Christchurch earthquake fund.

Possessions taken from his $30 million mansion yesterday provided a hint of the extravagant lifestyles of the accused men.

More than 20 luxury cars worth a combined $6 million were taken from the site, including a 2008 Rolls-Royce Phantom Drophead Coupe, with the licence plate ”GOD”. Others including Mercedes Benzes, a Maserati and a Harley Davison motorbike.”

————————————————————–

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.