LAWYERS for Kim Dotcom have filed an exasperated brief in a US court asking the government to remove its teeth from Megaupload and its servers.
Megaupload and Kim Dotcom were raided in January 2012. This kicked off a legal game of cat and mouse in which the mouse, Dotcom, has managed to see off the cat on a number of occasions.
It is getting to the stage where it looks like there is nothing about the original raid that can be relied on. Dotcom, who launched Mega on the anniversary of the raid, seems sure of success, and so does his legal team.
Our case will expose US/NZ spy secrets, DOJ / White House / NZ govt corruption and broad illegal conduct against us. #Dangerous— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) January 29, 2013
In a court filing they accuse the US government of overreaching and failing to have any real grasp of an actual case. They ask that Megaupload be allowed to launch a proper challenge to the charges, and soon.
"More than a year has now passed since Megaupload was branded a criminal, with no opportunity to date to clear its name or to challenge the charges against it. More than a year has passed since every penny of the company's assets was frozen, yet there has been no pre- or post-seizure hearing for Megaupload to contest the propriety of that action," it says.
"Megaupload's servers - which house the universe of relevant evidence against which the Government's allegations against Megaupload might potentially be fully and fairly assessed one day - have been taken offline for lack of funding..., gathering dust and in danger of deteriorating. And Megaupload's innocent consumers have been forced to go more than a year without any access to their property."
They raise the question of why, as a criminal defendant, they have not been allowed to provide a fair defence, and suggest that the US government stomped its way into Dotcom's business and is now refusing to take its boot away.
"The Government's conduct of this case is to the contrary, raising grave questions about whether the Government is intent on being judge, jury, executioner, and asset collector without benefit of the adversarial process and protections," it adds.
"Certainly the prosecution to date [...] has denied Megaupload any semblance of due process. Megaupload asks this Court to right that wrong." µ
Sign up for INQbot – a weekly roundup of the best from the INQ