Swizz Beatz Refuses To Cooperate In Megaupload Case
Swizz Beatz name has once again come up in Megalupload Case, as many of you may know Megaupload had been shut down by authorities back in April.
The US Attorney’s Office accuses Swizz Beatz of refusal to cooperate in the ongoing case against Megaupload. At one point Swizz Beatz was said to be the CEO of the mega file sharing network, but that was denied several times by his attorney.
Despite the claims federal authorities are targeting Swizzy in efforts to continue the case against Megaupload in America.
The latest development in the case against the shut down online storage site is the byproduct of Megaupload’s request to dismiss a federal indictment against the company on the grounds that they are a foreign corporation, and thus cannot be prosecuted in America.
The US Attorney’s Office countered on Friday, July 13 with a 20-page motion citing the involvement of US citizens David Robb and Swizz Beatz (named in the motion as Kasseem David Dean).
The reports conflict the earlier statement from Rothken, who said Swizz was merely in negotiations to become the CEO of Megaupload. And just to add a kicker US Attorney’s Office is now saying that Swizz has refused to cooperate with their investigation, making him liable to legal action.
The portion of the motion involving Swizz Beatz is cited below.
After Defendant Dotcom became Defendant Megaupload’s Chief Innovation Officer, the company appears to have employed at least two Chief Executive Officers in the United States: first David Robb and then Kasseem David Dean (also known as Swizz Beatz). These individuals represented the company before the Office of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) in relation to Megaupload.com’s inclusion on the Notorious Markets Review, and more recently, Mr. Dean through counsel has refused to cooperate with the government’s investigation. Delivering a summons to Mr. Dean, a resident of the United States, in his capacity as apparent Chief Executive Officer should also constitute proper service of process upon an officer of the company.
A full digital version of the 20-page motion is available via Scribd.com.