With New Zealand authorities trying to overturn a ruling that a raid of Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom's mansion was illegal, new footage has surfaced showing police storming the home with helicopters, semiautomatic weapons, and attack dogs, despite the fact that police admitted Dotcom posed a "low risk."

Video shot from a helicopter carrying Special Tactics Group officers (and posted online as part of a 3News report out of New Zealand) shows police storming Dotcom's resort-like home on the morning of January 20. Within seconds of landing, four armed officers ran to the main door, and were followed by vans and later a second helicopter. Dotcom, his pregnant wife, their three children, guests, and a dozen staff were accounted for and contained by authorities serving a warrant to Dotcom, who faces conspiracy, money laundering, and copyright charges in the US.

Oddly, officers weren't wearing full combat gear. In court footage, a police officer explained: "We wanted to match the threat level, in this case a low threat, with our dress. We made that conscious decision not to wear full tactical gear. It wasn't appropriate in these circumstances."

Helicopters were needed, authorities say, because Dotcom's security might have stopped cars at the gate, and a quick raid was necessary to prevent destruction of evidence. However, Dotcom pointed out that the FBI had already taken over the machines in the data center where Megaupload's systems were hosted, preventing him from destroying evidence even if he wanted to.

In testimony this week, Dotcom also said authorities got rough with him even though he tried to surrender peacefully.

"Once they came up the stairs I had my hands like this," Dotcom said, with his hands in the air. "Within two seconds they were there and all over me. I had a punch to the face, I had boots kicking me down to the floor, I had a knee to the ribs. My hands were on the floor, one man was standing on my hand."

New Zealand police denied beating Dotcom. But internal police documents called the raid "heavy-handed," and "over the top," the New Zealand Herald reports. Legal hearings are ongoing as the High Court in Auckland hears the government's appeal of the earlier decision declaring the Dotcom home raid illegal.

Here is the 3News raid footage along with testimony from the case, for your viewing pleasure:

This is the kind of heavy handedness we see here in the states. I'm shocked that it happened in New Zealand.

Well the US was involved so...

...and spoons make you fat.

New Zealand could have handled this any way they wanted to, and they *chose* to execute it this way. I'm all for crucifying big content and the sway they have over the US government, but give credit/blame where it's due.

My suspicion is that these guys dream of being Navy SEALS just like in the movies, so I'm sure it was a quick rationalization to go from a simple door-knock with one or two plainclothesmen, to a balls out raid with helicopters, attack dogs, and assault weapons. You know, just in case the big fat nerd turned out to be a psychotic mutant supervillain.

The militarization of the police is happening all over the world. We get the same kinds of tactics here in Canada too (look at the G20 summit in Toronto.) There's no denying this trend is part of creating more police-like states. Rather than less police violence in the presence of shrinking crime rates, we see the opposite. The use of SWAT teams for white collar crimes is done for effect - get caught, expect heavy handed response regardless of guilt.

Meanwhile the corporate criminals who ACTUALLY steal millions of dollars get a slap on the wrist. I could maybe get behind this type of police brutality if those people were subject to the same treatment.

Okay I still couldn't get behind it but I would at least be less disgusted by it.

The militarization of the police is happening all over the world. We get the same kinds of tactics here in Canada too (look at the G20 summit in Toronto.) There's no denying this trend is part of creating more police-like states. Rather than less police violence in the presence of shrinking crime rates, we see the opposite. The use of SWAT teams for white collar crimes is done for effect - get caught, expect heavy handed response regardless of guilt.

The whole "War on Drugs" is about giving political will by continuous "crisis" giving context to expanded police force and powers.

In a world where there is no "War on Drugs", America would not be able conscientiously get laws passed where they take away much of peoples rights. There would be downward demand for police manpower and budgets. The police may not agree with the war but they enjoy it's benefits.

Now they have the "War on Terror" to allow them to do these things and expand on them.

All these laws get used in the war on filesharing. The US is aggressively protecting it's industry using these tactics. What can be done? Show it for what it is and the "political will" will falter. Have a discussion with your friends and family about police powers, justice, and the crazy world we live in.

I'm glad it was ruled illegal. This ridiculous overreach can be traced back to Hollywood.

Then you all should be ignoring anything that the MAFIAA does and joining in on Boycotting their Industry.Do yourself a favor and take the time to discover the World of Local & INDIE Art you can find.Then Support & Buy that Art.Screw my US Gov and Screw The MAFIAA.

The militarization of the police is happening all over the world. We get the same kinds of tactics here in Canada too (look at the G20 summit in Toronto.) There's no denying this trend is part of creating more police-like states. Rather than less police violence in the presence of shrinking crime rates, we see the opposite. The use of SWAT teams for white collar crimes is done for effect - get caught, expect heavy handed response regardless of guilt.

This guy has put up videos of him acting like a gangsta, he has a butt load of money and private security. If they did any kind of research they would discover as some of his purchases handguns and a panic room. He also comes across as a bit of an idiot. I would of done the same thing if I were the police there.

new footage has surfaced showing police storming the home with helicopters, semiautomatic weapons, and attack dogs

Yes, they should have used bolt action rifles instead. Though, lever action rifles are making a comeback...

The "semiautomatic weapons" part is a bit odd. Everyone nowadays can get semiauto weapons, that's just your basic handgun. They probably want you to think of "fully automatic" which is military level firepower, though they didn't actually say that.

I still want to see the footage they're hiding of Dotcom's alleged beating when they reached him. The police confiscated it, and the fact they won't reveal it makes Kim sound more credible in that regard.

Gee, so between this and the case in England, millions of tax money going after these two individuals, when US law enforcement had warnings about the Ft. Hood shooter before he went on his rampage, but they sat on their asses and let him do his deed? What you want to bet footage from this raid shows up in some B, C or D grade movies spit out by Hollywood? Does US law enforcement really think the Dotcom case and the one in Britain will take heat off them for their incompetence in stopping home grown terrorist attacks? Not likely. It's repulsive to me that so many trolls think taking down an arrogant, rude, overweight slob is preferable to stopping a mass killing before it happens. I guess the Yahoo trolls needed a place to go when they lost that nest.

If this is the typical journalistic quality of a standard newscast in NZ, I'm impressed. It wasn't edited for an ADHD audience and actually discussed real issues, not what Justin Bieber had for breakfast.

If this is the typical journalistic quality of a standard newscast in NZ, I'm impressed. It wasn't edited for an ADHD audience and actually discussed real issues, not what Justin Bieber had for breakfast.

I agree!

If TV news was like this in the US I might actually watch it once in a while.

I was struck by that, too. Note how the news anchor calls the FBI only by its acronym and not what I would think would be more appropriate, something like "the American FBI." Very interesting.

Also interesting is Dotcom's own account that he fled his bedroom to his safe room ALONE. If someone broke into my house, my first thought would be my wife and child. No such report here.

Please note that him being creep doesn't justify others to be creeps. But he's creeeepy.

Erm, speaking as someone in Europe, everyone knows what is meant when someone says FBI. They are notorious for their heavy handedness and armed enforcement on behalf of corporate fascists. (Unless you're saying NZ has an FBI too?)

Secondly I thought that was odd too about Dotcom's behaviour. However, with so little information I feel you are massively jumping to conclusions to call him a creep based on this alone. Who knows if his wife was with him, whether he expected to meet her in the panic room with the kids, how much they knew about what the cause of the break in was, etc. His own testimony in the report mentions that at some point he seemed to be aware that it was the authorities invading his house and he made the decision to stay where he was for fear that popping out would alarm them and cause them to fire. Both seem valid reasons, at least unless you're the kind of person who has gun defence fantasies (which given the response to many of the shootings in the U.S. is disturbingly prevalent).

That's insane. As Cornel West says it's a shame America doesn't treat the war on poverty like a real one.

It's about profit not justice or ethics.

So long as the people with power have money and control then nothing else really matters (see Romney's pitch for President if you want proof of this - not that Obama has done nearly enough to fight the corruption and corporate fascists either).

"We wanted to match the threat level, in this case a low threat, with our dress. We made that conscious decision not to wear full tactical gear. It wasn't appropriate in these circumstances."

So the difference between a low threat and a high threat is some body armor?

Are you suggesting you're more of an authority on threat levels and the gear to wear than a police officer?

I think you misunderstood the spirit of that post. What he is saying is that the heavy-handed action of the NZ police betrayed them more than "body armor". Obviously, someone in America told them something that made them over-react. The police "admitted that he was low threat" was probably some courtesy to whatever jack-wagon on this side of the pond said to them.