Regarding the "he only disputed the cash" bit:

My understanding is that this isn't the murder trial, so none of the other items would have been brought up because they aren't relevant to the hearing. The only thing this hearing was for is whether he should be held behind bars and for how long, and the cash was relevant to make that determination because it was being argued that the cash (and in particular the fact that part of it was foreign currency) indicates that he's a flight risk and is trying to flee the country. That was being used as the basis for asking the judge to rule that he should be held without bail pending trial.

This wouldn't be the time or place for disputing the facts of the case because there is no case at this moment. No trial has occurred, and this courtroom doesn't even have jurisdiction to hold a trial for this case. The New York prosecutors office would need to make a request for extradition and he would need to be tried in a New York court.

So the fact that he only disputed the cash doesn't necessarily mean he is admitting the rest belonged to him. It's just as likely that the cash is the only thing that was disputed because it was the only thing that was presented as being relevant to make a decision regarding bail, and the other items weren't commented on because they weren't relevant to the matter being discussed.

If someone has more knowledge on everything that was presented in court and can comment further on the matter, feel free to correct me!