How Brett Kimberlin Tried to Frame Me for a Crime—Part 4: What Kimberlin Said about the January 9 Incident.

[This post is part of a larger series of posts.  See here for a fuller explanation.]

Previously: Part 3: TheJanuary 9 Incident.

But let us focus on what he said about the incident and we will start with his Application for Statement of Charges, filed on January 9, 2012.  Citizens who claim that a crime has been committed against them in Montgomery County, Maryland, can go over the Commissioner’s Office in the District Court building in downtown Rockville, Maryland.  The person fills out an Application for Statement of Charges, swears an oath that all that had been said is true, and the Commissioner or their delegate determines whether to file the charges.  Here’s what Kimberlin said in relevant part in his Application against me:

[Aaron Walker] attacked me physically while exiting the courtroom.  He hit me on the shoulder and chest and pushed me, and grabbed my iPad away from me and refused to return it.  Mr. Walker has been [page break] harassing me and stalking me online for months, and as we were exiting the Courthouse / Room 5 / Floor 9, he said he was going to continue harassing me, and as we left the courtroom, he grabbed my iPad, hit me in the face, shoulder and chest and wrestled the iPad away from me.  Several people witness [sic] this event and the police were immediately called.  They got my iPad back and safely escorted me from the building.  Mr. Walker tried to come at me several more times but was restrained.

(Emphasis added.)  And here is an embed of the same document:

Brett Kimberlin's Application for Statement of Charges 1.9.12 (OCR)

So just to keep track of things, I supposedly struck him three times, and then after the sheriff’s deputies arrived I supposedly tried to come at him several times and was restrained.  And there is something else to note on this Application.  Look at the time he filed it: 12:31 p.m.  The entire incident was over at 11:49 a.m.  So within forty-two minutes of the incident, he was pressing charges against me.  And you will see later that he claims that I caused him to lose vision in an eye.  If someone hit you in the eye so hard you lost vision in it, would your first action be to press charges?  Or would you high-tail it to the nearest hospital, worried that you might permanently lose your sight?  But no, instead he filed charges and then filed for something else called a Peace Order.  That is sort of like a restraining order issued in domestic violence cases, only it is specifically required that the two people are not family.  So he also filed a Petition for Peace Order, and in relevant part he said this:

Mr. Walker assaulted me while leaving the courtroom.  He hit me in the face, chest, & shoulder and took my iPad, and threatened to harass me more.

Here’s an embed of that document:

Brett Kimberlin's Petition for Peace Order 1.9.12 (OCR)

So this time it is three strikes—”the face, chest, & shoulder.”  No mention of wrestling, of me being held back like a wild bull or any of that.

(Please note that in the Maryland Judiciary Case Search database, his name is incorrectly written as “Kimberline.”  So, if you are verifying that story, you need to do searches under both Kimberlin and Kimberline.)

It’s also worth noting that he affirmed the truthfulness of the petition, in a quick hearing held at 2:19 p.m. the same day, in order to get a temporary peace order against me.  The hearing lasted approximately two minutes.  Besides claiming that what he wrote in the petition for a Peace Order was true he also said, “I’m having trouble seeing out of this eye. I’m going to go to the doctor right now.”  So that is right, as of about 2:21 p.m. on that day he hadn’t seen a doctor even though he was allegedly losing vision in one eye.

And believe it or not, he wasn’t done talking about the case for the day.  At 4:59 p.m., he emailed my former lawyer, Beth Kingsley, and wrote (in relevant part):

I just finished pressing charges against him for assault and battery and got a Peace Order against him.  Nine deputies had to back him off.  He decked me in the face, hit me in the shoulder and chest, pushed me, grabbed my iPad away from me and wrestled me....

Went to doctor and they sent me to ER at Suburban, said I need a CAT scan.

You client is very dangerous...

So just to review, he claims this time that I “decked” him and struck him two more times, that I pushed him, that I wrestled with him.  So there he was supposedly losing vision in one eye, and in need of treatment at the ER, and he took the time to tap out an email.  Good to know.

Here’s an embed of that email:

Email From Brett Kimberlin to Beth Kingsley 1.9.12 (1) (OCR)

And let’s remind ourselves what the word “decked” means.  If you google it, you get this:

That means in order for a person to be “decked” they have to be at least knocked on their behind.  Did you see that happen in that video?

Of course this wasn’t a statement under oath, but later in a hearing on April 11, 2012 (which I will embed for you later in this post), he claimed under oath that he told the truth in that email:

Q [Reginald Bours III] Later in the afternoon on January 9th, did you send an e-mail to Beth Kingsley?

A [Brett Kimberlin] Probably.

Q Did you use Justice Through Music as your return on e-mail?

A Yes. Uh-huh.

Q Do you want to look at this? The top is irrelevant, but is that your e-mail to Beth Kingsley?

A Uh-huh. Yeah.

Q In that e-mail, did you say, I just finished pressing charges against him for assault and battery and got a peace order against him. Nine deputies had to back him off. He decked me in the face, hit me in the shoulder and chest, pushed me, grabbed my iPad away from me, and wrestled me.

A That’s true.

Q You say that’s true and that’s also what you put in the e-mail to her, correct?

A Right. Uh-huh.

And as usual it was all about shutting me up.  This is what he wrote to my former lawyer at 10:46 p.m. that same night:

Beth,

You might want to advise your client that anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law.  I went into court seeking contempt and came out with criminal charges against your client because he physically assaulted me right in front of the court staff.  If he blogs about me, harasses me, or takes any other action, he could be facing additional charges for obstruction of justice, and his sentence could be enhanced for intimidating his victim.  I have asked over and over to be left alone, and now the Sheriff and Court have advised me to report any action, statement or other conduct by or on behalf of Mr. Walker, including his contacts to third parties such as Seth Allen.

It was Mr. Allen’s continued harassment of me after the November 14th judgment that drew Mr. Walker into the civil case.  Now he is facing very serious criminal charges that occurred in the court itself and the entire matter has now been taken over by the long arm of the criminal justice system.

I am already working with the Victim’s Advocate at the District Court and I know my rights, the main one being that I have the right to be left alone by now criminal defendant Aaron J. Walker.  

I spent five hours in Suburban Hospital this afternoon and evening being treated for injuries caused by your client and have been ordered by the attending physician to rest and take medication.

Brett Kimberlin

Yes, he was told to get bed rest, but somehow he crawled out of bed and wrote her an email helpfully telling me to shut up.  You can read that email, here.

And of course Neal Rauhauser had to get into the act, too, writing in relevant part:

Kimberlin is hospitalized, blind in his right eye. They think maybe a blood clot, he was going in for CT scan when he called me.

I won’t be giving you the entire email, because he says a lot of things about different people that I suspect amounts to defamation and I am not going to be a platform for that.  But he wrote that email to me at 8:14 p.m.

He also wrote this extortionate email earlier in the evening:

Aaron,

Do you think it would be best if each of us never said the other’s name in a public venue, nor induced anyone else to do this? If that is the case you can assent by simply removing anything you’ve ever written about me.

Sincerely,

Neal Rauhauser

In other words, silence myself about his creepy behavior (e.g. here and here) or be outed before the whole world.  You can read that email, here.

The next time Kimberlin was asked to speak about the incident was a hearing to determine if a final peace order would be issued.  That was on February 8, 2012, and I will embed a full copy of the transcript shortly.  One important thing to note is that at this point in time I didn’t know there was video of the incident.  I had asked a representative of the sheriff’s office immediately after the incident, and he had told me that no cameras were pointed in the correct direction.  This turned out to be wrong (obviously).  And as far as I could tell, Brett Kimberlin had no idea the video existed, either.

So here are the relevant excerpts from Kimberlin’s testimony:

But so as we were exiting the courtroom on the 9th floor, Courtroom 5, I believe, we walked out of the courtroom and he’s screaming at me and telling me that he’s going to continue harassing me. And as we got outside the door, right outside the courtroom, he began lunging at me. I picked up my iPad and took a picture of him lunging at me. He decked me in the eye and wrestled with me.

A man that followed us out of the courtroom raced back into the courtroom and told two people that were working for Judge Rupp that he was attacking me and attacking me. They came out and told him to get off of me and they called the police. Nine police came up to the -- or, sheriffs came up there and separated him. He had my iPad in his hand at the time and refused to give it back.

The sheriff went over and took the iPad away from him and told me to come down and press charges against him. I pressed charges against him for second-degree assault and I also got this peace order. At that time, the judge in the temporary peace order case told him not to harass me and not to bother me or do anything.

(Emphasis added.)  And there is this silly bit:

You know, Judge Rupp ran him out of the courtroom and he was so angry, he went into a complete rage. I ended up in Suburban Hospital, you know, for six hours that night. I got -- here’s a picture of him with his hand coming down towards me to whack me in the face that I took from my iPad. Here’s pictures of me with my black eye. I’ve got medical reports from the hospital from January 9th where he attacked me.

So let’s review, here.  He claimed I “decked” him in the eye, and that I “wrestled” with him.  He also claims that the courtroom staff told me to get off of him.  He also claimed that Judge Rupp ran me out of the courtroom, something you can see is not indicated in the record for the January 9, 2011 hearing and indeed didn’t happen.  Indeed, if it did, I wouldn’t have been leaving court at the same time as him and my life would have been much less complicated.

Here’s an embed of the entire February 8, 2012 transcript:

Brett Kimberlin Hearing 2.8.12 Transcript (OCR)

So this goes on and the charges against me stood until shortly after March 19, 2012.  Of course they attempted to drop the charges—after seeing the video—a few days before.  But Kimberlin managed to delay it for a few days by filing an opposition to the prosecutor’s motion to dismiss the case, entitled: “Victim/Complainant Brett Kimberlin’s Motion in Opposition to State’s Motion to Nolle Pros This Case.”  One thing that is important to note is that I believe that at this point in time Kimberlin at least knew that the video existed and may have even seen it.  It does explain the dramatic reduction in part of the story.  Here’s what he said in that opposition about the incident:

6.         As Victim [Kimberlin] was exiting the courtroom, Mr. Walker began berating Victim for identifying him and said that he would continue to harass Victim.  As Victim exited the courtroom doors, Mr. Walker became more irate and began making threatening moves toward Victim including coming toward Victim.  Therefore, Victim, using his iPad, snapped a photo of Mr. Walker with his hand coming toward Victim Exhibit A. [sic]

7.         Mr. Walker struck Victim with his hand, and Mr. Walker began wrestling with Victim for possession of the iPad.  A person who followed Victim from the courtroom repeatedly called back into the court, “He (Mr. Walker) attacked him.”  Two courtroom staff came running from the court and separated Mr. Walker from the Victim.  Mr. Walker retained possession of the iPad.  The staff also called for assistance of courtroom deputies who arrived shortly thereafter.

(Emphasis added.)  Here’s an embedded copy of that document:

Brett Kimberlin Motion to Intervene 01 (OCR)

So now I only struck him one time, and then wrestled the iPad away from him.  Also he saw me coming at him and took the photo.  And also the courtroom staffers came out and separated us.

And notice at the end of the document you see a picture supposedly of the bruise.  You can’t see it particularly well in black and white (sorry, but the court would not give me a color copy), but in the original there was some purplish yellow discoloration near the eye.  There is no way to know—besides this perjurer’s word—when it was taken; indeed it appears he just held his iPad up and took the picture himself.  You can also see a very poor copy of the photograph he unlawfully took in the courthouse itself as my hand came at him to stop whatever he was doing.

I have also seen color copies of several of these pictures at the February 8, 2012 hearing.  In addition to that, this is when he showed a copy of the supposed medical record.  He did not make copies of that medical record to retain, so I cannot show you, but you can see clearly on page 12, lines 2 and 3 in the February 8, 2012 transcript, that Kimberlin indicates that he gave the judge the medical record.  I am not medically trained so I cannot repeat what it said verbatim, but it claimed trauma to the head and that he had a cracked rib, supposedly.

And then finally in a second peace order hearing on April 11, 2012, he spoke about it again.  First, in his opening statement (which is not technically under oath) he said this:

Mr. Walker has been engaged in a campaign of bullying towards me online and this resulted in him showing up in a court case that I was involved with, getting admonished by Judge Rupp to remain quiet in the court case, and following me outside the courtroom where he continued to berate me and came at me in an aggressive manner which resulted in me taking a photograph of him as he was coming to hit me. He did assault me at that time.

The courtroom staff came out of the courtroom, from Judge Rupp’s court, called the sheriff. Nine deputies showed up and they advised me that they could not arrest Mr. Walker because they didn’t see the assault, advised me to go to the commissioner’s office and press charges, which I did, and I got a peace order at that time also.

But this next part is under oath and it is somewhat lengthy:

THE WITNESS: Mr. Walker -- When the hearing ended, Mr. Walker followed me outside the courtroom and told me that he was going to continue harassing me. He –

MR. BOURS [my attorney]: Judge, could you instruct Mr. Kimberlin at least to give quotes of what was said as opposed to characterizations?

THE WITNESS: I heard Mr. -- okay. I’ll say what I heard.

THE COURT: You need to say exactly what he said. Don’t characterize it.

THE WITNESS: Okay. Mr. Walker said that he was going to continue harassing me.

THE COURT: Well, I don’t think he said he was going to continue harassing you. He didn’t speak in those terms. What did he say? Quote him.

THE WITNESS: That’s what I recall. Then as we –

THE COURT: You’re not understanding me. Mr. Walker did not come out of that courtroom and say he is going to continue -- he said, quote, “I” what?

THE WITNESS: “I am going to continue to harass, expose,” something about that. I’m going to continue bothering you, something to that effect. I recall the word harassment. Maybe it was bothering, exposing, something to that effect. And as we exited the two doors, he said, “You abused the court process by using subpoenas to identify me.”

As we continued to exit the second door, he got very loud and I felt threatened by his aggressive behavior toward me. I backed up. I backed up more and more. Finally, I pulled out my iPad because I wanted to document the fact that he was coming at me.

As I lifted my iPad, Mr. Walker came to me with his -- with his hand and hit me in the eye, or the face. He continued to come at me and wrestled with me for my iPad. Fearing that my iPad would be destroyed from Mr. Walker’s conduct, I finally released it and I heard someone come behind me, out of the courtroom, saying, “He attacked him, he attacked him.”

Two courtroom staff came running out of the courtroom and told Mr. Walker to get away from me, and they called the police. The -- within a very short time, eight or nine deputies came up to the ninth floor and Mr. Walker had my iPad still. He -- the deputy went over and took the iPad away from him. I told the deputies that he had struck me, assaulted me.  They advised me to go to the commissioner’s office and get a -- press assault charges and to get a peace order against Mr. Walker. That’s what happened on January 9th. I did that.

Since then, I have been retaliated against. First of all, after that incident, I had a very distinct problem with my eyes. I had blurry vision in my eyes and –

MR. BOURS: Object.

THE COURT: What’s the basis of that?

MR. BOURS: It sounds like he’s trying to give a medical diagnosis. There are proper ways to do that. But I think all he’s entitled to state is what my client did to him, not what it caused.

THE COURT: Yes. There are no damages awarded in a peace order.

THE WITNESS: Well, I ended up at the hospital. I ended up at Suburban Hospital for six hours.

THE COURT: I mean you understand you don’t get damages in a peace order.

THE WITNESS: I’m not asking for damages right now.

THE COURT: But go ahead.

THE WITNESS: I’m saying what happened. I had a terrible -- a screaming headache. I had blurry vision in my eye. I had back pain. I went to a clinic over here on Seven Locks and the doctor looked at me and –

MR. BOURS: Object.

THE COURT: Sustained. You can’t say what the doctor said.

THE WITNESS: Well, the result was I was sent to the emergency ward at Suburban Hospital where I went there and was there for approximately six hours, and had a CAT Scan, multiple other evaluations –

MR. BOURS: Judge, I object again.

THE COURT: I sustain that.  You see, that has nothing to do with whether a peace order is granted or not.

And then my attorney cross-examined him:

Q So then you filed in the jacket all the identifying information about him and you withdrew the motion before Judge Rupp, is that correct?

A Yeah. I -- yeah. I let the judge know that it was moot and this is why.

Q You agree, I think you even said on your direct, that this gentleman to my left came to court and asked that your motion to withdraw be sealed because it contained his identity, correct?

A Yes. And the judge granted that motion.

Q But you still had your iPad with you and you tried to take a photograph of him outside the courtroom, didn’t you?

A That’s not the series of events. I would not have taken –

Q Well, you did try to take a photograph with your iPad.

A Yeah. I did take a photograph. I did take a photograph.

Q It’s the one you put in evidence.

A Exactly.

Q You claim you took that only because he was attacking you?

A No. He was -- he was being an aggressor. He was verbally aggressive and physically aggressive toward me, and he was coming at me, and I felt that in order to memorialize that aggressive behavior, I took a picture. And I’m very well aware of the rule requiring -- I mean prohibiting photos in the courthouse and so --

Q You are now or you were then?

A No. Of course I was then. And I talked to the deputies when they came up and I told them that I had taken a picture, and –

And then we get this later in the cross-examination:

Q In connection with the assault, will you tell this Judge now in what manner he assaulted you? Give us a concise, but complete statement of the ways in which he assaulted you on January 9th.

A Well, as I said, he -- when he came out of the courtroom, he was berating me with comments, and being aggressive, and coming toward me. And I felt threatened, so I pulled the iPad out to catch him, because I could see that he was getting ready to actually physically hit me, and I backed up and clicked the picture. I got his hand as it was coming toward me and it hit me some -- somehow it hit me in the eye.  I mean everything happened very quickly. And he started wrestling with me and I felt bumps on my side, my chest, and my back twisted. And he’s wrestling me for the iPad and he actually took the iPad away from me. And I didn’t want to struggle with the iPad too much because I was afraid it would break, and my kids use that iPad a lot and I didn’t want to disappoint them, so I let it go. And he -- then the man --

Q Let me try a couple of things here.

A Okay.

Q Did he knock you down?

A No. He hit me.

Q He hit you?

A Well, his hand hit me. His hand hit me. Whether it was his fingers or his hand like this, I don’t know, but I –

Q Are you claiming that he hit you with his fist?

A No. I don’t know if it was -- I can’t say it was a fist. I can say it was a hand.

Q Isn’t it really a fact that he was just holding up his hand so you couldn’t take a photograph of him?

A Absolutely not. Absolutely not.

Q And then he grabbed the iPad from you and walked away from you?

A No, sir. I -- no, sir. Not at all.

Q That’s not a fact?

A That’s not a fact at all. I mean I –

Q Now you’ve apparently watched the video?

A Yes.

Q Do you claim the video supports what you’ve just told us?

A Exactly. Yeah.

And this is slightly off topic, but here is where my attorney cross-examined Kimberlin on the subject of the opposition he filed to the charges being dropped against me, and his motives in filing it:

Q Excuse me. Prior to filing the motion that is part of No. 7 [the State’s Attorney’s motion dismissing the case], did you know the State had the absolute right to drop a case?

A Absolutely. Of course.

Q So in other words, you filed this multi-page opposition to their absolute right to drop the case and put that in a public record, is that correct?

A I filed it because I didn’t want them to drop the charges. That’s why I filed it. And I felt like I wanted to get it before a judge and make my case before a judge and I thought that I would be able to have that motion heard. I was also in touch with several people and they said yes, including the victim’s advocate. I talked at long length with the victim’s advocate and she suggested that I file that motion.

Q She? What’s her name?

A Donna Becker (phonetic sp.).

Q She told you could file an opposition in the court file?

A Yeah. Uh-huh.

Q Sir, isn’t it a fact that this is just part of your ongoing campaign, your campaign, to put materials about my client in public records so that other people can look at them and potentially put him in danger?

A Oh come on. I -- the State’s Attorney called me up and had a long talk with me.

Q Excuse me. Could you answer my question?

A That’s totally false.

So that is what he said about the January 9, 2012 event.  Now to be fair let’s review everything I said about the incident.  Here’s what I said about the January 9 incident in the February 8, 2012 Peace Order Hearing:

I did not, I did not physically touch him once. This is what happened that day. I knew that he was a convicted terrorist. I knew that he was a convicted bomber. We were, I was, I was, frankly, cross-examining him live in front of, right there after the hearing. I was trying to get him to make damaging admissions and I did. I got him to admit that his entire process of attempting to obtain my real identity was a sham.

And at that point he stepped back, and now as he admits, broke court rules by attempting to take a photograph of me with his iPad. And I saw him go to do this, and I didn’t know what he was doing and I had a split second to think, Your Honor, and I didn’t know if this convicted bomber had a bomb inside of the device, had who knows what inside of the thing. So I had a split second to think and I reached down and I grabbed the iPad from him and I peaceably held it away from him, and that is all I did.

I did not deck him. I did not lay one single finger on his body.

Later in the same hearing I said this:

So, all I had done that day, Your Honor, is, you know, I literally took the iPad from him, I surprised him so much it wasn’t that difficult to do, frankly, and then I held it one way, you know, the other way -- it’s kind of like kids on the playground, honestly, Your Honor. And then finally I just held it above me, and that is all I did. And I did not touch his person one single time. I simply removed the iPad and held it away from him until the sheriffs could arrive and straighten the whole thing out, and that is all I did that day.

And I have also filed an Application for the Statement of Charges against him, on April 17, 2012 (which I will embed shortly), and although I have quoted it before, let me re-post what I said in it:

On January 9, 2012, I was leaving court at the same time as Mr. Kimberlin when Mr. Kimberlin raised his iPad as though to use it.  Knowing that Mr. Kimberlin had deep malice toward me and knowing his criminal history, I was afraid he was about to do harm to me so I took the device from him.  Because of the malice he had toward me and his criminal record, I believe I had a reasonable fear of bodily harm in that situation, justifying the invocation of self-defense.  Even so, I only used the minimum force necessary to protect myself from this perceived danger.  Specifically, I snatched iPad from him (he offered no resistance) and kept it from him, without ever once making contact with his body.  I did not strike his body with my own.  I did not push him.  I did not wrestle with him.  I did not strike him with the iPad as he later alleges.

That was the judgment I made about his conduct when I had no time to think, when I had to make a snap decision.  As I waited, holding the iPad away from him I had time to think and to replay the event in my mind.  As I thought about it I realized that more than likely Mr. Kimberlin only attempted to take my picture.  I concluded that it was unlikely that the device was a bomb because I believe Mr. Kimberlin is too much of a narcissist to ever risk his own life.  Therefore when the sheriff’s deputies arrived at the scene, I stated my belief that Mr. Kimberlin had taken a picture of me.  Mr. Kimberlin denied that this occurred.  I asked the officers to inspect the iPad for photographs.  I did not see them do this, but they represented that they did, and I trust their word.  I asked to inspect it myself, but they refused this request.

I’ll share a full copy of it in just a few moments.

Now let’s talk for a moment about the video—about what it shows and what it doesn’t show.  Now, I know I am telling you the truth, that I only took his iPad, and that I never touched Kimberlin at all.  But lawyers have to learn how to see the evidence for what it is, not what they want it to be.  Because the video is not continuous, because the camera was some distance away, and it was not perfectly sharp, the video is not good enough to prove my version of events to be true.  But you can take several things away from the video.  Here, watch it again:

The first thing you can take away from it is that while it does not prove that I didn’t touch Kimberlin’s body, at the same time it doesn’t contradict my claim, either.

The second thing you can take away from it is that Brett Kimberlin has continually lied about happened.  Let’s review all the things he said I did, starting with the most obvious lies:

He said I “decked” him.  This was said in his February 8 testimony and in an email to my attorney on January 9.  He claimed that his statements in the email were true in his testimony on April 11.  But do you see me knock him down even once?

He said that after the deputies arrived, I “tried to come at [Kimberlin] several more times but was restrained.”  This was in his Application for the Statement of Charges, filed on January 9, less than forty minutes after the alleged assault.  Obviously this is pure fantasy.

He said the sheriff’s deputies had to separate me from him.   This was in his testimony on February 8.  But look at the video when the sheriff’s deputies come up.  He is fully separated from me at that moment.

He said that two courtroom staff had to separate me from him.  This was in his Opposition to the State’s Attorney’s decision to dismiss the charges.  They never made any effort to pull us apart.  Indeed I would assume that they were told to leave this kind of thing to the professionals in the sheriff’s department.

He said that I struck him three times.  That was in the Application for the statement of charges and the petition for a peace order.  Now to be coldly analytical one cannot be sure just from looking at the video whether I hit him at the same moment I snatched the iPad from him.  I know I didn’t, but a neutral observer, just looking at the video would say “because of the poor quality of the video, I can’t tell whether he struck him at that moment.  It is possible that he did, but it is also possible that he didn’t.”  But multiple strikes?  That is plainly implausible.  As I wrote in my criminal complaint against Kimberlin:

To believe that I struck him three times (“in the face, shoulder and chest”), you would have to believe that I timed each action precisely between “snapshots” so that you not only don’t see the blow, but you don’t see any movement from me indicating that I was about to strike, or had just struck, and you don’t see any reaction from Brett Kimberlin in terms of being knocked by the blow or recovering from it.  The same can be said of his allegations that I wrestled with him or pushed him; one would have to believe that both my actions and Mr. Kimberlin’s actions were timed perfectly so that the complete motion was missed by the “snapshots.”

And since I mentioned the allegation of pushing and wrestling, let me give you the source for that, too.  Pushing was mentioned in was mentioned in Kimberlin’s Application for Statement of Charges.  Meanwhile, “wrestling” was mentioned in Application for Statement of Charges, the February 8 testimony, his opposition to the State’s Attorney’s decision to dismiss the charges, and his April 11 testimony.

Indeed, to drive this point home, I have created a video comparing what Kimberlin said about the incident to what the video shows and also giving you a brief introduction to who Kimberlin is.  I will win no academy awards for my work here, but I think it does what I need it to do, and I think it is fairly devastating. 

(By the way, I am bound to say that the music is by and from MpFree.)

So the video doesn’t prove I am telling the truth, but it doesn’t contradict what I said, while at the same time it absolutely proves that Kimberlin has lied about what happened, from the beginning.  I submit that under those circumstances it is logical to believe my account and discount everything Kimberlin claimed, but of course I am biased when I say that.

Next: Part 5: The Effect of Kimberlin’s Lies.

---------------------------------------

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates.  And you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.  And you can read a little more about my novel, here.