The Brett Kimberlin Saga:

Follow this link to my BLOCKBUSTER STORY of how Brett Kimberlin, a convicted terrorist and perjurer, attempted to frame me for a crime, and then got me arrested for blogging when I exposed that misconduct to the world. That sounds like an incredible claim, but I provide primary documents and video evidence proving that he did this. And if you are moved by this story to provide a little help to myself and other victims of Mr. Kimberlin’s intimidation, such as Robert Stacy McCain, you can donate at the PayPal buttons on the right. And I thank everyone who has done so, and will do so.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Exclusive: Brett Kimberlin Threatens to File Criminal Charges Against Me, Again

This is the latest post in what I call jokingly call The Kimberlin Saga®.  If you are new to the story, that’s okay! Not everyone reads my blog.  So if you are new to the story, go to this page and you’ll be able to catch up on what has been happening.

So thirteen days ago I met Brett Kimberlin in court on an appeal of an abusive and unconstitutional peace order he obtained against me and I walked out with it nullified.  What I didn’t know until yesterday is that he sent an email to my attorney that afternoon, threatening to file new criminal charges against me.  Yes, really.  He’s like the Energizer Bunny of lawfare: he keeps going, and going, and going...

Here’s the full text of that email:

From: Justice Through Music [email omitted]
To: Reginald Bours [email omitted]
Sent: Thu, Jul 5, 2012 1:39 pm
Subject: Aaron Walker

Here is what I took away from the hearing today.  Judge Rupp said that I should file criminal harassment charges rather than a Peace Order.  

I want Mr. Walker to stop.  I have said to you and Mr. Walker numerous times that I want to be left alone.  I am making that request one more time.  

It’s always amazing to see his mind at work.  No matter how complete a defeat something is, he always tries to claim some kind of victory out of it.

Where this is coming from is an exchange he had with Judge Rupp where the judge asked him why, if Kimberlin believed I was harassing him, that he didn’t file criminal charges against me.  I didn’t include this in my transcriptions of the hearing because it was so insignificant, for reasons that will become obvious in a moment.  But that is where this is coming from.

Now my lawyer had a beautiful response to him, but it was delivered yesterday.  I presume this means that he didn’t get the message until then, which is actually pretty normal in a lawyer’s office.  So, for twelve days, Kimberlin’s threat was met with silence when I kept happily posting about him, even encouraging people to urge the State’s Attorney to file criminal charges against him, again.  Kimberlin has made it clear that he believes this constitutionally protected activity—petitioning the government for a redress of grievances, specifically protected in the First Amendment—is harassment.  And yet in all that time, were criminal charges filed against me?

No.  I just checked before I started writing this.  No new charges, no new peace orders, nothing.

So thirteen days ago, Kimberlin told my lawyer that I had to “leave him alone”—that is, stop writing about him anywhere on the internet in a peaceable, non-threatening manner—or he would file criminal harassment charges against me.  Indeed, this is not the first time he has made that threat.  I didn’t reveal this at the time because I was still unconstitutionally silenced, but he made a similar threat on June 20th.  Let me give you the context.  My lawyer had written to him giving him a copy of the motion for a partial stay of the peace order that we filed and that was granted the following Monday (after which I was SWATted).  My attorney doesn’t like me revealing his emails on my blog, and I will respect that limitation, but the gist of his accompanying letter was asking Kimberlin to voluntarily relinquish his peace order if he cared about Freedom of Expression.  In short, he was attempting to appeal to Kimberlin’s “good side,” so it shouldn’t surprise you very much that Kimberlin rejected the olive branch with this email:

From: Justice Through Music [email omitted]
To: Reginald Bours [email omitted]
Sent: Wed, Jun 20, 2012 5:04 pm
Subject: Re: Your peace order against Aaron Walker in the Circuit Court, Case No. 8444D

I am in receipt of your pleading.  In short, I oppose it and will file a formal opposition.  I have continued to get death threats as a result of your client’s conduct.  I intend to file additional peace orders tomorrow, and am considering contempt against your client.  I am working with federal and state law enforcement officials regarding these matters.  Your client has demonstrated that he is very dangerous to me and I am fully prepared to oppose your motion on the grounds that his conduct, not his speech, violates the Maryland criminal harassment statute and other federal and state criminal statutes.

I have said this to you and your client many times, as required by the Maryland harassment statute —  I want him to leave me alone.  

Brett Kimberlin

So on June 20, he was threatening to file criminal harassment charges against me.  And on July 5, he threatened it again if I didn’t stop “harassing” him—“harassment” being defined as “writing negative things about Kimberlin on the internet to a general audience.”  And yet as of this date, no charges were filed.  Did Kimberlin suddenly have a change of heart and realize that my speech is protected by the First Amendment?  Not very likely, in my estimation.

No, you see dear reader, I am holding back one vital piece of information.  Something has changed.  I don’t believe it is rightfully considered a secret, but my attorney has asked me not to reveal it and I will respect that.  So I will simply say that as a result of this change, Kimberlin’s ability to abuse the courts has been severely curtailed.  He has been rendered impotent.  Indeed, I suspect his impotence was made obvious by June 25th.

As for my lawyer’s response, like I said above, he doesn’t want me to quote him, so I won’t.  But I will point out the following...

First, in the post announcing my victory over Kimberlin, I embedded a copy of Judge Rupp’s findings that day, but the key language is this:

The petition is denied because: There is no statutory basis for relief.
PETITIONER COULD NOT MEET THE REQUIRED BURDEN OF PROOF.

So Judge Rupp isn’t saying that Kimberlin could have been granted a peace order but in the judge’s discretion he decided not to give Kimberlin the peace order.  He is saying that Kimberlin has not met the minimum requirements of the statute.

So what does the statute require?  Much of this is covered here and here, but it’s worth going over it again.  In order for a peace order to be granted, the court has to find—by clear and convincing evidence—that I did any one of a number of things.  There are many kinds of conduct that can trigger the peace order statute, but we only have to pay attention to one kind: Md. Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code § 3-1503(a)(6) states that a petition for a peace order may be granted if I committed “Harassment under § 3-803 of the Criminal Law Article.”  So the important thing to get here is that harassment under the peace order statute is defined precisely the same way as it is under the criminal law.

Only there is one difference: it is easier to prove harassment under the peace order statute than it is under the criminal law statute.  Why?  Because under the peace order statute, Kimberlin would only have to show that I harassed him using “clear and convincing evidence.”  That is a strong standard, but the standard in criminal cases—proof beyond a reasonable doubt—is even stronger.  So you have to prove the same things occurred—in essence the same facts—but in the criminal case it is harder to prove they occurred.

And Judge Rupp definitely found it did not occur.  To quote from my transcription of Rupp’s oral ruling:

Alright I have reviewed the testimony that’s been submitted, considered the documents that have been submitted on behalf of Mr. Kimberlin.

Mr. Kimberlin is requesting the issuance of a peace order against Mr. Walker on the basis of harassment and/or stalking.  There certainly no evidence to support stalking.

As far as harassment is concerned the requirement is that there be clear and convincing evidence to satisfy that Mr. Walker has “followed another in or about a public place...”—there’s no evidence that Mr. Walker has done that—“…or maliciously engage in a course of conduct that alarms or seriously annoys the other, with the intent to harass, alarm or annoy the other, after receiving a reasonable warning or request to stop by or on behalf of the other, and without a legal purpose.”  The harassment statute goes on to say “this section does not apply to a peaceable activity intended to express a political view or provide information to others.”

Mr. Kimberlin is arguing that the exhibits that have been introduced into evidence constitute harassment in that this is a course of conduct that alarms or seriously annoys him.  He has asked that I consider the Galloway case which finds that the statute is not overly broad. Galloway specifically relates to an inmate who sent 122 letters to another person.  Based on everything that I reviewed, these are blogs or tweets that Mr. Walker has issued, that I’m not satisfied directed directly to Mr. Kimberlin.  They are about Mr. Kimberlin and they are about his opinion about what he believes Mr. Kimberlin has done to him that impacts him.  But I do not find that there is sufficient evidence to support harassment that would permit the issuance of a peace order.  Accordingly I am going to deny the request for a peace order.

So if there isn’t clear and convincing evidence of harassment, logically there cannot be proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the same.  So any attempt to charge me with criminal harassment would be necessarily frivolous.  But in my opinion, that didn’t stop him from filing these charges.

No, and this is pure speculation, but I believe something else stopped him.  Something I can’t disclose...

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

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years.  I know that claim sound fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video evidence.  If you would like to donate and help my wife and I in this time of need, please go to this donation page.  And thank you.

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.

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

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  As you will see by the time I am done telling my story that this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.

14 comments:

  1. "Something I can’t disclose..."

    Tease.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's what I was thinking too. 8)

      Delete
  2. Maybe he had his in forma pauperis status revoked?

    ReplyDelete
  3. If Kimberlin is getting death threats as he says in the 2nd email "I have continued to get death threats as a result of your client’s conduct." where are the police reports?

    If they are serious enough to mention to your lawyer, they surely merit police investigations.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sorry, my instinct is to just... say it. But I can't.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Seriously, this guy needs to learn to stop.. He obviously is trying in his own sad desperation to gain a win.. at any cost..

    He won't win this one either..

    That last part was a definite tease..
    ;)

    ReplyDelete
  6. This has my heading spinning. The list of suspects is massive. The Maryland court system probably didn't take it very well that soon after a judge fairly ruled against Kimberlin, stories of that judge being soft on pedophiles emerged on the internet. His own lawyer probably wasn't too impressed when Kimberlin probably failed to note the $500,000 payment he accepted in exchange for cooperating with a biography, or his advocacy of the arrest of public figures, that brought Kimberlin notoriety. His donors probably aren't too impressed with the time and effort Kimberlin is spending in pursuing a vendetta, and are probably reassessing the cost-benefit ratio of their donations. His daughters are probably concerned that their peer's parents might respond to the entire "Debbie"/ "Jessica" story, and the fate of her grandmother with an abundance of caution. Mrs. Kimberlin probably has the same concerns, and many more. His fellows at his "non-profits" probably don't want a close look taken at its books. The DeLong family might just want to relitigate the matter if Kimberlin gives them standing. The same is true for the Barton clan. Neal Rauhauser probably wants him to lay low until the entire matter blows over. Even the Swatter himself is probably reassessing the how worthy Brett Kimberlin was of his efforts. A competent lawyer would probably put a muzzle on Brett Kimberlin for as long as possible. When you are in a hole stop digging!

    One of the stronger impressions I have of Brett Kimberlin is how suicidal his attacks are. They are catching up with him quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not a lawyuh, but I'm guessing he has been declared a vexatious litigant. But I don't know why that should be kept a secret.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What did Barbra Streisand know and when did she know it?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I note that the "Not Brett Kimberlin" site (don't go there unless you do it safely) hasn't updated in more than a couple of weeks. That is uncharacteristically silent.

    Related?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mr. Walker,

    If you can't disclose what made or imposed on Kimberlin to not file any more frivolous lawsuits. Could you tell WHY you can't disclose it?

    I mean, I think to understand that justice has to be public for it to be justice, otherwise it might be misunderstood as some other circumstance.

    So, Is it that you and Kimberlin had agreed, out of the justice courts, to cease and desist on some conditions not to be disclosed?

    Sure there has to be, otherwise, a way for you to cite either public rulings or documents, or that this was settle down out of justice courts.

    I apologize if I'm missing something here, but I don't see why it can't be explained despite not quoting your lawyer's emails.

    ReplyDelete
  11. David

    You're right to say I am not explaining why I can't disclose it. I have thought about it and there is no way to say why I can't disclose without giving you a giant hint about it.

    But while I won't play 20 questions let me be very clear about this. Brett Kimberlin has not made any agreement with me to stop this. That should be fairly obvious from what I wrote, but in case it isn't, there has been no kind of agreement. I in fact believe that he wants to file new criminal charges against me... and something has stopped him from doing so.

    And i know that you are dying to know what I know, and I apologize for that reality. But it is unavoidable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, I hope things change so that you can tell us in the future. Good luck with the legal battle against such a thug. I'll assume that you can't give away some legal strategy you are pursuing, but, hopefully, you'll be able to talk about it once your lawsuits are settled.

      N.B. Sorry I mentioned explicitly your surname... I realize a bit late that you might not want to give away too many hints, despite all that happened, so feel free to edit it as "Mr. Worthing" or any other initials as you see fit.

      Delete