Exclusive: Convicted Terrorist and Serial Litigant Brett Kimberlin Doesn’t Want to Play With John Norton Any More

This is the latest post in what I half-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 today I took a field trip to Maryland and obtained copies of Brett Kimberlin’s attempt to dismiss the appeal of John Norton’s peace order.  Contrary to my originally erroneous reporting (since corrected), this appeal was filed by Norton of the peace order against him.  Kimberlin, for his part, apparently doesn’t want a peace order against Norton any more.  The main ground for this request is that the Kimberlin contends that the case is moot.

Mootness is a doctrine in law that refers to when a case was no longer relevant.  For instance imagine a woman is in a coma and on life support.  Some members of the family believe that the woman should have her life support removed; others believe that she should be kept on life support.  So the family members seek injunctions in court to enforce their views.  If the woman then suddenly died, the case would be moot and it would be typically dismissed for those reasons (and voluntarily by both parties).

Now on the surface that would seem to apply here.  The order expired on August 1, and thus would have expired nearly a month ago.  But John Norton might still be suffering the effects of that Peace Order.  He is stigmatized by a finding that he criminally harassed Brett Kimberlin, suggesting to friends, family and current and potential employers that he might pose a danger to others.   It is due to that ongoing stigma that Norton has a right to appeal this decision.

And Kimberlin seems to understand that this is an issue.  Below the break I will embed both his motion to dismiss and Norton’s answer.

Kimberlin v. Norton Motions

Most of it is self-explanatory, but here’s what I found interesting.  In paragraph 2 of Kimberlin’s motion, he writes “Appellant is suffering no adverse or collateral consequences from the Peace Order.”  So he is implicitly admitting what I wrote above—that the stigma of having a Peace Order against you justifies an appeal—is true, but he is pretending Norton suffers no such stigma.  Now I ask you, dear reader, even if this is true, how could Brett Kimberlin possibly know this?  So this seems to be another case of Brett Kimberlin telling whatever story he thinks will get him what he wants, regardless of the truth.

And what he wants is for this case to be over.  Now why is that?  Back in June he led the court to believe that Norton represented some kind of threat to his life, lurking in the bushes and whatnot (and doesn’t that sound just a little too cliché to be believable—lurking in the bushes?).  Suddenly he doesn’t want protection anymore?

Or has he figured out that every time he goes to court, every time he lies again—as he is want to do—that this increases his infamy that much more.  Maybe he has started to realize that his downright pathological tendency to lie might finally get him in trouble.  And maybe every time his dishonesty is documented, his donors start to wonder if they can trust him with their money.

But more on that to come.  Much more on that.

Of course if you want to continue to hold his feet to the fire, donate!  Give to the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right and help us to hold him accountable.

Anyway, in the file there was also a post-it note that said that the issue of mootness can be decided on September 5, when the hearing.  I asked the staff who had written that, but they had no idea.  But it suggests that it will be saved as an issue until the Sept 5, hearing.

Finally, as a programming note, next Friday we are going to have the hearing to hold Neal Rauhauser and Ron Brynaert in default in my Virginia case.  That means they lose for having failed to even respond and former Raw Story Editor Ron Brynaert will be found to have defamed another.  That will be on August 31, at 10:00 in the morning, supposedly (I expect the hearing to start later than that) at the Prince William County Circuit Court, in northern Virginia.  So if you are inclined to show up, I would be happy for the company.  And we will have commentary as soon as practicable afterward.

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

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 sounds 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.  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.