So as alluded to in my last post
(where
I give important news related to the SWATting), there was a fresh peace
order hearing between Schmalfeldt and Mr. Hoge today, Hoge claiming that since
the last peace order, Schmalfeldt had further violated the harassment and
electronic harassment statutes. As you
might recall, it is not harassment in Maryland until you ask that person to
stop. Bill Schmalfeldt lied about whether
or not he saw the notice to stop, and Hoge just didn’t have the proof with him
that Schmalfeldt received that notice.
But the hearing ended with Judge
Rasinsky giving this warning to Mr. Schmalfeldt:
The warning I want
to give you is very specific, and it’s not an unusual warning for me to give.
The battle line is drawn. He doesn’t want to hear from you, and that means no
specific things addressed to him.
This is why his attorney, Mr.
Kim, was heard afterward telling Schmalfeldt in the hallway that if he doesn’t
stop he will go to jail. And even if Mr.
Hoge hadn’t told him to stop before then, or Schmalfeldt really hadn’t seen it,
well as of that day, Schmalfeldt was
on notice to stop.
But Schmalfeldt didn’t stop. Indeed just last night Schmalfeldt tweeted
twice to Mr. Hoge, not to mention various other threats and so on. And accordingly, Mr. Hoge filed for more
criminal charges, and for another peace order.
(a) Prohibited. -- A
person may not follow another in or about a public place or maliciously engage
in a course of conduct that alarms or seriously annoys the other:
(1) with the intent
to harass, alarm, or annoy the other;
(2) after receiving
a reasonable warning or request to stop by or on behalf of the other; and
(3) without a legal
purpose.
(b) Exception. --
This section does not apply to a peaceable activity intended to express a
political view or provide information to others.
And this is the electronic
harassment statute (in relevant part):
(a) "Electronic
communication" defined. -- In this section, "electronic
communication" means the transmission of information, data, or a
communication by the use of a computer or any other electronic means that is
sent to a person and that is received by the person.
(b) Prohibited. -- A
person may not maliciously engage in a course of conduct, through the use of
electronic communication, that alarms or seriously annoys another:
(1) with the intent
to harass, alarm, or annoy the other;
(2) after receiving
a reasonable warning or request to stop by or on behalf of the other; and
(3) without a legal
purpose....
(d) Exception. --
This section does not apply to a peaceable activity intended to express a
political view or provide information to others.
Now there is some
refinements. There is a definition of “electronic
communication” there and a section I left out exempting various court-ordered
actions, but the key thing to get is that the electronic harassment statute is
really a lesser included category of stuff covered by the general harassment
statute and of course that subset of harassment is punished more severely. That is how I interpret it and how numerous
attorneys within the state interpreted it.
Today, Judge Ellinghouse-Jones, however,
had a very different interpretation. She
interpreted the electronic harassment statute as carving out a separate
offense. So implicit in her reading of
the general harassment statute is that it can’t qualify as electronic
harassment, too.
And then in turn she noted the
peace order statute only allows for peace orders for general harassment and not
electronic harassment. Which is
ridiculous.
For instance, if I wrote the
following in three letters this would be harassment (assuming I was told to
stop beforehand):
“Dear John Doe,
“I am going to kill you.”
“—Aaron”
A genuine threat is harassing and
with several repetitions, it becomes a course of conduct, and thus harassment.
On the other hand, according to
her, if I sent the very same message by email it is not general harassment. Not
because the content of the message changed, but because the method of delivery
changed. As if that would make a damn
difference to the recipient.
Even more absurdly, if I tweeted
out the following from my twitter account three times this would be general
harassment:
“Tonight I am going to
kill John Doe.”
But on the other hand, if I
instead tweeted the following...
“Tonight I am going to
kill @John Doe”
...that would not be general harassment but only
electronic harassment, because that one is addressed specifically to this “John
Doe” character and not to the world at large.
So according to her, a mailed
threat can support a peace order, but an emailed one cannot. According to her, a tweeted threat to the
world at large can support a peace order, but a tweeted threat to the target of
that threat cannot. It is absurd.
So respectfully, I think that
ruling is bunk. It is also worth noting
that the judge thought the whole situation was “ridiculous” so even if she didn’t
get the law wrong, she might have still found against Hoge.
So that was the ruling and it was
frustrating, but it gives Hoge fertile ground for appeal. He’s already appealed the first ruling.
And there are a few other
interesting notes from the trial. First,
of course Kimberlin was there. He showed
up looking much more put together and indeed might have been wearing a suit
under his leather jacket. I suspect my
reports of him looking like a disheveled homeless man got back to him and had
gotten under his skin.
But this time Hoge pointed out to
me that it was obvious that this was aging him.
He looked much older in terms of the lines on his face, and he also
looked thinner. It made us suspect that
he was even ill. But that is of course
speculation.
Another note is that during the
hearing Mr. Kim argued that Hoge wasn’t a journalist because he insulted
Schmalfeldt in his reporting. Hoge has
taken to using piracy terms to describe all of Team Kimberlin. So borrowing from The Princess Bride, he calls Kimberlin the “Dread Pirate
Kimberlin.” Neal Rauhauser is the “First
Mate,” if memory serves. And Schmalfeldt
is the cabin boy. It’s all part of Hoge
being a classic “happy warrior.”
The interesting thing is that if
insults means Hoge is not a journalist, then Schmalfeldt really isn’t one. For
instance, once Schmalfeldt wrote that Hoge was being paid to file these charges
against him (he is not), and that it allowed him to buy something to comb out
the “poop flakes” from his beard. And
Kim actually did specifically say his client was as bad as Hoge was on this
count. I would argue he is worse.
So you have it straight from
Schmalfeldt’s own lawyer: he is not a
journalist.
Another thing to note is that,
intentionally or not, Mr. Kim misrepresented what happened in Schmalfeldt’s
case friday. First he accused Mr. Hoge,
Mr. Stranahan and myself of forum shopping.
I and Lee are out of state residents who filed our charges where Schmalfeldt
lives. By comparison, Hoge filed his
charges where he lives. I don’t see how that adds up to forum
shopping.
But more despicably, he falsely
claimed that Hoge had filed charges in Howard Country, too. He didn’t.
Did Kim just get confused? Or was
this a deliberate attempt to deceive the court?
I don’t know, but there you go.
Next up, dear friends, we have
the peace order hearing on Friday between John Hoge and Brett Kimberlin. And dear reader, that might be some real fun.
---------------------------------------
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 help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable,
please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right. 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment