[Update: Please note that I have removed the first name of Ms.
Kimberlin at her request and left only her first initial, “T.” She is, after
all, a victim of sexual abuse and those kinds of reasonable requests will be
honored. While the moral right to privacy
of rape victims is not absolute, it seems to be reasonably asserted here.]
Aaron, if there's
someone who could refer Ms. Kimberlin, there's a House of Ruth affiliate she
can turn to. They are very effective advocates and supports for abused women.
You see, as much as I have
written about Brett Kimberlin, there are some details I have held back, just
because a detail might not be very important at the time. Let me start by telling you about the House
of Ruth. This is their mission statement:
The House Of Ruth
Maryland leads the fight to end violence against women and their children by
confronting the attitudes, behaviors and systems that perpetuate it, and by
providing victims with the services necessary to rebuild their lives safely and
free of fear.
Our vision is that
one day, every woman in Maryland will be safe in her own home.
That statement suggests they are
confined to Maryland, but I know there is an affiliate in at least one other
jurisdiction. But still, it sounds like
a noble goal. As I wrote a
few days ago:
There are, sadly,
millions of men (and some women) who believe that marriage is a contest of
cruelty rather than love. But there are
also millions of decent people who stand ready to lend the victims of such vile
persons a helping hand and to help them escape.
I am proud to count myself as one of them.
They even have a legal clinic
where they provide free lawyers to people who have been abused. So, over the last two weeks when I was trying
to find a way to get her a Maryland-licensed attorney who can go to bat for
T. Kimberlin her and her children, they were a natural choice to call.
But I already knew there might be
a problem. You see, you might remember
how on May 29, 2012, Brett
Kimberlin had me arrested on false charges at a Peace Order hearing. What I didn’t mention at the time was that the
House of Ruth was there, helping Brett Kimberlin out. Kimberlin did this as part of his martyr act:
“see how victimized I am? I got the
House of Ruth here to support me.” Of
course I was convinced he got their support by spreading his usual string of
lies and they probably didn’t check his story too closely. But this, I realized, might be a problem for
T.
So when I called them up, I
talked to them about the resources and, yes, they sounded wonderful. And they probably are in most cases, but I
knew to ask them about that previous involvement. They verified that yes, their legal clinic
had helped Brett Kimberlin in the past and therefore they couldn’t represent
T.
So I said, “hold it, now, aren’t
you a Domestic Violence organization?”
The girl on the other end (I won’t name and embarrass her) verified that
they were. (Later they verified that
contrary to the suggestion in their mission statement, they represented men and
women, really whoever walked through their doors, first.)
“Okay, I know the case where you
helped him. That is a Peace Order
case. Peace Orders cannot by definition
be granted in domestic violence situations—you have to get a Protective Order
for that. So why were you helping him in
that case.”
The girl on the other end told me
that sometimes they get involved in Peace Orders when it does have a domestic
violence connection. Like maybe the
husband is harassing a woman, and so is her friends, as part of a larger
campaign against her.
“I can see that,” I replied, “but
I know that case. It was against
me. And even if you believe his version
of events, all I was doing was writing bad things about him on the
internet.” I went on to explain that I
was not family or a paramour or anything like that, nor was I connected to
anyone who would be considered as such.
“So there was no connection to any domestic violence. So why were you involved?”
About then the girl got me to a
supervisor and the conversation started mostly all over again. But the upshot was that they literally
couldn’t tell me why they helped him out.
So I said something like this:
“Look I am not going
to get mad at you, because I don’t have all the facts. Given what I know about the guy, I consider
it to be a strong possibility that this guy snookered you into helping
him. Now, I know how organizations like
you work. You probably have a few screening
questions before you accept a person as a client right?”
They verified they did.
“So I am willing to
bet that if you go back and look at his paperwork, you will discover he lied to
you in a material way. And that is fraud
in the inducement and that is a crime.
And so if you discover he defrauded you, you should consider filing
charges against him. Because you should
be angry at him, if he tricked you.
“I mean, think about
it. Somehow he got you to stick your
nose into a case where you had no business being involved. And because he got you to do that, now you
are actually prevented from helping his wife, who genuinely needs your help.”
After all, this guy was a
convicted bomber. T. says he is threatening
her life and I know he has been using the Maryland legal system to abuse her further,
with false arrests and the like. We
now know he is a pedophile. And
Robert McCain revealed
yesterday, he was associated another pedophile, Craig Gillette, the same guy
who helped
Brett Kimberlin violate his protective order before the ink was even dry on it. But because he got their help on this bogus
case, they couldn’t help in this meritorious case.
And of course in talking to them
I was being charitable, trying to build bridges, suggesting they might have
been the victim of fraud. And they might
have been.
Or maybe this is corruption. Maybe one of Kimberlin’s rich family members
donated heavily to the House of Ruth and asked them to do them a favor and help
out their poor and beleaguered relative Brett.
I have no proof of that, but I am holding it out as a possibility so
someone else might be able to research into that question.
In any case, I think the House of
Ruth owes the public an explanation for how they ended up dropping the
ball. And if I could offer them a humble
suggestion, let me say this. They need
to split their legal clinic into two organizations. Call it “House of Ruth for Women” and “House
of Ruth For Men.”* By making them
separate legal entities (and truly segregating their operations), that means
that if an abusive person comes to them first, there will still be a whole other
organization untainted by their previous attorney-client relation. That way, a manipulative abuser can’t
effectively block his victim from getting aid.
Finally, we will be creating a
legal defense fund for T. and we will be kicking that off very soon. So if you are offended by this story, or if
you just believe in helping a woman get her kids away from her pedophile
husband, please give until it hurts.
---------------------------------------
Sidebar: Bill Schmalfeldt has been going on and on about how he
thinks it is somehow criminal to help
this victim of pedophilia escape her abusive husband.
At what point does Hoge's meddling in a private family matter turn into a crime? pic.twitter.com/z4CPVCLZRc
— RadioWMS (@RadioWMS) July 29, 2013
Oddly he hasn’t yet cited any
criminal statute that applies to this situation. Certainly it isn’t harassment to speak to
T. with her consent. Brett could
demand that I stop “harassing” her, which would include contact, if he spoke on
her behalf. But plainly he doesn’t speak
for her, given that she is accusing him of raping her as a child and is seeking
a divorce from him.
But hey, I am waiting for Mr.
Schmalfeldt to call the police and report the House of Ruth for “criminal
interference with an abusive marriage” or whatever crime he is making up, here. That'll happen any minute now, right?
Also, I will note that
Schmalfeldt is accusing her of making up the charge of pedophilia just to get
the kids. But why would she have
to? Does any rational person think that
if there is a contest of custody she is likely to lose? First off, although Maryland has officially
done away with maternal preference in custody cases, it probably still exists de facto. And second, what court is going to say, “hey,
let’s take the kids away from a loving mother with a spotless record, and give
the kids to a convicted bomber, drug dealer, and perjurer who associates with a
pedophile?” All things being equal,
doesn’t the mere fact she has never cost a man his life suggest she is likely
to win this, without additional charges of pedophila against Brett Kimberlin? So why bother to make that up?
---------------------------------------
* I say, “men” and “women” in the
title of the organizations, but given that Maryland now recognizes gay
marriage, inevitably there will be a man claiming his husband is abusing him,
or a woman claiming her wife is abusing her.
I’m not saying gay relationships are more or less likely to involve
abuse, just that it’s almost a mathematical certainty that one will involve
abuse. So maybe “men” and “women”
shouldn’t be in the title of the organizations.
But you get the idea.
---------------------------------------
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.
Aaron -
ReplyDeleteThe House of Ruth is national, at least; I have received proposals from two of their California affiliates in the past. A friend of mine used their help some time ago, as well, and they were very effective. That was why I mentioned them.
And I'm always sincere.
had little doubt in your sincerity. :-)
Deletethey sound like most of the time they do good work. but they screwed this up, somehow.
That's just horrible, and I had no idea.
DeleteIMO it is pretty common for domestic violence abusers to work to game the legal system in their favor. Domestic violence organizations should be aware they are a target for this behavior.
ReplyDelete"But the upshot was that they literally couldn’t tell me why they helped him out."
ReplyDeleteBecause one of their left-wing benefactors made a strong suggestion that they do so.