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.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Brett Kimberlin Accuses Himself of Obstruction of Justice (Part 8): Brett Kimberlin's Assault on the Truth

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.  The short version is that Kimberlin has been harassing me for over a year, his worst conduct being when he attempted to frame me for a crime.   I recognize that this might sound like an incredible claim, but I provide video and documentary evidence of that fact; in other words, you don’t have to believe my word.  You only have to believe your eyes.  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 this is part of an ongoing series where I have been pointing out all the lies and half-truths in Brett Kimberlin’s amended complaint for RICO and other violations against myself and pretty much half the internet (previously here, here, here, here, here, here and here).  I say this is him accusing himself of obstruction of justice because 1) he has claimed that lying to the FBI is obstruction of justice under various statutes and 2) his self-described “friend” Bill Schmalfeldt has said that he handed over the complaint or substantially similar information to the FBI in the hopes of starting a RICO investigation... against Simon and Schuster (in part)... claiming they are in some kind of mafia...

So we reach the lie of the day and as I promised, today is a bigger lie.  It’s the big one that leapt out at anyone who has regularly followed this saga from the beginning: the claim that I assaulted Brett Kimberlin.  One of the key paragraphs in that lie comes on page eight, in paragraph forty-three:

After the hearing was concluded, Defendant Walker followed Plaintiff out of the courtroom in Montgomery Country Maryland [sic], and assaulted him and took his iPad from him.  Courthouse security responded, retrieved the iPad and urged Plaintiff to seek medical assistance.  Petitioner went to the Emergency Room at Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland, where he was evaluated, treated and given medicines for his physical injuries, including contusion to the eyes, possible concussion and back pain.  The assault was in retaliation for Plaintiff exercising his right to redress and access to the courts, and it was meant to intimidate him.

Of course regular readers know that no such assault occurred.  If you would like to read the (very long) series of posts where I demonstrate conclusively that this entire episode was a frame up, go here and follow the links.  I give you two options: either reading it as one chunk in probably the longest blog post ever written, or in eight chunks because said possible longest blog post ever written allegedly made people’s computers move like molasses.

Or you could sit and watch this video that sums it up:

I also didn’t hear anyone tell Brett to seek medical assistance, and Deputy Johnson testified he saw no sign of physical injury on Kimberlin.  I can’t say whether he went to the hospital and so on.  I can only say his implication that my act of taking an iPad from him sent him to the hospital is misleading.  Maybe Brett is nutty enough to have injured himself or have had someone injured him.  But Occam’s Razor says that the convicted document forger—whom his own wife accused him of forging her birth certificate—just forged the relevant documents.

That all is humdrum and well understood by regular readers.  But here is what is less obvious.

First, it’s not just my opinion, that it wasn’t assault.  There is also a little matter of a concept called Res Judicata, which means that once an issue is decided it cannot be re-litigated.  And this is what happened on that issue.  First, on February 8, 2012, the District Court found that no assault occurred.  Now, lawyers know that even taking the iPad can technically be an assault if no defense applies.  But a defense did apply: self-defense.  From my testimony:

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 1 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.

In other words, dear reader, I was arguing it was self-defense.  And since there was no dispute that I did indeed grab the iPad from him, the judge could have only found I didn’t assault Brett by accepting that defense.  I had a split second to think and I decided that I was safer depriving him of the iPad rather than letting him do whatever he intended to with it.  And the District Court ruled that I had not assaulted him.  The peace order was based on supposed harassment.

I appealed that order and on appeal, the Circuit Court decided that the evidence was so weak that it was not even necessary to put on a defense.  So that didn’t even disturb the lower court’s ruling.  Res Judicata still applies.

But it gets worse than that for Kimberlin.  See, we are going to drag in an additional laughable portion of his claim.  Right in the very first, massive paragraph, he writes “[s]ome of Defendants conspired to and/or did assault Plaintiff[.]”

Now, first, of course, since the District Court found it was self-defense, it was not assault.  Further, Brett likes to pretend that this part of the Circuit Court’s ruling amounts to a finding of assault:

What occurred? An item was snatched from your hands.  If this was an assault trial, perhaps the evidence would be sufficient beyond a reasonable doubt, without addressing possible defenses, that an assault did occur. Obviously wrestling something from somebody, he assaulted you. That occurred. He did. He assaulted you.

But again, context is everything.  The judge was considering whether the Plaintiff had even met his initial burden.  If judge ruled that he had, then we would have been allowed to put on a defense to rebut that.  That is why the judge was saying, “without addressing possible defenses”, because without considering any possible defenses, including self-defense, he cannot make a finding of assault.  At best it could be described as a preliminary finding, subject to rebuttal.

But even going into fantasyland and pretending that this was a final determination of assault (and it was not), Brett wants us to ignore that the judge also said the same evidence indicated that the assault was a spontaneous event brought on by Kimberlin’s own unlawful conduct (unlawful, because taking photographs inside the courthouse is illegal outside of a few designated areas), John Johnson telling Brett that:

One of the factors that the Court could find existed for you to get a peace order is the assault. The problem with that is there is not one scintilla of evidence that that will occur again. In fact, but for the fact that you had the camera, it’s not a camera but an iPad with a camera, but for the fact that you had that, the assault may not have happened at all.

So unless there’s an attempt to take his picture, hypothetically, when he walks out of this courtroom, which I don’t think is going to occur -- well, he’s going to walk out of the courtroom. I don’t mean that not occur, but I mean taking a picture. There’s no evidence that he’s going to do it again.

As you can see Johnson is one of those chatty judges, who likes to have a lot of asides and take the time to explain things to parties.  Judge Rupp, by comparison is just business.  Nothing right or wrong with either approach, but there you go.

But the key thing to take away from that is that the judge is saying, in essence, that even if I assaulted him, it was prompted by Kimberlin’s own provocative conduct...

...which directly contradicts his claim that anyone conspired with me to assault him.  You can’t conspire to commit a spontaneous act.  And it also eliminates his claim that this was done in retaliation for anything, except his unlawful behavior outside the courtroom.

Which is conceding entirely too much for the sake of argument.  I didn’t assault him.  The only court to make a full factual determination on that point determined that I hadn’t and, well... you have eyes, don’t you?  And so necessarily no one conspired with me to assault him.

But if you want to see what complete histrionics Kimberlin engages in, try this simple exercise.  The worst you can say about what happened that day is I took his iPad.  Clearly his claims I decked him, punched him, etc. are wrong...

So every time Brett uses the word, “assault” replace it with “peacefully took my ipad and then returned it” or some appropriate mutation on that phrase and start to see how silly his complaint looks.  Here let’s start with that bit I quoted above: “[s]ome of Defendants conspired to and/or did peaceably take the Plaintiff’s iPad and then return it.”  Yeah, it’s not nearly as impressive as calling it an “assault,” is it?

So let’s review, including the lies from the previous posts, with the new lies being underlined:

Lie #1: claiming I filed anything for Seth Allen or helped Mr. Allen to file anything himself.

Lie #2: claiming that I filed anything “attacking” (including criticizing) any of the judges in Kimberlin v. Allen.

Lie #3: claiming none of the Defendants have ever contacted him for comment about the SWATting story.

Lie #4: claiming I have intimidated anyone, ever (and necessarily that anyone “conspired” with me to intimidate anyone).

Lie #5: claiming that Judge Jordan rejected our allegedly false narratives.

Lie #6: claiming I have defended Seth Allen’s “attacks” on Judge Jordan (which as best as I can tell were just criticisms, albeit intemperate, ineffective and ill-advised ones).

Lie #7: claiming that my blog, Everyone Draw Mohammed was dedicated to “attacking, smearing, mocking and insulting” Islam or Mohammed.  (And really that is kind of a two-fer, isn’t it?)

Lie #8: claiming that my blog solicited “vile, pornographic and insulting depictions of Mohammed.”

Lie #9: claiming that my blog published over 800 insulting depictions of Mohammed.  Looking back, I would say about 60% were insulting to Mohammed or Islam, given that I promised I would not censor my submissions as long as they adhered to two rules 1) they must depict mohammed in some clear way (including drawing an arrow to a thing and calling it Mohammed) and 2) no porn.

Lie #10: claiming that Lee Stranahan works for

Lie #11: claiming that Robert Stacy McCain lives anywhere in Maryland.

Lie #12: sending a false copy of the Amended Complaint.

Lie #13: claiming that I assaulted Brett Kimberlin.

Lie #14: claiming that anyone conspired with me to assault him.

Lie #15: claiming that I assaulted him for any other reason than his provocation in unlawfully using his iPad.

Mendacity  #1: when he gives the impression that I intervened in Kimberlin v. Allen out of the blue and motions on my own initiative when in fact each and every one of them were filed in response to some action Brett took directed at me.  I have no standing to intervene, otherwise.

Mendacity  #2: when he fails to note that he instructed many of the defendants not to harass him, which includes unwanted contact making it more difficult to contact him for a response to the SWATting story.

Mendacity  #3: when he pretends his denials have any value whatsoever.  If his denials are meaningless then why is it even relevant whether we contacted him to obtain it?

Mendacity #4: when he pretends that I did anything improper by filing motions in Maryland anonymously, when I was given specific permission by the court to do exactly that.

Mendacity #5: when he pretends that Malkin and McCain are just bloggers.

Mendacity #6: suggesting that any alleged injury occurred from contact with me (he might have really been injured, but I didn’t injure him.)

So that is now fifteen lies and six merely misleading statements in less than eight paragraphs and the big lie of sending a false copy of the complaint.  Be sure to tune in tomorrow for part nine.


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 donation link 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.



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.

1 comment:

  1. At least this time he didn't claim it took multiple deputies to pull you off him.