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.

Friday, December 20, 2013

The Franklin Center’s Motion to Dismiss Convicted Terrorist Brett Kimberlin’s Silly RICO Suit

Or “The Franklin Center Plays John Hoge the Most Sincere Compliment Imaginable”

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 previously I dropped on your five different documents in the two lawsuits filed by Brett Kimberin and myself.  You can read my basic motion to dismiss, here; the memorandum of points and authorities for that motion, here; a motion requiring him to file verified pleadings, here; and a memorandum in support of maintaining Kimberlin Unmasked’s identity, here.  And I posted a copy of DB Capital Strategies’ motion to dismiss, here.  And yesterday, I dropped a post talking about the ridiculous claim by Brett Kimberlin that somehow all of this defamation had rendered him “odious, infamous and/or frightening.”

Most of the purpose of this post is to give you the Franklin Center’s Motion to Dismiss in Brett Kimberlin’s lawsuit.  Like Dan Backer, they went with a less-is-more approach.  You can read it below the fold:

But let me tell you a quick story.  About a decade ago I worked for a Federal Public Defender’s office as an intern.  I was still a law student, so my role was limited, but in one case they asked me to decipher the federal sentencing guidelines, to argue for the lowest possible sentence for one of their clients.  And I wrote a memo summarizing what I found.

The attorney in charge said it was good and asked me to do him a favor and send him a Word copy of it.  I complied.  The next thing I saw, he was filing with the court his own memorandum with the language I had used directly cut and pasted word-for-word into it, without attribution.

And then some time later the sentencing hearing was held, and I went to see how well all of this was received.  The judge then took out a written opinion and proceeded to read it from the bench.  And for several paragraphs, he was using the exact same language that my supervising attorney had put into his memorandum, which was taken from my memo, without attribution to either one of us.

Here’s the thing: this happens all the time, and it is not considered plagiarism.  It would be in any academic writing context.  It would be if someone did that in a book.  But as I often say, in law there is no such thing as plagiarism.*  When a judge “rips off” an attorney’s writing, that’s a good thing: that means you said something so well, so logically, and so persuasively the judge can’t imagine a way to say the same thing differently.  And when an intern hands a memo to a lawyer, we are generally hoping to see a similar result.  I wasn’t insulted.  I didn’t feel ripped off.  I felt complimented.  It was a concrete sign that I might be good at this law business.  I thought it was really cool.

So with that in mind, I direct you to this passage in the Franklin Center’s memorandum on points and authorities, on the topic of Brett Kimberlin’s status as a public figure:

Plaintiff is a public figure because he has had an authorized biography published about him detailing his exploits. Citizen K: The Deeply Weird American Journey of Brett Kimberlin (Singer, Mark, Knoff, New York, 1996) is an authorized biography of Plaintiff Kimberlin. In it the book insinuates that the Plaintiff had an inappropriate relationship with a ten year old girl, (id. at 78.), that he was suspected in having arranged a murder-for-hire of the girl's grandmother (at 82, 83), and that the subsequent Speedway Bombings were an attempt to distract the murder investigation (at. 89).

And I said to myself, “gosh, that sounds familiar.”  So I looked over to John Hoge’s Motion to Dismiss, which he posted here, and found this passage:

As can be seen by the partial listing of Plaintiff’s history in the paragraph above, he has considerable reputational baggage.  Citizen K: The Deeply Weird American Journey of Brett Kimberlin (Singer, Mark, Knoff, New York, 1996.) is an authorized biography of Kimberlin. It insinuates that Plaintiff had an improper relationship with a ten year old girl (p. 78.), that he was suspected of having arranged the murder-for-hire of the girl’s grandmother. (pp. 82, 83.), and that the subsequent Speedway Bombings were an attempt to distract the murder investigation (p. 89.).

Starting with the words “Citizen K” it’s almost word-for-word even to the point that there is considerable redundancy in the first two lines in quoted passage from the Franklin Center filing.  Notice the repetition of the words “authorized biography,” “insinuates,” “suspected.”  And the phrase “and that the subsequent Speedway Bombings were an attempt to distract the murder investigation” is taken word-for-word from John’s writing.  There are differences, but if this was normal expository writing, it would be plagiarism.

But in law, it isn’t because...  it just isn’t.  I indeed pointed this out to John last night and he wasn’t annoyed.  He was tickled to see them borrowing from him.  A real lawyer looked at what he wrote as a pro se defendant and thought it was good enough that she would borrow it.  Heck, to a lesser extent I borrowed from him as well in mine, though I think if what I wrote was expository writing it would not be considered plagiarism.  If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, the Franklin Center’s attorney has played John Hoge a huge compliment for which he is rightfully proud.

It is also worth noting that some of the relief the Franklin Center is seeking is the same as DB Capital Strategies.  Given how close they were together in filing, that is probably a case of two separate groups of lawyers coming up with the same solution to the same problem.  In other words, great minds think alike.

Also I got a phone message from the attorney representing Red State and Erick Erickson, and he indicated he has not been served.  I am hearing that from several defendants, that Kimberlin has been negligent in service of process of many of the defendants, which is strange, even for Brett.  I’ll let you know how that develops.

So to keep a tally, Brett has to respond to 1) a motion to dismiss the RICO suit by John Hoge, 2) a motion to require verified filings in the RICO suit by John Hoge, 3) a motion to dismiss the RICO suit by me, 4) a motion to require verified filings in the RICO suit by me, 5) a memorandum in support of Kimberlin Unmasked’s right to remain anonymous in state court, 6) a motion to dismiss the RICO suit by DB Capital Strategies, and 7) a motion to dismiss the RICO suit by the Franklin Center.  And he will have to work on all of it over Christmas—I mean, he doesn’t want to default on any of that, does he?

And that’s just what I know of.  For him it truly will be...


* Of course, plagiarism does exist in legal academic writing, and it can get one in trouble.  But in motions, briefs, memoranda presented to the court, etc. or for that matter contracts and court opinions, there is no such thing as plagiarism.  If someone says the right thing in a good way, there is nothing wrong with ripping that person off and it’s done all the time.


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. Think of all the poor trees that have had to sacrifice life and limb (literally) to produce the blizzard of paperwork engendered by Brett's assclownery!

  2. I hadn't heard that perspective on legal copying before. Interesting.

    Hopefully, the judge will send Kimberlin to his room without supper.

  3. Kimberlin hasn't served everyone for two reasons - the first being that the point of this frivolous lawsuit was to be able to talk about it as if it was a fait accompli (instead of the fail accompli that it is) that had somehow already "proven" its allegations.

    The second was that he is going to try to file perjurous affidavits claiming valid service and fake up default judgments to play into the first above.