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 two years, 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.
Well, it is Monday
and thus it is time for another court document filed in Brett Kimberlin’s silly
RICO suit. Previously, Twitchy’s able
counsel, Mike Smith, accused
Brett Kimberlin of scheme to trick Twitchy into falsely believing they were a
party when they were not. And in the
same post, I showed you Brett’s only reply at that point in time: a motion to
supposedly correct the caption, which was in fact a motion for leave to amend.
Since then,
Brett has filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss that accused him of
criminal acts like forging a summons, but today I am going to show you the
first of two oppositions to that attempt to add Twitchy as a party. Previously, you might have seen where John
Hoge had filed his own opposition.
Well, now you can see mine:
One big point
you might notice is that I don’t even touch (except in the slightest way) was the
subject of prejudice, figuring it was virtually certain that Twitchy would file
an opposition and that Mr. Smith would do an able job. I figured Twitchy could speak better than I could
about how they were harmed because I am not them.
Bluntly, I was
completely outclassed by what Twitchy filed.
You will see what I mean, probably tomorrow, when I show you. But really his opposition was much better
than mine.
Which doesn’t mean
I didn’t still contribute. My joke is
that lawyers are like the Geth...
...we are
smarter in groups than the sum of our parts.
(And for those
of you who are not fans of Mass Effect, perhaps this Wiki will make you understand
the joke.)
So on one hand,
I see lawyers very clearly borrowing ideas from me and John, particularly the
idea that Brett Kimberlin might be defamation proof, an idea I have floated from
literally the first time I even found Brett Kimberlin interesting enough to
discuss in a blog post, writing:
[Ron] Brynaert is almost certainly referring to this case, involving the alleged defamation of Brett Kimberlin, the convicted
terrorist known as the Speedway Bomber. I suppose next he will assert
that I have defamed bin Laden. Seriously, defamation is a cause of action
for damage to reputation; does Kimberlin even have a public reputation capable
of being damaged?
Oh, the idea
got beefed up over time with more law supporting it, but the basic intuition of
“how the hell do you even defame a guy as scummy as that?” was intact from even
that first writing. It was always the
best, most common-sensical argument against liability for any alleged defamation,
in my opinion. And that was the day
before Brett Kimberlin first began his campaign of harassment of me. If it was set off by that post, Kimberlin
truly has no sense of proportion, does he?
And meanwhile
on the other hand, I borrow from the other lawyers. And sometimes I say something in document A,
and they say something else in document B, and together both of our arguments
are stronger for the existence of the other.
Brett will probably see and claim some kind of great conspiracy, here,
but 1) there is nothing wrong with defendants coordinating in their defense and
2) we aren’t really doing that anyway.
It’s more like that there is so much wrong with Brett’s documents that
it takes multiple lawyers to explain to a court what all is wrong with it.
But otherwise I
will let the document speak for itself. And
in any case, I am far too busy with the next fun filings to write a short
novella here. As I tell you good folks
regularly, the case comes first, the blog comes second. I could devote a few minutes to writing a
quickie post giving you this document, but a longer essay will have to wait.
Finally, dear
reader, to show you that SLAPP suits are not confined to sociopathic convicted
terrorists or pedophiles, let me direct you to a post
by Popehat discussing a frivolous suit by Steve Stockman. It deserves more attention than I can give it
as a genuine outrage against the First Amendment by a Representative who swore
to uphold it.
---------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------
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