Twitchy’s Opposition to Being Named as a Defendant in Convicted Document Forger Brett Kimberlin’s Silly RICO Suit

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.

So on Monday I shared my opposition to Brett’s motion to add Twitchy as a party, shortly before finding out that Brett had been granted a full amendment.  Oh well, life is like that.  So this isn’t a pending motion, but still I think that this is very much worth reading.  As I said on Monday, Smith totally outclassed me on the issue.  I bluntly thought of “prejudice” in far too narrow a way.  You will see what I mean when you read it.

   2014_02_18 Twitchy Response to Mot to Amend Case Caption

And while the specific relief sought—denial of leave to amend—was not granted, Smith’s commentary about the harm it does to the court if Brett can engage in these kinds of shenanigans and get away with it is probably still lingering in Judge Grimm’s mind as he thinks about whether to sanction Brett for forging a document.

The more I think about it, the more devastating this document forgery might be to Brett’s case.  First, it undermines Brett’s narrative that, “yes, I committed some terrible crimes, but I have reformed!”  This fresh criminality suggest the reforms hadn’t took.

Second when he claims there is a conspiracy to falsely accuse him of criminal conduct, and then he commits criminal conduct in front of the judge...  well, that makes the judge wonder if he is being falsely accused at all.  I believe all-in-all the judge is really starting to wonder if Brett has actually been involved with SWATting people—including victims of the crime the judge suspects Brett was involved in—and is literally suing people for truthfully pointing out facts that make one suspect Brett was involved in it.  And indeed when you think about it, at its core SWATting is a falsification of information: you are giving the cops a false confession to a crime, rather than a false document.  So why exactly is it defamation to suggest that Brett could do such a thing?

And wholly apart from the SWATting, it supports the allegation that kicked off this whole brouhaha: that Brett Kimberlin tried to frame me for a crime.  And it illuminates a central question in that case: how did those supposed pictures of Brett Kimberlin having an injury and how did those medical records supposedly supporting his claims he was injured come into being?  Sherlock Holmes (and Mr. Spock!) once said “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”  Well, let’s start by eliminating the impossible: plainly, I never beat Brett Kimberlin outside of Judge Rupp’s courtroom:

So that leaves only two possibilities.  Either he falsified medical records and photographs, or he actually was injured because he is crazy enough to injure himself or get someone to do it to him.  I have been agnostic about which possibility is most likely, saying mainly, “I don’t know, I just know I didn’t even touch the man.”  Well, besides Sherlock’s “razor,” there is the one of William of Ockham, which maintains that the simplest solution is usually the best.  That would seem to be that this convicted document forger who has been caught recently committing five acts of forgery before various courts, forged these things by some method.  The alternative—that he hurt himself or had someone else hurt him—seems a little out-of-character, given events.  Seriously, it is hard to believe that someone this whiny would have any threshold for pain.

(“Wait a second,” you might say, “what are the five document forgeries?”  You might remember that Twitchy caught Brett forging a summons, and John Hoge pointed out that Brett apparently committed two acts of forgery related to service in a motion to the judge and you might even remember the latest forged document related to service in the state case...  but that only makes four.  What is the fifth one?  Well, hold on, dear reader, I made a discovery yesterday that will be revealed in time.)

And back to the subject of how this forging of documents related to Twitchy might hurt him, of course he is now facing the danger of sanctions for this document forgery, which might still include even dismissal.  And most of the lesser possibilities are also pretty awful for him, too.  Truly I think Brett is likely to be forced to pay a some of Smith’s customary fee, which might be pretty damn high.  Which would mean that Neal Rauhauser’s theory that Brett could sue us without any downside to him might be officially proven wrong.

Anyway, that’s it for today.  Tomorrow I think I will share Levy’s affidavit against Kimberlin.

---------------------------------------

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.