Convicted Perjurer and Document Forger Brett Kimberlin Talks Back to His Former Lawyer

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, we are in the midst of another mini-blizzard in the D.C. area and for that matter, Brett Kimberlin is in the middle of producing his own miniature blizzard of paperwork.  And just like some adventurous kids on Twitter last night, Brett is trying to get more time to do his homework.  Now, last Friday I shared Brett’s laughable motion to disqualify.  In that post, I also shared how he also was trying to get an extension based on that motion to disqualify, but explained it was meritless because even if Paul Levy was disqualified as counsel (fat chance), there are two lawyers signing on to that document (the other being David Rocah of the ACLU, a nice guy) and Brett is not even challenging the qualification of the other attorney.

But Brett is not accepting that reality.  Instead, in addition to all the other fun occurrences Friday, Brett filed his Reply to Levy’s Opposition to his motion to extend, and even clocking in at just over two pages, Brett still packs in a great deal of silliness.  Without further ado, here it is:

   Brett's Reply to Levy on MFE

Since Levy will (probably) have no opportunity to oppose this there’s nothing wrong with me noting a few points that I am sure won’t escape the judge.

Paragraph 1—consulting on a motion to disqualify is not the same as consulting on the motion to extend.  Even if a pending motion might eliminate the need to reply to a motion, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you will need more time to reply.  For instance, I moved to strike all of Brett’s Oppositions, but I still filed a Reply to those oppositions regardless.  In any case, he has admitted he did not consult before seeking the extension, and that is the second time he has done so.  That is reason in and of itself to deny him the extension.

Paragraph 2—it continues to be silly to claim that if the motion for disqualification is accepted that Levy's and Rocah’s “Opposition to Motion for Leave to Pursue Discovery to Identify Defendant Ace of Spades” (which Brett keeps falsely referring to as a Motion for Protective Order) would have to be withdrawn.  It just means Levy wouldn’t be able to represent Ace anymore.  But as local counsel, David Rocah was required to ratify and approve of every word in the document.  I know.  I have been local counsel several times over the years.  As a matter of law, Rocah is responsible for every word in that opposition and consequently, it can stand entirely on Rocah’s support—because he already said, in essence, that he supported every word of it.

Seriously, does Brett think that Rocah would be required to write it again, only in different words?  Oy.

Paragraph 3—his claim that this motion was merely a response therefore allowed under the Letter Order released last week is equally silly.  A new motion is not a response.  A motion for an extension while the court considers that motion is not a response.  The ink on Judge Grimm’s order was barely dry and Brett violated it, twice.  We will see how much patience the judge has with that.  (I would have none, but I tend to be harsher than most judges on most issues.)

Paragraph 4—in addition to the ridiculousness already pointed out in paragraph 2, there is this fresh silliness: “Mr. Levy well knows that he is the person who wrote the motion, and the ACLU lawyer is merely local counsel.”  Well, certainly Mr. Levy knows how much was written by him and how much was written by Mr. Rocah, but I don’t know how much Levy wrote and neither does Brett.  Hey, I would guess most of it is Levy because that is typically how things go, but 1) I don’t know this, that is just an educated guess that could be wrong, and 2) in any case, I see no reason to assume Rocah had no role at all.  As I have said before, lawyers are smarter in groups, and therefore Levy is extremely likely to have floated a draft past Rocah and Rocah is very likely to have had some thoughts of his own—especially if Rocah has appeared before Grimm before because Levy is unlikely to have done so.  I admit I haven’t seen Rocah operating professionally but from the conversations I have had with him, he struck me as being a bright guy, so the only way I could see him not contributing is if what Levy wrote was perfect in the first draft.  And once you recognize that Rocah probably contributed, it becomes a guessing game as to how much was contributed by whom.  (And as noted above, it is not even relevant, anyway.)

Nor is the allegedly “defamatory” post by Levy even relevant to the admissibility of motion.  That’s not just my opinion, but that of Judge Grimm when discussing Brett’s uncommonly silly attempt to stop me from having seven more pages in my Reply in relation to his opposition to my motion to dismiss.  This is what Judge Grimm said in the Letter Order we’ve been talking about: “Further, even if Walker’s speech outside of court is inflammatory, Plaintiff has shown no reason why that should affect a ruling on his motion for additional pages.”  In short out of court speech doesn’t rob a party of the right to respond.  Why would it disqualify Levy as counsel or cause his opposition to be struck?

Paragraph 5—Brett whines that Levy called his motion to disqualify spurious by insisting that it is the greatest motion evah, or something:

the motion is hardly spurious since the attorney client relationship does not allow a lawyer to unilaterally violate that relationship. Indeed, since the privilege exists to protect the client's interests, only the client can decide whether to waive its protections.

Not a picture of Brett whining

The problem with that is that Brett is not Levy’s client.  He was his client about a quarter of a century ago.  And as such his only rights are that of a former client.  So if Brett told Levy that he had actually murdered (by a murder-for-hire scheme) Julia Scyphers, or that he actually had sex with the criminally underage Debbie Barton (as has long been suspected), then that means that Levy can’t share that information with Ace or anyone else.  It doesn't mean he can't represent Ace.  And given that the only issue in this case is whether Brett gets to identify Ace, it is not likely to be relevant.

So none of these are grounds for an extension.  All of which is not to say that the judge definitely won’t grant him an extension.  But it probably won’t be on those grounds.  And I have said before, the judge might be looking to show the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that he has given Brett every break he possibly can, before dropping the hammer on him.  So if the judge grants him an extension I wouldn’t assume it is because the judge is being too soft on Brett and I wouldn’t denounce the judge.  I would reserve judgment.

Not an actual picture from the storm

But as it is, Brett will be faced with a dilemma.  You see as I said in the beginning we are getting a mini-blizzard today.  It should be in progress as this piece appears on my blog.  According to WTOP, the local news radio station, the court is closed.  And, gee, Brett’s response is due on Tuesday.  And for all we know, the judge has already ruled and we just don’t know, yet.  So Brett has to decide if he wants to gamble on the judge granting his extension, or losing his opportunity to reply to Ace’s opposition.  In other words, does he file his reply, or does he skip it and hope the judge grants him an extension?

We’ll see how he rolls the dice soon, I suppose.

And in addition to that, the Second Amended Complaint is due Friday.  And he still needs to reply to various state case filings.  And then next week he needs to show cause why his copyright case against Kimberlin Unmasked shouldn’t be dismissed, and why he shouldn’t be sanctioned for forging a summons for Twitchy.  He has a full dance card, indeed.

And meanwhile, Orville Redenbacher is doing like this with all the money we are spending on popcorn:

Always stay happy warriors, folks.

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

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.