A Legal Note: Brett Kimberlin is an Adjudicated Pedophile the Same Way the Amityville Horror House is Haunted

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.  And more recently when his wife came to us claiming that this convicted terrorist had threatened her harm, we tried to help her leave him, and for that, he is suing myself, John Hoge, Robert Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar for helping his wife and he is suing Hoge, McCain, Akbar, DB Capital Strategies, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, James O’Keefe III, Patrick “Patterico” Frey, Mandy Nagy, Lee Stranahan, Erick Erickson, Breitbart.com, the Blaze, Mercury Radio Arts, Red State, the National Bloggers Club, and  Simon and Shuster alleging that we are all in organized crime for reporting factually about the spate of SWATtings committed against myself, Frey and Erickson.  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.

Donate to BomberSuesBloggers
and enjoy a big box of popcorn!

First, let me bring up, again, my plea to you to donate to Bomber Sues Bloggers.  As you know, we won in the Maryland State Court and we have ordered the transcript.  It is going to cost $880 to get it, total, with us having deposited the majority of that money already.  And of course the trial audio cost money, too.  And while we can’t play the audio for you (due to a standing court order pertaining to all audio), we will publish the transcript.  So if you want to read all of it, donate to Bomber Sues Bloggers!

It is totally Popcorn-Worthy!^®

Blegging aside, a number of legally inclined types have written asking me exactly how I draw the conclusion that Brett Kimberlin is an “adjudicated pedophile,” as the title of my last post suggests.  Now, first, admittedly I chose that title in part to parallel the language I used in another post called “Brett Kimberlin is a Pedophile” which was found not to be defamatory last Tuesday.  There, I announced that I had drawn that conclusion that he was a pedophile based on a number of piece of evidence that I shared with you.  But, you might ask, all that was found is that he failed to prove it was false.  Is that the same as saying it is true?

In my legal opinion, yes.  To make this point, let me share with you another case, Stambovsky v. Ackley (1991).  It is a boring case involving the sale of real estate without proper disclosures.  What did they fail to disclose?  Some termites?  Some chipped paint?  Ah, well, no, not exactly.  They didn’t tell the new owners that the house was kind of famous:

Yes, it was the famous “Amityville Horror” House.  Basically these people went around telling everyone in the world that their house was haunted, and then one day they chose to sell it, and didn’t mention it to any potential buyer.  So the new buyers sued, saying that they were damaged by this non-disclosure that this house was the famous Amityville Horror House and sought relief in court.  That resulted in this fairly remarkable passage:

Plaintiff, to his horror, discovered that the house he had recently contracted to purchase was widely reputed to be possessed by poltergeists, reportedly seen by defendant seller and members of her family on numerous occasions over the last nine years. Plaintiff promptly commenced this action seeking rescission of the contract of sale. Supreme Court reluctantly dismissed the complaint, holding that plaintiff has no remedy at law in this jurisdiction.

The unusual facts of this case, as disclosed by the record, clearly warrant a grant of equitable relief to the buyer who, as a resident of New York City, cannot be expected to have any familiarity with the folklore of the Village of Nyack. Not being a "local", plaintiff could not readily learn that the home he had contracted to purchase is haunted. Whether the source of the spectral apparitions seen by defendant seller are parapsychic or psychogenic, having reported their presence in both a national publication (Readers' Digest) and the local press (in 1977 and 1982, respectively), defendant is estopped to deny their existence and, as a matter of law, the house is haunted.

(emphasis added) The situation is parallel, here.  While  the court did not positively find that Brett was a pedophile, he is collaterally estopped in any future defamation action from claiming he is defamed, and in any action where falsity is an element, from claiming it is false.  Just as the defendants in Stambrovsky couldn’t deny the house was haunted, therefore as a matter of law it was, Brett can’t deny in court that he is a pedophile, therefore he was, at least in the context of defamation.

But all of that is subject to two limitations.  One, that is only the verdict this week.  So he technically only can’t deny that he is a pedophile as of the effective date that this judgment pertains to.  So I guess in theory if you say “Brett Kimberlin is a pedophile right now” Brett could argue that he was a pedophile Tuesday, but was cured Wednesday.  I doubt he would win that case, but it might go to trial causing you expense.

Second, even if it is not actionable to call someone a pedophile, you shouldn’t do it.  I am a God-fearing Christian man.  I do believe in what I sometimes jokingly call the “divine incentive structure”—i.e. if you are a good person you go to heaven and if you are a bad person, you suffer eternal punishment.  I do not believe justice always happens on earth, but I do believe it does happen in the afterlife.  So if you don’t believe it, don’t write it, even if you think you won’t be successfully sued.  There is no exception in God's commands that say it is okay to bear false witness against a really bad person.  So even as I argue in court that he has no cause of action even if my statements were false, I do not believe I have a moral right to lie in a way that hurts anyone.

Finally, I am going to begin a series of posts wherein I take the audio and I transcribe, in my poor and unprofessional way, highlights from the trial.  I mean I figure there are a few thousand people who very much would have loved to have been there and as much as possible, I want to give you the feeling of having had a front row seat.  Normally when I do this sort of thing, I write down all of the quotes I like and then publish all of them at once.  But we have two days to cover, here, so instead I will dribble them out in intervals.  So stay tuned and keep checking my blog.

Oh and donate to Bomber Sues Bloggers!  As Stacy would say, hit their freaking tip jar!

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

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.