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 since last December, 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, last night I found out that the Brett Kimberlin media organ known as Breitbart Unmasked put up a post stating that the federal suit had been dismissed. As with anything coming from Team Kimberlin, this is dishonest.
What happened is this. The federal suit was originally filed as a parallel action while we were trying to get the flagrantly unconstitutional ruling by Judge Vaughey stayed in state court. So the federal suit included a motion for a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the peace order.
When my Maryland circuit court motion for a stay was granted by (state) Judge Rupp, (federal) Judge Mott found out very quickly by some means and he or one of his clerks called one of my attorneys asking whether the motion for an injunction should be withdrawn. My attorneys agreed that the motion for an injunction should be withdrawn, as indeed it should have been.
And then someone in the judge’s chambers made a mistake. I was told the judge did this, but I suspect the judge is magnanimously taking responsibility for one of his staff. But one way or the other they accidentally ordered the entire case dismissed, instead of just the motion for preliminary injunction.
Judges, and their staffs, are humans and not computers. They make human mistakes, but they also know they make human mistakes. They are not automatons who will follow this error blindly. Instead the case will be reopened as a matter of course. In short, it is a non-event that has absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the case.
Now, there are two reasonable questions to ask.
