This is the latest post in what I call jokingly call The Kimberlin Saga®. If you are new to the story, that’s okay! Not everyone reads my blog. 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.
A bit back I shared with you the complaint in my Virginia lawsuit against Brett Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser and Ron Brynaert. Now I am going to share with you Brett Kimberlin’s answer to it.
For the most part, I will let it speak for itself, but here’s some set up for those who don’t know everything about civil procedure as it is practiced in most states, including Virginia. Bluntly most lawyers can skip this and go straight to the document.
A lawsuit is initiated by a complaint. It sets out facts and the law in a plea for damages. And as you saw last time, the paragraphs of the complaint are numbered. There is a purpose in that numbering.
You see the Defendant is then required to file an “Answer” (or another responsive pleading) and the answer is supposed to acknowledge and respond specifically to each and every numbered paragraph. So for each one, you are supposed to admit, deny, state that you don’t know, and so on.
The idea is to whittle the suit down to what is really at issue: what facts are disputed and what are not. You might have a suit involving an accident where it is admitted there was a collision, the amount of damages are not disputed, but fault is at issue. Or there might be another accident case where there is no question that there was an auto accident, that the defendant was at fault, but the defendant claims the plaintiff is asking for too much in damages. So this process is designed to systematically identify what is truly at issue.
And every single allegation I have made that is not denied by Brett Kimberlin is admitted to.
So the way a lawyer has to read this is to take a copy of the complaint, put it next to the answer and then see what exactly the defendant is admitting to and what he is denying. I print them out, you may or may not want to.
Like I said, I will let the documents speak for themselves, in part because I don’t want Kimberlin to be tipped off as to what I see, but you can see two interesting things, here. First, he denies things that he previously admitted--indeed allegations he cannot reasonably deny. Second, he admits things he previously denied.
And of course the whole thing is improper, but who is shocked by that?
Of course the natural question to ask, here, is this: what about Brynaert and Rauhauser? Did they respond at the appropriate time? And what did they say? Well, the answer to that question is about to become very significant. But I can’t give away too much ahead of time. So yes, this is another undesired teaser. I hate to do that as much as you probably hate to receive it, but sometimes it is necessary.
But hopefully I can tell you something about that question very soon.
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 donate and help my wife and I in this time of need, please go to this donation page. 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.
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. As you will see by the time I am done telling my story 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.
Generally speaking, I don't think that Answer would give me a passing grade in Civil Procedure class for my Paralegal Certificate.ReplyDelete
Would love to be a fly on the wall when the Judge and Law Clerks read this one!
I see a comparison chart being drafted to aid in figuring what is being denied.
I'm disappointed. That's it? Wow.ReplyDelete
Wow! Discovery is going to fun, isn't it!ReplyDelete
discovery - (law) compulsory pretrial disclosure of documents relevant to a case; enables one side in a litigation to elicit information from the other side concerning the facts in the case.ReplyDelete
This my friends is where the real pain for BK et al begins.
Good grief. He denys PP2 right off the bat? All of it?!?!?!ReplyDelete
Man, the list goes on and on. Did this cat even read the complaint?
So Defendant denies... Wait, what? Paragraph 2?!? What is he denying? That he was convicted of the bombings? That he was convicted of perjury? That he is Brett Kimberlin?ReplyDelete
Not a lawyer... so I want to get this right. By *not* responding to certain allegations in your complaint (I did read the whole thing), he's essentially conceding the points thereof?ReplyDelete
Might he make some sort of amended filing of some sort to readdress those points, or is that now water under the bridge?
I know that there's no "standard" form of response, but this is ridiculous. Had I written anything even remotely this bad my Civil Procedure professor in Law School would have thrown me out of his class and told me never to darken his doorstep again.ReplyDelete
Having gotten an A in Civil Procedure, I see exactly what you are referring to.
Also, maybe it's different in Virginia, but in Michigan and here in Texas where I practice we are supposed to provide "specific" denials whenever possible as to what exactly we are denying in a response. Failure to do so when easily possible usually causes the judges to institute ... unhappy consequences.