Or: "How Brett Kimberlin Tried to Get Another Person Killed"
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.
As massive as my monster post was back in May, there were things I left out just because my story was long enough already. Today we fill in another piece.
In April, Brett Kimberlin lost his first petition for a peace order on appeal. That much you know. You can read the transcript below but experienced lawyers can tell you that a number of things happened in that hearing.
First, Kimberlin stumbled all over the rules of evidence requiring authentication. He kept trying to introduce writings allegedly by me (as well as hearsay), but he didn’t understand that he had to first prove to the court that I actually wrote them.
And then Kimberlin foolishly rested without asking me to authenticate the documents that were allegedly by me. (I didn’t highlight this mistake when discussing the case because I hoped he would continue to make that mistake.) At that point, my able attorney, Reginald Bours III stood up and said:
I’m going to ask that you [the court] make a finding now that the petitioner [Kimberlin] has not met, even initially, the burden of proof required under the statute.
In other words, Bours felt that Kimberlin’s presentation was so feeble that a defense was not necessary. Every person is presumed not to have violated the peace order statute until they have been proven by the petitioner to have done so. And further, an appeal to the circuit court it is a trial de novo, which means it is an entirely new trial, with the presumption I am “innocent” until proven “guilty” just like in the first trial. (Or more precisely they presume I did nothing justifying a peace order until Kimberlin proves I had.) The court agreed and dismissed the petition.
Kimberlin had foolishly assumed that my attorney would automatically put on a defense and call me to the stand, giving Kimberlin the opportunity to authenticate whatever writings he believed was harassing. So when my attorney asked for a ruling that Kimberlin had put on such a poor case that no defense was necessary (and it was granted), he effectively prevented Kimberlin from introducing any evidence of my supposed harassing writings.
And of course it is worth noting that Kimberlin did not make the same mistake in the July 5 hearing. (Which is why I feel free to point out this mistake now. I will hold back details when revealing them will help Kimberlin abuse the system more skillfully.)
So, then after that, Kimberlin filed for a stay of the decision, pending appeal. And I will let it speak for itself:
Brett Kimberlin Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal (OCR)
But let’s notice one thing. In a letter to law enforcement, on July 5, 2012 he said that because he outed me as the creator of the Everyone Draw Mohammed blog, “there exists the very real probability that Mr. Walker could be subjected to serious harm or death now that his identity has been exposed.” This is Kimberlin’s own description of the consequences of his own actions. He claims he didn’t want to place me in danger, but his conduct speaks otherwise. This he put this into the case record on July 5; then he fought my attempt to put it under the seal; then he put my real name in the caption of a motion to unseal, and then when I asked the court to put that document under seal, he put my real name and address in a document opposing that action. At every turn he tried to make sure that this information was put into public documents.
And on page two, he does it again, this time to contributor at the website, Dustin, who is a dear friend of mine. I won’t verify if he had the right last name for Dustin; but either he is right and endangering my friend, or he is endangering a third party. But once again he has created “the very real probability that [a person] could be subjected to serious harm or death” by attempting to expose Dustin’s real name—and after I publicly denounced him for doing that to me. So he knows exactly how bad this will look, but he is so determined to create that danger to Dustin, he did it again, either to Dustin or to a third party.
In any case, here is my response:
I will let it speak for itself, including where it points out what is dishonest in Kimberlin’s motion. And I will note that the motion for a stay was denied.
But at the same time, Kimberlin sought his appeal. Now, just to go over some quick terminology, the highest court in Maryland is not called the Supreme Court of Maryland. It is due to some quirk called the Court of Appeals. I suspect it has some historical reason why it is called that, perhaps going back to colonial times, but it is what it is.
Further this appeal is not automatic, as it was for my appeal to the circuit court. Instead it is discretionary—that is, the Court of Appeals has to decide that it is important to take the case for some reason. And thus you ask the Court of Appeals to hear the appeal by filing what is called a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. I could go into why it is called that, but who cares? That is its function and that is all you need, to muddle through.
So here’s his Petition…
And my Opposition:
And for reference, once again here is the transcript from April 11, so you can see who is telling the truth about it.
Otherwise I will let these documents speak for themselves. I will note that no decision has been made, yet.
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 Blogger’s Defense Team button 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.
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.
Anyone else having trouble viewing the embedded documents?ReplyDelete
Thank you and well done.ReplyDelete
For the record, not that this is really unclear, I do not "hate" Muslims and neither does Aaron. I believe that people who use terrorism are monsters. That's my opinion of Brett Kimberlin and that's my opinion of Osama Bin Laden. It is not my opinion of Muslims at large and anyone who has read my comments on this knows that I feel very strongly about Islamofascist terrorism because I have loved ones who are Muslim. I do not hate them. I want them to have the best possible life with the freedoms I cherish. I want the women in Iran whom I love and share my name to be equals before the law to Iranian men.
I have criticized many aspects of Middle Eastern politics and terrorism, but I generally go out of my way to show support for victims of this terrorism (most of these victims are Muslim too!).
The smear that I ran a 'hate blog' is exactly as Aaron describes it. It's an effort to get me and my family harmed. There have been many such efforts. I think the worst have been the recent attacks on Lee and his family.
I hate to bring politics into this, but the bigotry is coming from liberals. It's not worth pointing to specifically, but the people who have cited my heritage as relevant are lefties. 100% of the time. It's not coming from Aaron or myself or Patterico. They don't care that I have Islam in my family heritage. It has made absolutely no difference in their treatment of me. They care about the content of my character. The only people who care about my race seem to be on the left.
Brett Kimberlin probably doesn't care that much about left v right, except as an angle, but he tends to attack the right and I guess that means he's a liberal. I hesitate to make that conclusion, but I have no hesitation about concluding that the man who so grievously harmed Sandra Delong and Carl Delong is a monster. I have no hesitation in saying that someone who brought as much drugs into Texas as Brett did is a monster.
These are my opinions, and those who attempt to stiffle them have corrupted the meaning of the word liberal.
I do support South Park's right to free speech, and I'm glad those who threatened to murder them are now in prison. That was a major motivation behind all the folks around the world who joined 'Everyone Draw Mohammed.' And yeah, it's true that South Park can be offensive, and I think many of the cartoons were offensive. I recall watching Imaginationland (a South Park episode) and being annoyed when Jesus Christ was living in imagination land. I was annoyed when Jesus was easily overpowered by Satan on the show. There have been plenty of vulgarities on South Park, and there were a few with the EDM contributions.
Just because I agree with South Park or anyone's right to free speech doesn't mean I enjoy vulgarity. Just because I support a racist's right to say my family's Iranian or Muslim heritage fits the profile of a rat or an al qaida member does not mean I support that kind of disgusting sentiment.
I support the principle of free speech. It's easy to support free speech that I agree with or is bland. We find our who really supports free speech when it's something that is challenging or offensive or even something I greatly disagree with. I support it then as well, but I stop short of the point where people try to get others harmed by outing them or attempting to inspire rapists or terrorists.
I don't see this as complicated, but there are so many weirdos that perhaps even this normal attitude needs to be explained.
Texas has its own higher court quirks. Civil and criminal cases are split into two different courts. Civil cases go to the state Supreme Court, criminal go to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Dunno why. Wish you were out of the woods already, but glad things appear to be on the right track.ReplyDelete
" We find out who really supports free speech when it's something that is challenging or offensive or even something I greatly disagree with."ReplyDelete
Sorry about my typo. What I was trying to say is that actually supporting freedom of speech is only meaningful if we stand up for the right for people to say things we don't like. No one needs support to say things others have no problem with.
But it seems to me like we need substantial protection in order to say the truth about Brett Kimberlin, a convicted bomber, drug pusher, and "top flight con man". It's unfortunate that this includes legal expenses and a family that can withstand creeps talking about wives or dogs or rapes or posting photos of homes with an 'I can get to you' message.
Maryland's justice system could have done a better job with this case. The lax attitudes of a few have allowed this problem to build into something far more difficult, protracted, and expensive. When planned out and material perjury and false statements are permitted, it mocks the entire process and makes a real mess for the honest people who expect a fair shake.