The Brett Kimberlin Saga:

Follow this link to my BLOCKBUSTER STORY of how Brett Kimberlin, a convicted terrorist and perjurer, attempted to frame me for a crime, and then got me arrested for blogging when I exposed that misconduct to the world. That sounds like an incredible claim, but I provide primary documents and video evidence proving that he did this. And if you are moved by this story to provide a little help to myself and other victims of Mr. Kimberlin’s intimidation, such as Robert Stacy McCain, you can donate at the PayPal buttons on the right. And I thank everyone who has done so, and will do so.

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Dorner Lied (Shocking, I Know)

So Christopher Dorner is the Ex-LAPD cop who is allegedly on a killing spree.  He allegedly has murdered the daughter and son-in-law of a man who allegedly aggrieved him, and he allegedly shot two cops and killed a third.  This morning I wrote a long post where I picked through pretty much every word of his long manifesto.  In it I pointed out that his explicit purpose in committing these crimes was to gain sympathy.  Consider, for instance, this line:

Sure, many of you "law enforcement experts and specialist[s]" will state, "in all my years this is the worst........", Stop!!! That's not important. Ask yourselves what would cause somebody to take these drastic measures like I did. That's what is important.

Hey, yeah, it’s not important that he is killing people that he doesn’t even allege did anything wrong to him.  No the issue is he has a genuine grievance!  And over and over again, he very explicitly stated a belief that this alleged killing spree would redeem his name.

In doing so, I argued in that post, he was buying into a common tenet of liberal thought: that terrorism was motivated by injustice, and therefore, yes, the left was to blame:

[Y]es, this means the left shares a bit of the blame for this if Dorner is in fact guilty of this spree.  Not on the theory that his love of Chris Matthews translated into murderous hate or anything that simple, but because the past behavior of the left has led Dorner to believe that by committing these crimes he can generate sympathy for himself and the injustices he perceives to have been done to him.  To the extent that he is motivated by the explicitly invoked belief that he might redeem his name by allegedly murdering the daughter and son-in-law of a person supposedly in a conspiracy against him as well as random cops, that is because the behavior of the left toward other acts of terrorism has led him to believe that this terrorism might generate sympathy.

And if the left was truly introspective and truly valued peace as much as they claimed they would, they would stop asking the question “why do they hate us,” and instead confront and defeat that hate.

Accordingly, I also argued that the appropriate response to his list of grievances is to willfully ignore them:

Because it is not enough to think of the outcome of this particular case.  We must also think of the incentives we are creating.  Do we want to encourage non-violent protest of injustice, or do we want any crank with a cause to just start killing people?  Chris Dorner’s entire manifesto, properly understood, is the best argument yet for the idea that we should not let ourselves be guided by the violence of terrorists in our policies, if only because it encourages more terrorism.

Well, of course not everyone is being that smart about this.  Twitchy has done a yeoman’s job of revealing how websites and twitter accounts have sprung up supporting this man, such as @WRChrisDorner, @ExonerateDorner and CJDorner.  Several websites, and supportive tweets:

You can find much more, here, here, here and here.

And finally we come to this report in The Oakland Tribune.  The title is “Christopher Dorner: A look at the man behind the mayhem,” and at first when I saw it I started feeling like this:

(It's a bilingual facepalm!)

A couple tweeters were bad enough, but a newspaper?  But then I read through the article and it surprised me in pleasant way.  Now, just to review, Dorner spent a great deal of his manifesto arguing that a female officer I only identified as “T.E.” used excessive force by kicking a lunatic in the face as they were trying to arrest him.  We learn in this article that this happened near a Doubletree hotel.  After T.E. was cleared, Dorner himself was brought up on false charges and he claimed he didn’t get a fair hearing.  And that leads us to this remarkable paragraph:

After the incident outside the DoubleTree in 2008, Dorner's accusation against his training officer was proved false. In a series of hearings, hotel bellhops and officers testified that the man taken into custody had not been kicked. Dorner was terminated for falsifying that police report.

In other words, it was not, contrary to Dorner’s assertion, just a matter of other police covering for each other.  Two or more hotel bellhops were also witnesses and stated that the brutality he reported didn’t happen.  So I stand somewhat corrected.  There is a value in researching his motives…  to demonstrate that he is a liar and to make everyone who took up for his cause look extra ridiculous.  Wow, you supported the murder of innocent people who he didn’t even claim had done him any harm, because you were fool enough to believe him when he said that other people did..

Indeed, his dishonesty and his violence are potentially related.  Due to my dealings with Brett Kimberlin, I have learned a great deal about psychopaths, and one of their tendencies is to be pathological liars.  I mean, as in they absolutely compulsively lie.  So when a person commits cruel violence, it is actually a sign you can’t trust them to be honest with you, either.

So again, I point out to any liberals who come across this writing.  When you allow violence to give the terrorists a soapbox, you incentivize terrorism.  So if you really care about peace, stop giving the terrorists a soapbox.  Insist that they refrain from terror, or else no one is going to listen to them.

If we took this attitude, who knows?  Maybe Chris Dorner wouldn’t have resorted to terrorism at all.


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.


  1. sounds great and all but how do you explain the reasons Chris complained about his partner in the first place.

  2. You are an idiot. Seriously, stop the blogging before u become a bigger laugh than u already are.

  3. Your post is ridiculous.

  4. Keep telling - and standing tall for - the truth, Aaron! Evil is good and good is evil in the world of the m00nbatz...


  5. LAPD Had "No Idea" Who They Were Shooting At In Dorner Pursuit,

    "It's 100 percent clear that they had no idea who was in that vehicle and just lit it up," says attorney Christopher Driscoll.

    Driscoll is representing Maggie Carranza, 47, and her mother, 71-year-old Emma Hernandez, the two women who were shot on Thursday, Feb. 7 in Torrance, CA by LAPD officers. The officers were on the hunt for Christopher Dorner, and claim to have mistaken Carranza and Hernandez's truck for Dorner's.

    "They had a description of the suspect, they had a description of the suspect's vehicle. The two women obviously do not match that description in any way," Driscoll says.

    Christopher Gettler, the victim that was kicked, was dismissed because he wasn't coherent enough in the video.

    The video is on the page linked, or here;

    That day, his father said he told him that he (Gettler) was kicked, but that was disregarded as well, because Gettler didn't say he was.
    Why? Because the other officers plainly "didn't see".

    Watch this video, and tell me that Gettler wasn't kicked by the female cop. Tell me that he doesn't point to the area where he was kicked, twice.
    He was kicked in the chest, too, but he wasn't asked about that. He did tell his father, though, and he witnessed about this.

    Here's the case file;

    "Gettler told his father he was kicked in the chest twice by a police officer"

    "The Board reasoned that, although there were inconsistencies in the testimony, the testimony of Adrid, Sergeant Perez, and Sergeant Hernandez was consistent with the original report by appellant and Sergeant Evans. Although Richard Gettler’s testimony supported appellant’s assertion that Sergeant Evans kicked Gettler, the Board found his testimony not credible because it was inconsistent with his son’s testimony. The Board also noted that Gettler’s mental illness affected his ability to give an accurate account of the incident and found that Gettler’s videotaped statement, alleging one kick, was not credible."
    The video, and his father saying he was kicked, wasn't found credible.
    Note that he wasn't explicitly asked about the kicks to the chest, and/or might have forgotten, as he didn't get lasting injury from those, as he did from the face kick (something that could NOT have happened by accident, unless the officer was some kind of Tae Kwon Do-student, which presumably, "Chupacabra", wasn't).

  7. This is fucking garbage