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.

Thursday, August 1, 2013

EXCLUSIVE: How Brett Kimberlin Prevented a Domestic Violence Organization From Helping T. Kimberlin

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 a year, 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.

[Update: Please note that I have removed the first name of Ms. Kimberlin at her request and left only her first initial, “T.” She is, after all, a victim of sexual abuse and those kinds of reasonable requests will be honored.  While the moral right to privacy of rape victims is not absolute, it seems to be reasonably asserted here.]

Early in the Kimberlin saga I started moderating every comment on this blog.  This was because Team Kimberlin would try to abuse the comment system in various ways.  But there was one comment, to this post, I held in the queue, for another reason.  “Dianna” seemed sincere enough, but there was an unintended irony to her comment that I wasn’t ready to discuss.  This is what she wrote and for the first time today, I let the comment out of moderation:

Aaron, if there's someone who could refer Ms. Kimberlin, there's a House of Ruth affiliate she can turn to. They are very effective advocates and supports for abused women.

You see, as much as I have written about Brett Kimberlin, there are some details I have held back, just because a detail might not be very important at the time.  Let me start by telling you about the House of Ruth.  This is their mission statement:

The House Of Ruth Maryland leads the fight to end violence against women and their children by confronting the attitudes, behaviors and systems that perpetuate it, and by providing victims with the services necessary to rebuild their lives safely and free of fear.

Our vision is that one day, every woman in Maryland will be safe in her own home.

That statement suggests they are confined to Maryland, but I know there is an affiliate in at least one other jurisdiction.  But still, it sounds like a noble goal.  As I wrote a few days ago:

There are, sadly, millions of men (and some women) who believe that marriage is a contest of cruelty rather than love.  But there are also millions of decent people who stand ready to lend the victims of such vile persons a helping hand and to help them escape.  I am proud to count myself as one of them.

They even have a legal clinic where they provide free lawyers to people who have been abused.  So, over the last two weeks when I was trying to find a way to get her a Maryland-licensed attorney who can go to bat for T. Kimberlin her and her children, they were a natural choice to call.

But I already knew there might be a problem.  You see, you might remember how on May 29, 2012, Brett Kimberlin had me arrested on false charges at a Peace Order hearing.  What I didn’t mention at the time was that the House of Ruth was there, helping Brett Kimberlin out.  Kimberlin did this as part of his martyr act: “see how victimized I am?  I got the House of Ruth here to support me.”  Of course I was convinced he got their support by spreading his usual string of lies and they probably didn’t check his story too closely.  But this, I realized, might be a problem for T. 

So when I called them up, I talked to them about the resources and, yes, they sounded wonderful.  And they probably are in most cases, but I knew to ask them about that previous involvement.  They verified that yes, their legal clinic had helped Brett Kimberlin in the past and therefore they couldn’t represent T.

So I said, “hold it, now, aren’t you a Domestic Violence organization?”  The girl on the other end (I won’t name and embarrass her) verified that they were.  (Later they verified that contrary to the suggestion in their mission statement, they represented men and women, really whoever walked through their doors, first.)

“Okay, I know the case where you helped him.  That is a Peace Order case.  Peace Orders cannot by definition be granted in domestic violence situations—you have to get a Protective Order for that.  So why were you helping him in that case.”

The girl on the other end told me that sometimes they get involved in Peace Orders when it does have a domestic violence connection.  Like maybe the husband is harassing a woman, and so is her friends, as part of a larger campaign against her.

“I can see that,” I replied, “but I know that case.  It was against me.  And even if you believe his version of events, all I was doing was writing bad things about him on the internet.”  I went on to explain that I was not family or a paramour or anything like that, nor was I connected to anyone who would be considered as such.  “So there was no connection to any domestic violence.  So why were you involved?”

About then the girl got me to a supervisor and the conversation started mostly all over again.  But the upshot was that they literally couldn’t tell me why they helped him out.

So I said something like this:

“Look I am not going to get mad at you, because I don’t have all the facts.  Given what I know about the guy, I consider it to be a strong possibility that this guy snookered you into helping him.  Now, I know how organizations like you work.  You probably have a few screening questions before you accept a person as a client right?”

They verified they did.

“So I am willing to bet that if you go back and look at his paperwork, you will discover he lied to you in a material way.  And that is fraud in the inducement and that is a crime.  And so if you discover he defrauded you, you should consider filing charges against him.  Because you should be angry at him, if he tricked you.

“I mean, think about it.  Somehow he got you to stick your nose into a case where you had no business being involved.  And because he got you to do that, now you are actually prevented from helping his wife, who genuinely needs your help.”

After all, this guy was a convicted bomber.  T. says he is threatening her life and I know he has been using the Maryland legal system to abuse her further, with false arrests and the like.  We now know he is a pedophile.  And Robert McCain revealed yesterday, he was associated another pedophile, Craig Gillette, the same guy who helped Brett Kimberlin violate his protective order before the ink was even dry on it.  But because he got their help on this bogus case, they couldn’t help in this meritorious case.

And of course in talking to them I was being charitable, trying to build bridges, suggesting they might have been the victim of fraud.  And they might have been.

Or maybe this is corruption.  Maybe one of Kimberlin’s rich family members donated heavily to the House of Ruth and asked them to do them a favor and help out their poor and beleaguered relative Brett.  I have no proof of that, but I am holding it out as a possibility so someone else might be able to research into that question.

In any case, I think the House of Ruth owes the public an explanation for how they ended up dropping the ball.  And if I could offer them a humble suggestion, let me say this.  They need to split their legal clinic into two organizations.  Call it “House of Ruth for Women” and “House of Ruth For Men.”*  By making them separate legal entities (and truly segregating their operations), that means that if an abusive person comes to them first, there will still be a whole other organization untainted by their previous attorney-client relation.  That way, a manipulative abuser can’t effectively block his victim from getting aid.

Finally, we will be creating a legal defense fund for T. and we will be kicking that off very soon.  So if you are offended by this story, or if you just believe in helping a woman get her kids away from her pedophile husband, please give until it hurts.


Sidebar: Bill Schmalfeldt has been going on and on about how he thinks it is somehow criminal to help this victim of pedophilia escape her abusive husband.

Oddly he hasn’t yet cited any criminal statute that applies to this situation.  Certainly it isn’t harassment to speak to T. with her consent.  Brett could demand that I stop “harassing” her, which would include contact, if he spoke on her behalf.  But plainly he doesn’t speak for her, given that she is accusing him of raping her as a child and is seeking a divorce from him.

But hey, I am waiting for Mr. Schmalfeldt to call the police and report the House of Ruth for “criminal interference with an abusive marriage” or whatever crime he is making up, here.  That'll happen any minute now, right?

Also, I will note that Schmalfeldt is accusing her of making up the charge of pedophilia just to get the kids.  But why would she have to?  Does any rational person think that if there is a contest of custody she is likely to lose?  First off, although Maryland has officially done away with maternal preference in custody cases, it probably still exists de facto.  And second, what court is going to say, “hey, let’s take the kids away from a loving mother with a spotless record, and give the kids to a convicted bomber, drug dealer, and perjurer who associates with a pedophile?”  All things being equal, doesn’t the mere fact she has never cost a man his life suggest she is likely to win this, without additional charges of pedophila against Brett Kimberlin?  So why bother to make that up?


* I say, “men” and “women” in the title of the organizations, but given that Maryland now recognizes gay marriage, inevitably there will be a man claiming his husband is abusing him, or a woman claiming her wife is abusing her.  I’m not saying gay relationships are more or less likely to involve abuse, just that it’s almost a mathematical certainty that one will involve abuse.  So maybe “men” and “women” shouldn’t be in the title of the organizations.  But you get the idea.



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. Aaron -

    The House of Ruth is national, at least; I have received proposals from two of their California affiliates in the past. A friend of mine used their help some time ago, as well, and they were very effective. That was why I mentioned them.

    And I'm always sincere.

    1. had little doubt in your sincerity. :-)

      they sound like most of the time they do good work. but they screwed this up, somehow.

    2. That's just horrible, and I had no idea.

  2. IMO it is pretty common for domestic violence abusers to work to game the legal system in their favor. Domestic violence organizations should be aware they are a target for this behavior.

  3. "But the upshot was that they literally couldn’t tell me why they helped him out."

    Because one of their left-wing benefactors made a strong suggestion that they do so.