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.
That question mark is correctly
placed. I will attempt to reach out to
some parties today but
according to a local CBS affiliate, the prior restraint
element of the injunction may have been removed.
To recap (and I will put it in
bold when the recap ends, so you can skip to it if you don’t need the review),
Roger Shuler is frankly a crank who writes a blog called the Legal Schnauzer. I mean seriously,
just
read where I explored his writings: the man is paranoid, finding
conspiracies in the most ordinary workings of the courts. He was also a cheerleader for Brett Kimberlin’s
attempt to suppress my freedom of expression last year and we have come to
suspect he is an unappreciated member of Team Kimberlin. John Hoge has taken to calling him the
Jailbird Advocate General, sticking with his Naval-themed nicknames.
And as you know, he was arrested. Basically he wrote a series of posts accusing
Robert Riley Jr. (son of a former governor of Alabama), of having an affair
with a lobbyist named Liberty Duke, conceiving a child with her, and then
procuring an abortion (and her silence) by some shady finances. These posts cited unnamed sources, without
any specifics as to dates, times, locations, etc. and he has not named them in
any other context. And not only do the
alleged paramours deny the affair, but Riley has claimed he is medically
incapable of fathering children at the time he was alleged to have done so, but
he would not elaborate whether that meant he had a vasectomy or what.
Riley and Duke then sued Shuler
for defamation. As the case went
forward, they got the records sealed—which I think is unjustified—and then
Riley sought an injunction against him. They
held a preliminary injunction hearing.
Shuler was informed ahead of time that this would be happening, but
claimed the service was invalid. I find his
argument specious and even if he was right, it was still stupid for him to skip
the hearing. Anyway, so the court found
that he had defamed the plaintiffs and put out preliminary injunction. That injunction contained three commands,
more or less: 1) take down the claims about the affair/abortion, 2) do not
repeat those claims in the future, and 3) do not otherwise defame Riley and
Duke in the future.
It’s that third part that is most
noxious. Of course defamation is not
protected speech, but the problem is that it is likely to chill speech that is
protected. I mean how would Shuler be certain if he wrote something negative
about either of them that the courts would or wouldn’t find it to be defamatory…
if Shuler had any tendency to obey the courts.
And apparently Shuler did not. He
did none of it and thus eventually the court put out a warrant for him to be
arrested for contempt of court. When he
was arrested, he allegedly resisted arrest and was charged for that as
well. And to this day he is being held
without bail.
So
ending the recap,
the
ACLU decided to intervene. They were
not going to weigh in on the truth or falsity of Shuler’s charges, they have
filed a memorandum in which... holy crap, I was cited! Cool!
I have never gotten an ACLUalanche before! You can read it
here. But the upshot of the brief is to say that
the injunction shouldn’t have been issued and the case shouldn’t have been
sealed, both points I agreed with. The
Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press wrote a letter, but it is not materially
different from the ACLU memorandum and not being an official filing, I am not
sure how effective it is. At best it
simply says to the judge that “we as a group are disturbed” which has some
value.