Or “Brett Kimberlin Goes the Full Schmalfeldt”
|Brett's fail is much funnier in 3D!|
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 convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin has been harassing me for over three years, 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. Indeed, he sued me for saying this and lost on the issue of truth. And more recently when his wife came to us claiming that this convicted terrorist had threatened her harm, we tried to help her leave him, and for that, he sued myself, John Hoge, Robert Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar for helping his wife and for calling him a pedophile. He lost on the issue of truth. He is also suing Hoge, Akbar, Dan Backer, DB Capital Strategies, Patrick “Patterico” Frey, Mandy Nagy (who is significantly incapacitated by a stroke), Lee Stranahan, the National Bloggers Club, and others alleging that we are all in conspiracy to defame him because we reported factually about the spate of SWATtings committed against myself, Frey, Erickson and others. 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.
Now in the last two posts, I discussed Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., and Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club (II), and I have discussed other cases in the past. One case I don’t remember discussing at all, is Kimberlin v. Hunton and Williams, et al. That’s largely because I am not a party in it, and not generally involved in that case, but my friend John Hoge is and he has been discussing it regularly at his blog, here. He calls it “RICO II,” sometimes humorously adding “Electric Boogalo” to riff off the movie “Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogalo” which is more famous for its title than anything else.
How to explain this suit? Well, the short version is this. Longtime readers know that Brett Kimberlin believes that there was a vast conspiracy against him called in shorthand “Team Themis” that involves the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the FBI and I think the CIA. No word on whether the Templars are involved, too. Anyway, this suit is about that pile of crazy... and then he threw in some random unrelated state-law tort claims against John Hoge and Bill Nickless. The insertion of Mr. Hoge seems largely to be related to his anger at John for having won a peace order hearing the week before Brett filed this. He filed this dumb lawsuit literally the same week that Judge Hazel dismissed all RICO claims (and most other claims in Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club (I). You can read that opinion here. And guess who got the new RICO case? Judge Hazel. It’s like legal whack-a-mole.
Sidebar: And for those of you who bother to read the opinion in Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club (I), you will recognize that Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club (II) is kind of a continuation of Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club (I). Basically Brett brought federal law claims against various state law claims against a large number of us. The judge dismissed most of the federal law claims for failure to state a claim, and then dismissed the state law claims for jurisdictional reasons. This gave Brett the right to re-file the state law claims in state court, so he did. And that is what just got dismissed, recently.
Anyway, in RICO II: Electric Boogalo, Brett just filed a motion that did involve me, accusing me of unauthorized practice of law. Just to give a little more background, Brett Kimberlin’s complaint against the defendants, as usual, was woefully inadequate as a matter of law, so he filed a motion to amend his complaint. I would post it, but what it says specifically isn’t important to the story I am telling right now. The important thing is he asked to amend it, and John Hoge filed an opposition to it, which you can read here:
And here comes Brett’s response where he falsely accuses me of unauthorized practice of law:
(Please note that the title of the document says he is responding to a different document, but the substance of it was about the document I just gave you from John.)
Now that raises a few questions and the problem here is my duties as a reporter are going to be trumped by my duties as an attorney. I have been John’s attorney for some time now and so I have a duty to keep private conversations related to legal matters confidential. This is true even if it helps me, and even if what he told me was innocuous—as long as it is in the course of our attorney-client relationship, I can’t tell just tell you. I am not free to tell you.
So it is not a breach of privilege to point out that this exists on John’s Scribd account...
...because that is not confidential. He posted it in public. So if you, dear reader, are concerned about any data security breach, that will put your mind at ease. But on the other hand, any explanation he might have given for posting that thing to his account—whether it was an accident, if John did this to create a “honeypot, or any other reason—is something I can’t share.
Now, one exception to that is that I can breach attorney-client privilege to the extent it is necessary to defend myself against allegations that I have engaged in improper conduct. So that allowed me to explain what went on to the Court, in terms I couldn’t normally say in the blog. In other words, to understand what happened, you are going to have to read the document, because I am limited in what I can say here:
(of course, the actual was appropriately signed. And I find scribd has been making the formatting on some of my documents weird in terms of line spacing. I assure the original looked normal.)
So basically Brett is humping the same theory of the practice of law that Brett’s self-described “friend” Bill Schmalfeldt subscribed to, here, which should be your first clue how stupid his theory is. (Schmalfeldt showed up here previously as a thug supporting Kimberlin. For instance, here he is—referred to as Liberal Grouch—trying to get someone to rape Lee Stranahan’s wife.) Basically Brett and Bill think that if you are not a Maryland lawyer, you can’t talk about Maryland law, even if you licensed in another jurisdiction and in that jurisdiction where you are licensed at the time. So, if you run a business with contacts all across the nation, you need to hire 51 lawyers to tell you if what you are doing is legal, one for every state and the District of Columbia. Anyone who actually, you know, practices law knows that this is not how it works: it is where you are that governs.
Also, Brett’s claim that I authored the entire document is just stupid. All the designation of authorship in Word indicates is whose computer the specific text came out of. For instance, for all Brett knew, I had loaned my computer to John to write on. It has no way of knowing who is punching the keys. My point isn’t to say that this is what happened—the document above tells you what actually happened. Instead, it is to point out that Brett should have known that this was no evidence at all that I engaged in unauthorized practice of law. Seriously, I know he’s an old man and old men don’t typically do well with computers, but he should know better than that.
So all he managed to do was waste everyone’s time, including—notably—Judge Hazel.
I’ll add that John has filed his response to this nonsense, which you can read about, here.
And that gives you some idea of the stupid drama Brett continually tries to insert into the dockets.
What it comes down to is this. You are not allowed to write anything bad about Brett Kimberlin. And if you are a lawyer, you are not allowed to assist any person that Brett Kimberlin is targeting. That is his core belief, and my fight is to disabuse him of that notion and make get justice for the crimes he has committed against me.
My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist (and adjudicated pedophile) 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 donation link 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.
There are 4 'o's in Boogaloo.ReplyDelete
And 21 in HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGE!!!
I do find it funny that it matters where you are when you do something, not what you're doing.ReplyDelete
But I'm not a lawyer. I'm expecting to hear "HYPERTECHNICAL!" shouted all over the place.
(FWIW, just to a layman the MD law seems really weird. One suspects it should be illegal to hold one's self out as a Maryland lawyer, or try to submit papers on another's behalf to a MD court. I don't see why they care who's proofreading what. But again, just a layman.)
Good for you, Aaron. I hate to sully your blog with coarse language, but what a dick Brett Kimberlin is. He's killed someone, terrorized a town, stiffed a widow on a just debt, run drugs big-time, and he's whining to a court of law about you helping a friend? What a dick.ReplyDelete