Brett Kimberlin has been engaging in lawfare against people who have the effrontery to write the truth about him and his background. He views this as harassment Fortunately, some of the folks Mr. Kimberlin has gone after are pushing back. Of course, he views this as unfair. He reminds me of a bully who whines when he gets hit back.
The most vigorous pushback is coming from Aaron Walker who is suing Mr. Kimberlin in both Virginia and federal courts. Mr. Kimberlin has made it clear that he does not intend to cooperate with discovery in these cases. Yesterday, I posted the Motion to Compel Discovery filed by Mr. Walker’s lawyer Dan Backer in the Virginia case. It referred to several Exhibits. Today, we’ll look at Exhibits A through D.
Exhibit A is a courtesy email sent by Mr. Backer to Brett Kimberlin. Mr. Kimberlin’s email address has been redacted.
Exhibit B is the Interrogatories sent to Mr. Kimberlin. This is a normal part of the discovery process in civil suit. A third party’s name has been redacted to protect her privacy.
It’s not hard to understand why Brett Kimberlin would want to avoid answering these questions (especially number 11) under oath, but unless he can come up with a valid legal argument, he must do so. He must also produce the documents requested in Exhibit C.
Finally, he must admit or deny the assertions in Exhibit D. Note that much referenced in this Exhibit are matters of public record.
There will be a hearing on the Motion to Compel Discovery on Friday, 14 September. Watch this space for more documents related to this case.
Tick, tick, tick, tick, …
UPDATE—In response to an email … The name redacted in Exhibit B is that of someone who was a minor child at the time of the events in question. This question appears to be related to information reported by Mark Singer.