Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


While I wait for The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to file his omnibus response to the defendants’ motions to dismiss his second amended complaint in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness, I thought if might be interesting to review the story of his vexatious federal lawsuit by reposting some of the highlights of the past year’s coverage. One of the high points of both the state and federal lawsuits was the discovery of the first example of TDPK altering evidence.

* * *

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Originally Posted on 14 January, 2014

Last Thursday, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin filed a status report with the U. S. District Court concerning his service of process on the defendants in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness. He included the following among his exhibits in that report.AliService

This appears to be a copy of the returned envelope of his attempted service on Ali Akbar. It appears to have sufficient postage that both the federal and state complaints could have been enclosed.

The Maryland state rule requires that service of process by mail be by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, Restricted Delivery. Note that the Restricted Delivery “Yes” box is not checked.AliServiceZoomThat means that the attempt as service was defective.

One of the motions heard yesterday in the Maryland Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. lawsuit was TDPK’s motion for alternate service declaring that Ali had been served. In support of that motion, TDPK submitted what was purported to be a copy of the same envelope, but that copy showed a check mark in the Restricted Delivery “Yes” box. When the Judge Burrell was made aware of the fact that Kimberlin has previously filed an exhibit containing a copy of the envelope that, like the federal filing, did not have the check mark, she noted the inconsistency between the two exhibits and denied TDPK’s motion.

It has been suggested that the exhibit filed with the motion for alternate service on Ali Akbar was forged. That is not inconsistent with the evidence.

* * *

Of course, the Team Kimberlin PR machine tried to spin things to show that it was the defendant’s who were lying.

* * *

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Originally Posted on 11 January, 2014

Baghdad Blob sez—BaghdadBlob20140111

* * *

As we’ll see in a later post, not only was it true that TDPK was altering documents, but he wound up having to admit it in an open court hearing.

#Fail

 

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


While I wait for The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to file his omnibus response to the defendants’ motions to dismiss his second amended complaint in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness, I thought if might be interesting to review the story of his vexations federal lawsuit by reposting some of the highlights of the past year’s coverage. Here’s my motion to dismiss his first amended complaint.

* * *

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Originally Posted on 12 December, 2013

RICOMadnessThe Dread Pirate Pro-Se Kimberlin has filed a frivolous and vexatious RICO lawsuit against 20+ defendants, including me. I was given 60 days from 19 October to respond to his Amended Complaint. I have done so with a Motion to Dismiss. Under Local Rule 105, TDPK now has 14 days to file any opposition to my motion.

Here is a copy of my motion. I do not wish to make any further public comment on it until the judge has ruled on it.

* * *

Of course, TDPK couldn’t be bothered to respond in a timely manner.

* * *

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Originally Posted on 30 December, 2013

RICOMadnessThe Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin seems a bit overloaded by the schedule he set for himself by suing so many defendants in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO case. Apparently, he didn’t expect so many of us to waive service of process and file motions to dismiss in the last week of the 60-day waiver period.DocketItem18-4That’s nonsense. The principle of judicial economy normally leads a court to settle issues with no more expense of its time and resources than necessary. Thus, if only one of the motions to dismiss filed in the RICO Madness is sufficient to eviscerate TDPK’s case, the court could dismiss the suit and get on to other matters. My motion to dismiss is first in line. The court could go ahead and consider it, and, if Brett Kimberlin hasn’t filed an opposition by close of business this afternoon, judicial economy might lead the court to do so quickly without further input from TDPK. If mine isn’t sufficient, there are more on the docket.

It’s not in the interest of justice to require the defendants in the RICO Madness to meet the deadlines set by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and allow extra time for Brett Kimberlin to deal with the mess he made for himself.

* * *

At this point, we were only about 2-1/2 months into the adventure and the paperwork was only just getting started.

Assumption of Risk


Life is risky. When I get out of bed, I risk tripping and falling. When I stay in bed, I risk missing breakfast. One of the essential parts of being free is my ability to choose which risk to take. One of the desirable features of our constitutional form of government is its protection of my freedom to choose which risks to assume. It’s notable failures are often related to allowing someone else to take those choices for me.

The recent beheading in Oklahoma has got folks talking about the possible value of “bring your gun to work” laws. There is no likelihood of the state where I live (Maryland, where the courts have ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply outside of one’s home) will pass such a law, and that’s one limitation on gun rights that does not bother me per se.

Private property owners should have the freedom to assume the risks associated with maintaining their property as a gun-free zone. Of course, assumption of that risk should include liability for protecting guests from violence. As an employer, I should have the right to manage my employees’ behavior on the job. As a business owner, I should also have the responsibility for providing a safe environment for my employees and customers, and I should be held accountable if I fail to do so. I should be held strictly accountable if I act to increase an employee’s or patron’s risk.

This gets to my problem with most “bring your gun to work” laws. They force an employer to assume the risk of armed employees rather than allowing him to choose to assume the risks associated with maintaining a gun-free zone. Morally, this is no different from forcing the employer to assume the cost of birth control as a part of health coverage rather than the risk of paying for a pregnancy. As Charles C. W. Cooke has noted, this sort of interference with risk assumption can amount to something like Obamacare for gun owners. If a Catholic may object to birth control, why can’t a Quaker object to guns?

Don’t get me wrong. When I have run businesses, they been hospitable to firearm owners who wish to discreetly exercise their Second Amendment rights, but I believe that we should protect the right those folks who wish to operate or patronize gun-free zones as long as they are not a public nuisance and the owners fully assume the strict liability that should be associated with their choice.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


While I wait for The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to file his omnibus response to the defendants’ motions to dismiss his second amended complaint in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness, I thought if might be interesting to review the story of his vexations federal lawsuit by reposting some of the highlights of the past year’s coverage. Here’s another early from Hogewash! concerning that lawsuit.

* * *

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Originally Posted on 23 October, 2013

Last Wednesday, Brett Kimberlin handed me a copy of  the original complaint he filed in his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO lawsuit. According to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that was not legal service of the complaint or the “summons” which came with it.

(c) Service.

(2) By Whom. Any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may serve a summons and complaint.

Also, the “summons” that accompanied the complaint was defective on its face.

The first sheet is the notice of the suit. It does not have the case number on it. Neither does the summons. Also, Kimberlin had given me zero days out of a minimum of thirty to reply to the waiver for service, and it’s dated the day before he handed it to me.

The summons itself is not signed by the Clerk of the Court, so it’s not valid.

What this boils down to is that I haven’t been served with the suit because the wrong person handed me unfinished paperwork.

Durum hoc est sed ita lex scripta est.

Fail.

* * *

The Gentle Reader can see from this post that TDPK began diddling with service of court papers from Day One of the lawsuit. This as continued. Indeed, the Certificate of Service on the last court filing he bothered to send me is not the same as what he filed with the court.

Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign


Reruns? Yep. Even for Johnny Atsign.

Originally Posted on 13 January, 2014

Johnny Atsign Logo 2ANNOUNCER: From Westminster, it’s time for—

SOUND: Skype ringing once. Handset picked up.

JOHNNY: Johnny Atsign.

ZOA: (Telephone Filter) Johnny, it’s Zoa. How’s that report coming.

JOHNNY: Check your email. I set you a final draft a couple of minutes ago.

ZOA: (Telephone Filter) Ah hah. It just popped up.

JOHNNY: OK. I’ll drop a hard copy off at your office in the morning. Will you need me for the trial?

ZOA: (Telephone Filter) I don’t think so. I get in touch if I do.

JOHNNY: I’ll keep the date open just in case.

MUSIC: Theme up and under.

ANNOUNCER: The Lickspittle Broadcasting System presents W. J. J. Hoge in the transcribed adventures of the man with the action-packed Twitter account, America’s fabulous free-lance Internet investigator …

JOHNNY: Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign!

MUSIC: Theme up to music out. Continue reading

Team Kimberlin Bonus Post of the Day


After two days of trial and enough words to consume over 400 pages of transcript, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s vexatious Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. lawsuit boiled down to this one sentence finding by Judge Johnson:

There’s not one scintilla of evidence in this case that the statements that were made by these individuals were false.

Res judicata. Collateral estoppel. They should both apply to the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RCIO Madness.

Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign


Johnny Atsign Logo 2ANNOUNCER: From Westminster, it’s time for—

SOUND: Skype rings once.

JOHNNY: Johnny Atsign.

BRAINIAC: (Telephone Filter) Hey, Atsign, it’s Brainiac. Sorry I missed your call.

JOHNNY: Yeah, well you’re the one who stated the game of telephone tag. What’s up?

BRAINIAC: (Telephone Filter) You know that I’ve been poking some fun at The Grouch?

JOHNNY: Yeah. So?

BRAINIAC: (Telephone Filter) So I’m starting to get some attention from Goodguys Unmasked.

JOHNNY: Uh, huh.

BRAINIAC: (Telephone Filter) I thought it would be useful to find out who is really writing the stuff.

MUSIC: Theme up and under.

ANNOUNCER: The Lickspittle Broadcasting System presents W. J. J. Hoge in the transcribed adventures of the man with the action-packed Twitter account, America’s fabulous free-lance Internet investigator …

JOHNNY: Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign!

MUSIC: Theme up to music out. Continue reading