Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin and the Fifth Amendment

Dread Pirate Kimberlin has been claiming that the Fifth Amendment grants him absolute immunity from discovery in the Virginia Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit. IANAL, but folks who are tell me that he’s wrong, at least about absolute immunity.

While poking through some Mr. Kimberlin’s other court filings, I found something that tends to indicate that he doesn’t believe that the Fifth Amendment should apply to his opponents in court.

Back in April, there was a trial in Montgomery County (MD) Circuit Court on one of the Kimberlin v. Walker Peace Orders. Brett Kimberlin put on such a poor case that Aaron Walker’s lawyer rested the defense without presenting any evidence. Then the judge ruled in Mr. Walker’s favor.

Mr. Kimberlin has appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals (that’s the state’s highest court) for a writ of certiorari. Note that Mr. Kimberlin’s home address has been redacted.

One of the issues Brett Kimberlin tries to raise is that he was not allowed to question Mr. Walker during the Circuit Court trial. He asserts a theory that, since Mr. Walker was the appellant in the case, he had to present evidence. However, since the appeal was a trial de novo, the burden was on Mr. Kimberlin to prove that a peace order was warranted. Mr. Walker enjoyed a presumption of innocence.

What really happened was this: Among the mistakes he made in the trial, Mr. Kimberlin tried to introduce unauthenticated documents into evidence. The judge, following the rules of evidence, refused to allow it. When Mr. Kimberlin figured out that he could ask Mr. Walker under oath to authenticate the documents, he assumed he could do so during cross examination. When Aaron Walker did not have to put on a defense because no case had been made against him, Mr. Kimberlin’s plan was ruined. But if he had been called, Aaron Walker would have been within his rights to refuse to authenticate the documents if they were incriminating. BTW, they weren’t. (I should also note that in the 5 July trial for another Peace Order, Mr. Walker was willing to authenticate postings he had made, but the judge found that the documents didn’t support Mr. KImberlin’s claims in that case.)

The court’s upholding Mr. Walker’s due process rights is not the same thing as denying Mr. Kimberlin’s rights.

IANAPsychologist, but given what seems to be Mr. Kimberlin’s failure to conform to social norms, his repeated lying, his irritability and aggressiveness, his consistent irresponsibility in his failure to recognize his financial responsibility to Mrs. DeLong, and his lack of remorse, … oh, never mind. I believe he’s a menace and that the sooner he’s brought to justice, the better.

Meanwhile, we’ll soon see if Mr. Kimberlin feels that he needs to exercise his Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination in order to keep from committing perjury during the upcoming discovery in the Virginia case of Walker v. Kimberlin, et al., and we’ll see if the Maryland Court of Appeals grants him a writ of certiorari.

Tick, tick, tick, tick, …

5 thoughts on “Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin and the Fifth Amendment


  1. A brief correction. Walker’s lawyer didn’t rest the defense, he made a motion for summary judgment after TDPK finished presenting his evidence. If the court had not granted the motion, Walker still could have presented a defense.

    This motion basically argues that the non-moving party (TDPK) had failed to present sufficient evidence for the court to find in his favor. If the court agrees, then no defense is needed because the non-moving party simply cannot win.

    The Maryland case was basically TDPK getting owned by the rules of evidence. The Virginia case is basically TDPK getting owned by the rules of civil procedure.

  2. Pingback: Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin Gets a Day in Court | Batshit Crazy News

  3. Pingback: Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin Gets a Day in Court | hogewash

  4. Pingback: BREAKING: Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin Loses on Appeal | hogewash

Leave a Reply