Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin and False Narratives

TDPK complains about the false narratives being used against him. The following is from the transcript of the 14 November, 2011, damages hearing in the Kimberlin v. Allen case. Q is Seth Allen. A is Brett Kimberlin.

Q Were you released and then sent back to prison for a parole violation, for failure to pay compensation to the, Ms. Delong (phonetic sp.), the wife of Carl Delong, who took his own life after those bombs —

A No.

Q — tore up half his body?

A No, I wasn’t.

Compare that narrative with this from 12 F.Supp.2d 487 (1998) Brett C. KIMBERLIN v. Stephen DEWALT, Warden FCI-Petersburg. No. Civ.A. AW-97-3829. United States District Court, D. Maryland:

On February 10, 1997 the Commission imposed a special condition of parole ordering petitioner to “immediately undertake, in good faith and with all diligent effort, to pay the final civil judgment …” in Kimberlin v. DeLong. Petitioner was further ordered to submit a payment plan for Commission approval and to take no measures to transfer or otherwise dispose of any assets owned or controlled by him without the permission of his probation officer. Because the Knopf payment was the only immediately available source of income or wealth, it was specifically identified, and petitioner was told to direct all future payments from Knopf, Inc. to Sandra DeLong. Petitioner additionally was prohibited from taking any action “that has the effect of delaying or otherwise frustrating the prompt satisfaction by you of any part of this special condition.”

Rather than comply with the special condition, petitioner submitted a directive permitting Knopf to “deposit any monies which would otherwise be due me personally from Knopf (Random House) with Sandra DeLong.” On February 17, 1997 petitioner, who previously had claimed 100% ownership of BKE, Inc. on previous tax returns and appeared to control the corporation’s accounts which he used for personal expenses, first claimed that BKE, Inc. was wholly owned by his sister. Notwithstanding petitioner’s January 25, 1997 claim that $225,000 in “guaranteed income” was due from Knopf, once the special condition was in place, nearly-concluded settlement agreements between Knopf and nine of petitioner’s associates fell apart.

Despite these maneuvers, Mrs. DeLong on April 18, 1997 obtained an order from the Marion County, Indiana Superior Court garnishing the Knopf book money in order to satisfy a judgment which by then amounted to $1,610,000 plus interest and costs. The next day, petitioner notified Mrs. DeLong’s counsel that he would go into bankruptcy unless she settled with him on his terms.[26] One week later Cynthia Kimberlin and her fiancé filed an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against petitioner in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland. …

Next, petitioner denied any attempt to avoid the special condition and offered to settle with Mrs. DeLong for $30,000. He further contested Officer Ramsburg’s testimony concerning the sudden changes in his financial situation after the February 10, 1997 Notice of Action. The examiner found that petitioner used “deceitful maneuvers to hide his ability to pay” and that his “relatives and friends are obviously acting to help him by filing claims and liens to protect his money and property from being available to satisfy the victim’s judgment.” The examiner further found that the “evidence against [petitioner] was provided by the subject himself,” and that at no time did petitioner “indicate any concern or empathy for the victim.” Finally, the examiner found that petitioner’s settlement offers were not undertaken in good faith; concluded that petitioner had resisted parole supervision by Officer Ramsburg “in every way he can,” and recommended revocation of parole with a presumptive parole date of two years. … Petitioner was taken into custody at the conclusion of the hearing.

On June 27, 1997 the Commission adopted the examiner’s recommendation, revoking petitioner’s parole …

TDPK says that he did not have his parole revoked for failing to pay Mrs. Delong. The records of the federal courts say that he did have his parole revoked for failing to pay Mrs. Delong. Gentle Reader, who do you think is pushing a false narrative?

TDPK was convicted of perjury while he was still a teenager. From what we see above, it looks as if he still is challenged by the truth four decades later.

We will see how the narratives play out on 4 December. I’m betting on Truth winning, and Lies going down. It will be interesting to see how much of TDPK’s creative story telling Judge Potter allows.

Stay tuned.

3 thoughts on “Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin and False Narratives

  1. Now that is interesting, That is the first I have read of the actual decision, other than what Aaron posted in one of his blog posts about the case. I’ve always just read a summary of the case without any details.

    Thanks for sharing this and your tireless work on the case. I hope you are enjoying uncovering and writing about this as much as at least this reader is enjoying what you discover and share.

  2. Brett Kimbelin’s narrative is that he is a latter day Jean Valjean. In Kimberlin’s narrative, instead of stealing bread, he sold a few joints as a teen. His Javert are those whom try to hold him accountable for his past such as Seth Allen and Aaron Walker. He even portrays them as obsessed. What is sad is that the judge in the transcript bought into his Valjean narrrative, as did the judge that censored Walker.

    The parallels between Valjean and KImberlin breakdown upon inspection. First, Kimberlin’s crimes were not minor. There is no comparison between a poor man stealing bread to feed his family, and, a college-educated son of privilege seeking big bucks smuggling drugs. Valjean stole bread. Kimberlin bombed Carl DeLong inflicting such severe injuries DeLong chose suicide over pain. This is before considering what happened to Julia Scyphers, or her granddaughter. Nor, were Kimberlin’s crimes in the past. He has consistently attempted to evade the DeLong judgment against him. Perjury still seems second nature to him. Nor, has Kimberlin shown the slightest remorse for his crimes. He denies the perjury, the impersonation of a federal officier, the possession of bombing equipment, and the bombings themselves. He seems more nostalgic about his drug dealing than remorseful.

    Nor has Kimberlin shown any sort of redemption. Valjean engaged in genuine acts of charity such as adopting an orphan child. Kimberlin’s “redemption” amounts to engaging in paid partisan political activity disguised as “non-profit” activity. If Brett Kimberlin is really another Valjean, one might as well assert Carl Rove is another Mother Teresa. While Valjean became a genuinely good man, Kimberlin’s actions have been those of a man that is petty, vindictive and small.

    What I find particularly galling is Kimberlin’s attempts to hide behind his wife and daughters. Kimberlin has consistently acted against the best interests of his daughters. A man who has from various accounts repeatedly took an underage girl on unsupervised trips, and, by various acounts, had an unnatural attachment to her oughten seek notoriety for himself now that he is the father of young girls. Surely, Kimberlin ought to have known that by acts such as making unsupported accusations that he personally sold marijuana to Dan Quayle, or claiming that he had knowledge that the 2004 election had been stolen his credibility would be questioned, and his past examined. Kimberlin tries to gain sympathy for himself due to his daughters allegedly reading of his past crimes on the internet. Kimberlin’s real problem is that the parents of his daughter’s friend will read of his past, and react to the fate of Julia Scyphers with an abundance of caution. Child protective services ought to be investigating Kimberlin.

    Dan Backer ought to be prepared to slap down any attempts Kimberlin makes to cast himself as a latter day Valjean. First, he should put him on record answering, “On such-and-such date you were convicted of the crime of yadda-yadda-yadda. Is that correct? Did you commit the underlying offense? Are you remorseful for yadda-yadda-yadda?” Then, if Kimberlin tries to portray himself as Valjean Backer ought to introduce the report of a competent pyschiatrist that characterizes him as being both unrepentant, and defiant concerning his crimes.

Leave a Reply