I did an earlier post called Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin Doubles Down on Stupid that mentions TDPK using his Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions in the Virginia Walker v. Kimberlin, et. al. lawsuit to threaten Dan Backer, Aaron Walker’s lawyer, with sanctions in the federal Walker v. Kimberlin, et. al. case and doing so after his sanctions motion in the Virginia case had been shot down. In that filing he said that he would produce a written exchange between the Justice Through Music Project/Velvet Revolution US Executive Director and Mr. Backer concerning the sanctions threat. When Judge Potter consolidated the hearings on motions to 4 December, TDPK was not able to present his written exchange and get it into the public record. Not to be deterred, he has included it as Exhibit O in his federal Motion to Dismiss.
This document raises some intriguing questions. Jeffrey Cohen’s email to Dan Backer contains the following notice:
This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged and is intended for use solely by the intended recipient. Unless you are the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the intended recipient), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message and any attachments or any information contained in the message.
The intended recipient of the email was Dan Backer. Do you think that TDPK was authorized to receive messages for Mr. Backer? Me neither. So how did he get a copy of the email exchange?
Jeffrey Cohen is the Executive Director of JTMP and VRUS. He is also a lawyer, and as we can see from this exchange, he is representing the two organizations in the federal lawsuit. (They are among the et al. defendants.) He’s not Brett Kimberlin’s lawyer, and his clients’ interest in the lawsuit are likely to be adverse with respect to TDPK’s. Did he give the emails to TDPK?
<fisking>In his email to Mr. Backer, Mr. Cohen asserts that the
accusations against the nonprofits are simply nothing other than unsupported supposition.
Oh, really? Just for openers, TDPK’s email communications relating to his personal litigation have often come from a Justice Through Music Project email address. Some are tagged as being sent from a JTMP mobile device. That use of corporate IT assets establishes a connection between his personal activities and JTMP and VRUS.
In the motion itself TDPK writes:
This conduct by Plaintiff demonstrates that this suit was brought for an improper purpose to harass Plaintiff [sic] and others. On October 30, 2012, Plaintiff [sic] served a Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions on Plaintiff’s attorney regarding this case, and that attorney told attorney for the non-profits that he will not withdraw the suit. Therefore, that Rule 11 motion will be filed with the Court on November 20, 2012.
Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Proceedure states (in part):
By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation…
<mockery>That Team Kimberlin would have the chutzpah to invoke Rule 11 … Oh, never mind.
And the timing for filing the motion … Rule 6 requires 14 days of notice for a hearing. Let’s see. 14 days after 20 November is … subtract 30 … um … 4 December. Nice try, but it won’t be hard to get the hearing rescheduled because of the conflict with the already docketed hearing in the Virginia case. We should all plan on being in Manassas on 4 December.</mockery>
Team Kimberlin is flailing away, looking for an exit from the trouble TDPK has led them into. As the net of Justice draws tighter, escape is being made more difficult. They’re beginning to resemble roaches that scatter when a light is turned on.
Stay tuned and watch ’em run.