Illegally Obtained Information?

I received a call this evening from a reader (my number’s in the phone book) about a post that Bill Schmalfeldt put up speculating on the identity of the person or person(s) behind Kimberlin Unmasked. I’m amused to find out that I am now a suspect. Apparently, Schmalfeldt goes on at some length about the IP addresses and locations from which tweets to the @Kimberlinumask Twitter account originated.

The Twitter API doesn’t make that information available. Law enforcement can get the information with a warrant, and it might be subpoenaed in a civil matter. Neither of those seem to be the source of Schmalfeldt’s information. Given that there are ways to hack that information, I suspect his “reliable” source obtained it illegally.

The reek of various bodily fluids is becoming quite strong as the panic sets in at Team Kimberlin.

UPDATE—I see from one of the comments that Schmalfeldt says that Twitter gives IP address information from its connection logs to anyone who asks.


TwitterPolicyUPDATE 2—I’ve heard all sorts of speculation about the identity of Kimberlin Unmasked. I don’t know who he/she/they is/are. I have no need to know, and it is to my advantage not to know. I can’t give up information that I don’t have. I am being willfully ignorant.

UPDATE 3—The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has had a subpoena issued against Twitter, but it is not for any IP address information. Twitter required to produce the following information by 27 December, 2013—BK_Twitter_SubpoenaAs you can see, the subpoena demanded the name of the person who registered the Twitter account @Kimberlinunmask. The only name Twitter collects is the user name. And for that account the user name is … wait for it … Kimberlin Unmasked.


21 thoughts on “Illegally Obtained Information?

  1. Even if you think that they are just making things up on the fly as they usually do; a quick discussion with law enforcement about their claims and the possible illegality should be initiated.

    If they are claiming to be doing possibly illegal actions, let law enforcement deal with them.
    Might give them an incentive to stop if they get more visits from the boys in blue.

    Also puts them on their radar for anything in future.

    • Why stop with reporting this seeming criminal to law enforcement? Why not seek a peace order or restraining order from both the state and federal courts. Brett Kimberlin should be expected to pursue discovery in a lawful manner.

      Kimberlin’s association with Neal Raushauer, self-styled spokesman for anonymous, and his open solicitations of five-figure “rewards” to “hackers” for providing him information about his enemies exhibit a pattern.

    • I have noticed a dramatic increase in froth flowing out of the trailer in which CB resides. Clearly, the so-called upcoming “mediation” is being sabotaged by Jabba the Hut because he now realizes that he indeed may be visiting the slammer in a short while. It is rather comical to watch him spiral downward into his pretend state of insanity. Perhaps he can get TDPK to accompany him during his mediation process. Now that would be entertainment!

  2. Lies cannot stand up under close scrutiny. Kimberlin counts on the casual reader to simply take his word for everything. This does not happen in a court of law, which is why Kimberlin fails in both criminal and civil court 100% of the time when someone, anyone, takes the time to examine his pleadings and respond.

  3. I saw that and captured the document. It reeks of Neal. (Hi Neal!). As you said, the Twitter API does not expose the IP address. Twitter support says they will only give it to law enforcement with a warrant, or with a subpoena, as you have already said.
    Of course Schmalfeldt just takes it as face value forgetting all the times he’s already been lied to and made a fool of by his “friends”. It would be fun to see him answer questions in court about where the info came from and how it was obtained.

    • He says on his blog that Twitter gave it to him. In that case, sue both of them. I’m not comfortable thinking that Twitter is helping these people obtain private information about their users. Especially private information that I’ve seen them use to ask others to go do them harm. Now there’s a lawsuit waiting to happen.

  4. Wasn’t this mystery solved a few times over by Projection Bill (which is to say, likely by TK and then pushed out to Bill)? I recall at least three individuals he seemed quite convinced were behind that Twitter account at various times, including Mr. Hoge’s son, I think… or did Bill accuse him of being another Twitter account… really, one needs a scorecard to keep up with Bill’s frothy lunacy at times. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, ol’ BS knows many things which aren’t so.

  5. Mystery solved. Cabin Boy says Twitter does release that information to whoever asks for it. I mean Twitter support says they don’t, but the Cabin Boy obviously knows better than Twitter what they do and don’t give out. Guess we can all forget about it now.

  6. It’s already obvious watching Tweedle Dee & Tweedle Dum (Willy & Biily) that those 2 are clearly not the brains behind the operation. Their conversations are like watching a bad Soap script. I agree with bringing in the law to find out who hacked the system. Could make things a whole lot more interesting than sloppy service reports.

  7. You don’t need to read their policies. Companies just don’t give that information up without either a warrant or a subpoena that has had a chance to be challenged. I dealt with alot of subpoenas and I’ve never seen a company just give up info like that.

    Why? Because such an order is a complete defense for any lawsuit from violation of privacy. Without that order they might be able to justify it, but they are more likely to have to go through a full trial, and they still might lose. No company will take that risk, except *maybe* if there is a serious risk to life, etc. Like if a guy says he is going to kill the president, then they might not require the full warrant. But just “this person is saying mean things about me”? A warrent is required.

    Anyway, we know schmalfeldt is lying, because he is lying in his final conclusions. Bad conclusion = bad process.

  8. Would the states attorney have had any reason to have requested this information as part of his review of BSs violations of the court order?

    • I doubt it. Schmalfeldt is not a party to any matter concerning KU. Also, KU is being sued. That’s a civil matter not criminal. The SAO only gets involved in civil cases when the county is a party.

  9. In the criminal matter the SA might need to be ready to authenticate tweets from BS, and request the account log, was what I was thinking. Not that this happened.

    Does anyone remember Neal boasting at some past time that he had actually managed to get access to such info by the simple expedient of asking for it?

Leave a Reply