Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Here’s the Cliffs Notes version of the hearing for those Gentle Readers who don’t want to slog through the entire 9 April transcript from the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit during which The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin admitted that he forged an exhibit in the case by altering a Certified Mail green card. He added a check mark to indicate that the card was for Restricted Delivery.

THE COURT: This is about the exact same brief green card being filed—the support motions you filed, the different docket entries, one showing the restricted delivery box checked and one not.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Your honor, like I said I asked the post office to send it restricted delivery.

THE COURT: You’re not answering my question.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Yes, I changed—

THE COURT: Did you change it?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Yes, I did.

THE COURT: And then you filed it representing that it accurately reflected the green card that had been filled out.

MR. KIMBERLIN: No, no, no, I filed it and accurately—it accurately reflected what I told the post office to do and that’s what it is. Like I said I’m a pro se litigant and—

THE COURT: Don’t even use that with me.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay, okay—

THE COURT: You know it’s one thing to say I’m pro se so I don’t understand rules or I don’t understand how to get something in and the rules of evidence and another thing to alter something and file it. I’m reading your motion right now to see exactly what you represented it to be when you filed it again at docket entry 59 so give me a minute.

So, in your motion at docket entry 59 and 60 at paragraph seven, you say, “Plaintiff does not need to provide an affidavit because the documents on which this motion is based are prima facie evidence, an official ticket from the Fairfax County Sheriff, Postal Service envelopes with tracking numbers, and a statement by defendant Akbar whom [unintelligible] sworn under the penalties as perjury.” So, you’re telling me that when you attached these copies of the green card, you weren’t intending to represent that those were accurate?

Earlier in the proceeding, TDPK also admitted that he has never paid for Restricted Delivery for any of his mailings.

MR. KIMBERLIN: I did not change them intentionally. When I go to the post office, I ask them to do it so it’s registered or whatever it’s called, restricted delivery, and they did not do it. He’s saying that there’s an extra fee. I’ve never paid an extra fee for restricted delivery.

That admission calls into question the validity of several Certified Mail green cards submitted by TDPK in both the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness and the Kimberlin v. Kimberlin Unmasked copyright trolling.

#DoNotPassGo

18 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


  1. Sounds like the judge would be best served if he just stopped assuming that, somewhere, Kimberlin is telling the truth. Because he’s clearly just throwing around words to get himself of whatever pickle he’s in at that time – to heck with what might be said in 2 min.


  2. Sounds like a strategic move — pay for unrestricted delivery, then check it off later before submitting. If the summons goes through, then no big deal. If it doesn’t, it sets up a default judgment when the defendant doesn’t respond because they never got it, but Kimberlin claims it was properly sent.

    It’ll work unless someone doesn’t assume that everything Kimberlin submits is potentially bogus and looks very carefully at everything for discrepancies, like in this case the two different versions of the card and the receipt and discovered the ploy.

    Bravo to whoever discovered the scam in this case.


    • Don’t forget “plead ignorance.”
      He insinuated confusion between “registered mail” and “Restricted delivery” in the last quote. Probably a failsafe: “The post office makes this so confusing!.”


      • Not a bit confusing. Considering that one must interact with at least one assistant Postmaster when sending registered mail and Brett admits he did so, even stating that he was informed that restricted delivery had an extra cost, which he declined to pay, thus, no restricted delivery notation on the green card. Brett is well old enough to be critically aware that you get what you pay for. His attempted fraud on the court and the defendants is his denial of that truism as well as a well worn practice (as he also admitted in open court). This may well come back to bite him very deeply upon his teeny-tiny ass in the RICO case …


  3. Amazed to see in the fuller transcript that the judge thought he was calling himself a first-time pro-se plaintiff. Imagine how she would have felt if she knew he was a hypperactive serial litigant over decades, and by his own account, a trained paralegal.

    Also re “your postal system frightens and confuses me”: he didn’t sent it registered mail….which relatively expensive (closer to 12 bucks). He didn’t even think of it – for that there is definitely a special fee which he didn’t pay and the options are not only clear in the law, but clear on the card. He’s such a liar.
    The 50 to 100 green cards he’s all filled out all include a section with multiple options for type of mail service. The option for restricted delivery is right next to it. It’s in an adjacent but separate section and clearly an OPTION.


  4. If there were any other requirement or representation in this case that he sent mail certified, return receipt requested, with restricted delivery, he’s as much as admitted he did not. Any “check” now, by his own, is an after-the-fact addition.

    Remember how Mr. Bill scoffed at the very notion BK would avoid the five extra bucks? BK says he’s never never never shelled out.


    • Its like as if Schmalfeldt was a lying propagandist who says his side is right no matter what. Like the information minister for an oppressive regime that kills dissenters. Almost like Baghdad Bob, only fatter… what could we call such a person? racking my brain…


    • Onlooker,

      It would please my eye to see his exact quote.

      The way to discredit Bill Schmalfeldt is to quote Bill Schmalfeldt.


    • It isn’t the fact that the service was not sent as restricted that is the contention in BS’ mind, it is the motifvation. BK never paid for restricted delivery, not because he is cheap which is what BS argues against, but more than likely because he was going for default judgements on un-notified Plaintiffs.


      • Perhaps BS was upset BK (the most generous of men and certainly not backward in dealings with the post-office) was not given proper credit for his sooper-genius scheming.


  5. The bottom line remains that every filing that Brett Kimberlin has made in all three suits was a distinct criminal act of perjury.

Leave a Reply