#BrettKimberlin Takes the Fifth

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination rather than properly respond to some of the interrogatories or requests for production of documents from the defendants in his vexatious Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. lawsuit. He is attempting to invoke other privileges as well.

More later.

UPDATE—Here are my responses to the interrogatories from TDPK:

65 thoughts on “#BrettKimberlin Takes the Fifth

    • Yup. He is declining to answer discovery on the areas he has put directly at issue in his complaint.

      • So, just to make sure I’m clear on the subject….

        TDPK: “Defendants falsely narrate/impute/accuse me of X!”
        Defendants: “OK, then. Tell us about X.”
        “TDPK: “That’s irrelevant!!!1!!1!!”

        Is that about right?

    • Although I can guess most of what you’ll probably post, I can’t wait to hear your analysis.

    • Doesn’t taking the fifth in a civil case open the barn door so to speak on to letting a jury know (I know you never want it to go that far for cost purposes, but just saying…).

      • taking the fifth on discovery means it doesn’t get to a jury. period. you have to cooperate with discovery as a plaintiff. 5th A privilege is no excuse.

        Now if some other privilege applies–such as attorney client privilege–that is one thing. But not the 5th A.

  1. Sweet Jesus, an interrogatory about vehicles is now STALKING?

    I really think it’s high time that ACME Law sued TDPK for besmirching its character and competence.

  2. It’s also quite interesting that Kimberlin can claim, under penalty of perjury, to be able to read the minds of you gents and discern the nefarious intentions and motivations for asking each question.

    It’s almost as if he’s wired for nefarious!

  3. I may have mentioned that I thought TDPK was represented by, or at least receiving advice from, outside counsel that he did not disclose. There would be a variety of reasons for not disclosing your counsel, or why counsel would not want to be associated with a convicted perjurer and bomber, or someone whose actions so harmed one of his victims that the victim later committed suicide. Said convicted bomber and perjurer being later found responsible for the death of that victim.

    I retract any suggestion that Mr. Kimberlin is represented by or advised by adequate counsel; and tender an apology to any attorneys who may have been implicated due to their close association with Mr. Kimberlin.

    Because no lawyer could be stupid enough to write, or advise Mr. Kimberlin to write, this motion.

  4. For those who may be wondering what the problem is, here is an example that does not involve a scenario in this or the RICO suit.

    You go to an amusement park. While there, you claim that you suffered an injury that required a hospital visit and medical care. Thereafter, you sue the park. During the course of discovery, when they ask you to produce your medical records and expenses for the care you claim that you needed as a result of the alleged accident, you refuse to produce anything. See the problem with this?

  5. The details of service of process in this case is irrelevant to this case. Brilliant. You can’t make this stuff up.

  6. Holy cow, TDPK fired the cannon right at his own deck with his ‘response’ to the interrogatories. I can see him getting away with not answering some of them, but most are saying to him ‘prove your specious claims’.

    And regarding his questions to you: is this guy fixated on kimberlinunmasked or what?

      • Oh, he knows. That’s why he can’t answer about his wife’s age. As private as those questions are, the accusation that Brett Kimberlin is a pedophile is the most damning. Though he was very vague in his accusations toward the Walker, Hoge and the “et als” but he is obviously pissed about being labeled a pedo. So, Hoge and Co. can rightly ask simple questions which address the accusation. This includes his eyebrow raising relationship with the young girl (very young girl) from Speedway, and Brett’s own wife.
        That’s gotta sting. But then so is having your leg blown off.

    • Who wants to lay bets that he asked all the other respondents the same questions? How do you think the judge is gonna look at this case after seeing his interrogatories?

      “No Your Honor, this is not a frivolous suit aimed at violating the privacy rights of KimberlinUnmasked and harassing the other respondents. I really am a victim. No really. I promise. Under penalty of perjury.”

  7. Wow, Brett Kimberlin REALLY has it out for Kimberlin Unmasked. I hardly ever looked at his web page and don’t remember much about what was on it. Can anyone explain why Brett is so incredibly obsessed with him? KU, can you comment on that?

    It’s also kind of distressing how Kimberlin clearly doesn’t know who KU is, but he and the rest of Team Kimberlin are throwing out personal details of some totally random person, presumably to attract harassment.

    • Yes, BS, unable to stay off the net, has been calling KU “Lynn” over at blubbersuesbloggers.

      • I believe BS’s implied threat is like this:

        “Give me your personal details so I can harass you instead of this innocent person we dug up. You wouldn’t want to be partly to blame for me harassing an innocent person, would you?”

        He’s offered exactly this kind of deal before regarding other people he harasses, so I figure it’s about the same on the Lynn/KU question. I’m conflicted over whether to add my observations about the wisdom of his strategy. On the one hand, I doubt he’d listen to good advice. On the other hand, on the off chance he does, it might help him improve his harassment strategies. I think the right people already understand how this game works so I’ll keep my mouth shut.

      • Movie Hero: “I can handle any torture you throw at me.”

        Movie Villain: “Of course you can. That is why I will torture this innocent bystander until you tell me what you know.”

        Is this any different? Team Kimberlin = S.P.E.C.T.R.E.?

      • Commodore, that’s the problem with amateurs who think they can dabble in this sort of game. They never account for those who have spent years “doing the math”, and will sacrifice our own in order to sacrifice no one.

    • No, I can’t comment on Brett Kimberlin’s obsession with me/us, “I am a commenter” because I really have no idea what is driving it.

      Although I have my suspicions:

      He also has a boner for Ace of Spades in the horrendous frivolous RICO suit and is seeking Ace’s identity. He was obsessed with Seth Allen when he was known as Dave from Queens. He was obsessed with Aaron Worthing and exposed him as Aaron Walker.

      I’ve concluded that anyone who writes about Kimberlin behind a psudoenym is potentially a target.

      We examined his God awful performances with Op Critical and used screen grabs from public embeddable youtube videos for the purposes of commentary and criticism. I also had the nerve to create new images from those screen grabs and incorporate them into various comics, using his own words. I also created montages, and pissed him off by placing his face on a Hitler Youth or Hitler or something. It’s been a while. He filed an impersonation complaint about the Kimberlin Unmasked blogspot blog and google took it down. He is one slithery lizard.

      I can only conclude he doesn’t want people to see current images of his face. And he doesn’t want to be criticized in any way. Even private individuals don’t have the luxury of requiring no critics. And he is a public figure.

      He filed a DMCA complaint about an image I was using when the image was a mugshot, which he doesn’t own.

      He’s pretty loony IMO.

      He is incredibly thin-skinned and doesn’t appreciate satire or parody if he is the subject. He can’t take a joke if the joke’s on him.

      Now he’s gone to great lengths to make himself a permanent joke in the internet’s consciousness with these lawsuits and what he tried to pull with the forgeries and green cards. This is all full on Streisdand effect on him now, and I have reduced my internet presence considerably.

      I/we have been contemplating getting rid of this persona altogether.

      • imho, i think he is hoping KU turns out to Karl Rove or some other person who gives him an “aha!” kind of moment. i think the available evidence speaks against that possibility, but what i know i cannot say.

    • To my knowledge (as limited as it is) Brett has never complied with discovery. He usually drops the case at this point or moves for a default judgment (after fudging service in my opinion) or defrauding the court through forged service documentation (as in the current instant cases).

  8. “Second, this interrogatory is overly broad as Plaintiff is a notorious felon, convicted in many courts over the years. Therefore, many references to Plaintiff’s crime commissions will likely be based on well-documented history and outside the purview of relevant discovery.”

    This should be boiler-plated, and pasted into every single legal document in every case involving TDPK in as many places as can be rationalized.

  9. The refusal to identify what tweets, comments, statements, etc are alleged to be defamatory looks to be a tactic copied from the infamous SCO case, where the plaintiff (or perhaps the planitiff) refused to identify what specific lines of code were infringing. SCO lost, rather spectacularly. A defendant is entitled to know with specificity what the plaintiff alleges to be defamatory.

    • Real life litigation is not like Perry Mason; in civil suits, there is no “gotcha” moment in court. You cannot use what you failed to produce in response to discovery requests.

      • There was a Perry Mason moment in the Prenda debacle. I thought it was most awesome and wished that I had been there for it. But it is as rare as a diamond in a pot of hearth ashes

    • And in this case, the defenidents had to ask lots of questions which were very personal, since they really didn’t know what the specific offensive blog posts/tweets were. So, Brett. Was it about the pedo posts? The shady non profits? Was it all about living in the basement? What’s got you down buubie?

  10. None of this is unsurprising and some of the protection he asks will be granted by the court. Others won’t.

    The whole purpose of his failing to provide specificity was to make this argument. He didn’t say RSMccain said I was a pedophile so that’s a crime, he made it about this nebulous false narrative. If you ask him about pedophilia he can say well that’s not what this is about.

    You can look at it and go, well that won’t work, but of course it has already. The state court has already denied the MTDs based on, among other things, lack of specificity so the state court implicitly accepts the false narrative theory of the case. If the main judge in this case reviews this, she is going to grant the protections in some of these.

    The requests for immediate sanctions on discovery will be denied because this was filed. Then the motions to compel will need to go to hearing. Again it will depend on the judge. If the judge compels discovery, then BK will have some more time to delay. And if he fails to respond then, then defendants will have to move for contempt. Which will take more time and money. Likely BK makes some minimally responsive answers available.

    He will continue to dodge discovery, and he will pay no price for that. I hope the motions to compel asked for attorneys fees which can be done even in a pro bono case. This was not requested in the hearing on the process forgery so the judge did not consider it.

    This will continue until it gets to trial and he will dodge and weave questions the same way. He will say that his conduct is not on trial. He will avoid any specificity on his allegations, and thus specificity in defense will be impossible. At least one judge on the bench will let him do that.

  11. In regards to his rationale for not answering interrogatories regarding the Cabin Boy… “Reporter privilege” made me lol. Like that’s some sort of real thing where reporters have a privilege that forbids the rest of us plebeians from talking about them. Even if the Cabin Boy WERE a reporter, which strains credulity.

    • At least in Lethal Weapon 2, “Diplomatic Immunity” had the patina of being a real legal concept.

    • Assume for a moment that reportorial privilege would even apply, it would apply to BS and not to BK. BS would have to claim the privilege were he requested the information. BK cannot benefit from BSes status as a reporter. Of course he can ask, and he has. But the sheer effrontery of it makes it no less an objection. The defendants will have to place an argument against it in the form of a response and perhaps have to go to a hearing (or have representation there. ).

      With luck it goes before Judge Rubin and it gets blasted in a letter response. Otherwise one of the ladies will sit and require that it gets heard and perhaps let BK make a “your honor they are a bunch of meanies and they hurt my cute daughters feelings” argument.

      • Oh, and even if Rubin blasts it, there is still motion to compel process and motion for contempt to go through.

        At best BK will provide minimally responsive discovery. Enough to avoid contempt, and not provide anything useful.

      • Perfectly aware actual reporter’s privilege is real. I reiterate: “reporters have a privilege that forbids the rest of us plebeians from talking about them” is not a real legal concept. Similarly, if TDBK had claimed “diplomatic immunity” protects him because he talked to a diplomat once, that wouldn’t be a real legal concept either.

  12. Let’s see… He claims damages due to a drop in donations to JTMP, but refuses to provide evidence of same.

    He claims damages sue to personal distress, but refuses to provide evidence of same.

    He claims defamation, but refuses to indicate which statements are defamatory.

    In short, he refuses to support his own claims. Case should be dismissed with prejudice, but then where will all those lawyers find billable hours?

    • The legal process is a slow one and every possible means of seeking a dismissal requires a judicial hearing which means getting available dates from the court, finding out if those dates are available for the parties/counsel, filing written motions, copying the other side on said motions, preparing an Order that you would like the Judge to enter, preparing for a hearing, appearing at said hearing and presenting argument, sometimes redrafting the Court’s Order, circulating the order between the parties for signatures, and finally presenting the signed order to the Judge for signature and entry to the file – which the Judge COULD kick back to you if he/she wants the Order to be changed. The entire process is time consuming and takes far more time that it would appear to a lay person. It isn’t necessarily lawyers delaying things to add billable hours. I am sure that does happen, some, but attorney’s don’t really need to pad their time on cases. Most attorneys I know write off their time and write their time down, not up.

  13. I’ve been wanting to give this a proper comment all day, but was swamped with more pressing matters…

    IANAL in Maryland, but… I would be shocked and dumbfounded if Maryland recognized a “invasion of privacy” privilege as a means of not answering discovery… Of course it is an invasion of your privacy, that is what discovery is… both sides get to ask questions about things you may wish to keep private. As I understand it, as long as the question is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, it is relevant. Whether you would like to keep it private or not is immaterial. Drop the case if you don’t want to answer. Settle the case if you don’t want to answer. Not answering is simply not an option.

    As to the intention by the other side to use the discovery as a means of proving criminal conduct… YES … DUH!!!! If you are claiming that the other side is wrongly alleging you have committed crimes, then the fact that crimes may have been committed (or that the answers may prove that crimes have in fact been committed) then the discovery is not only relevant but crucial to the case. In fact, I don’t even think it is the Defendant’s burden to prove the falsity of the allegations of criminal conduct that have been made against TDPK. His burden is to prove by a preponderance the falsity of the statements.

    Honestly, this pleading is laughable. I believe the Judge will deny the motion for a protective order for improper discovery I, frankly, have never heard of such a motion, although that is not to say it doesn’t exist in Maryland. By contrast, I have heard of protective orders being placed on answers given (ostensibly a gag order), making their disclosure unlawful and subject to contempt proceedings. I do believe the Judge will grant a motion to compel. I do not believe TDPK will answer (he didn’t even properly plead the 5th, and if he does it is sort of game over for his false narratives tale). Once TDPK fails to answer after being ordered to do so, the case gets dismissed. Count on it.

  14. These utterly frivolous “objections” are sanctionable. I think even the sociopathic and delusional TDPK knows that these objections are frivolous and has begun a tactic of sabotaging his own case to get it dismissed by the court for which he’ll claim martyrdom.

Leave a Reply