Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(3) requires that “factual contentions have evidentiary support.” Here’s an allegation that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin made in one of his filings in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness that has no basis in fact and for which TDPK can not have any evidence.The only truthful part of that sentence is that I refuse to accept service via email from Brett Kimberlin. The precautions that I have taken securing the devices I use to access my email are very, very robust. Of course, nothing’s perfect, but I doubt that any the hacker wannabes in Team Kimberlin could breach those walls. The only undelivered mail from TDPK that I failed to pick up at the Post Office was addressed to and was being held for 29 Ridge Road. I live at 20 Ridge Road.
OK, why do I insist on service via mail? I do so because I want to be served a hard copy that was generated by TDPK. That way, if it doesn’t match what was sent to the court (and there have been multiple instances of altered documents in both the state and RICO cases), I can show the court what I received. This procedure strikes me as a reasonable method of dealing with a guy who has a long and apparently continuing history of perjury and forgery.
Speaking of lying forgers, I have adopted the same policy for service of court papers from The Dread Pro-Se Schmalfledt.™