Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

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.ECF 49-5The 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.™

32 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. As usual, Brett Kimberlin’s whining complaints point back to his own bad actions.

    Brett Kimberlin forged passports, customs documents, ID documents, a prison release document, and court papers. Brett Kimberlin is the only person in American history to have forged a summons.

    When he complains that his lawfare victims are trying to use procedural rules to protect their legal rights, it ought to draw our attention. And also our scorn.

  2. Didn’t Michael Smith actually receive an e-mail from Brett Kimberlin that included malware? Wait, never mind, I think I was confusing that with an episode of Johnny Atsign.

  3. To the best of my recollection:

    Neal Rauhauser is an avowed ally of Brett’s. Neal’s blog before he was kicked of Kos boasted that he was a hacker, and in his extremely limited work experience he did work with communications technology.. He appeared to know about surreptitious and dangerous technology crimes before they were publicized. The harassment of Brett’s critics is pretty widespread and involves a lot of doxing and cyber harassment that isnt far removed from script kiddie level hacking.

    So it’s actually not that unrealistic that an email from these people could be some kind of hacking attempt. Particularly if you count social engineering by deception.

    Regardless, I think asking for a hard copy of complaints from Brett is an even better reason to opt for physical service. This requirement is a legal right, so I don’t know why Brett acts like it’s a criminal offense. But I don’t know why someone would bomb a school athletic event, either. Some things are simply beyond the understanding of the sane.

  4. It occurs to me that there’s a whole ‘nother type of danger involved in demanding that a convicted bomber send you a physical package to your home address…

  5. I am having difficulty with one of the niceties of Maryland law. I believe I have read here, and elsewhere, that BK is not permitted to give testimony in Maryland due to the fact that he is a convicted perjurer. This seems like a state procedural rule, and therefore I assume does not also apply in the federal courts, since they have their own civil procedures.

    Where I am is confused is here: all legal argument must be supported, eventually, by facts. While certainly, an individual can establish facts without personally presenting testimony, this could only occur during evidentiary hearings, such as a trial. Prior to trial, all pretrial motions contain legal arguments based on either the pleadings (legal argument) OR things occurring in the lead up to the trial (facts + legal argument).All pretrial motions are going to require at least a basic rendition of facts and at the hearing would require MORE than just legal argument to be made. Attorneys are not sworn because they have an obligation to be truthful with the Court, but typically pro se litigants are sworn to ensure their truthful rendition of facts supporting their motions. Under Maryland Law, BK cannot be sworn… how is he presenting motions in the state level? The court may not consider his factual contentions (i.e. I am a mere pro se litigant, the modern postal service frightens and confuses me, I was just fixing the post office’s mistake…)

    I know this particular tidbit Mr. Hoge posted comes from the Federal case, but if the same argument were made in the State case, couldn’t Mr. Hoge simply respond, in open Court, by pointing at BK and saying, “your honor, this guy is a convicted perjurer, you may not consider any of his factual allegations he makes in support of his legal argument.” Moreover, since I believe that SHOULD work, why wouldn’t these judges entertain a very early motion to dismiss?

  6. I can’t understand how any of that matters. He’s complaining about something which is your right. Mr. Hoge wants the hard copy. Get down to Kinko’s and make some copies. It’s like they start whining about every inconvenience and can’t stop. (By “they” I mean Mr. Schmalfeldt and Mr. Kimberlin.)

  7. Let’s see. He has been convicted of both forgery and bombing, and there is evidence of forgery in this very case. Those facts make insisting on your full legal rights more than reasonable. The stupidity of making all this relevant AGAIN is breathtaking. BS may seem nuts, but he is far smarter than BK.

    • Another puzzler: BS thinks that living with one’s parents is worthy of ridicule, except if those doing it are BK and Osborne. Hhm.

      • He’s ridiculed people living in parent’s basements, marrying foreign brides, being a felon, being short, etc. Pretty much anything that defines Kimberlin.

        I don’t think it’s ever dawned on him what he’s doing.

    • As Kyle noted, there just isn’t enough soap and water. Adjudicated harasser is that creeptastic.

      • I forgot who said it yesterday, but I think it was you, Grace, or Gryff, but whoever it was hit the nail on the head. BS will simply shift to new people to harass when he either grows tired of his current chew toys or is precluded from bothering them.

      • It wasn’t me but I agree wholeheartedly. I think it’s all he knows and all he is. Without the harassment, what does he have/do?

      • It was me.

        Even if the courts manage to get through to him that he really, really, needs to leave John Hoge alone, he’ll just move on. It seems to have been his MO for the last three years, and unless someone locks him up or otherwise forcibly parts him from his internet connection, it’s what he does.

    • The Certified Adjudicated Serial Harasser is adding to the C.A.S.H. he will be paying out as the list of smears keeps growing

      • “…Bill Schmalfeldt has enemies, and then nothing, a black and dank and empty void of sullenness.”
        – Ken White, Aug. 6, 2013

Leave a Reply