In Re Discovery for Kimberlin v. Walker, et al.

Just before noon this morning, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin delivered what he has proffered as his responses to the Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents from Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, and me. Our lawyer and I are reviewing the material. Aaron and Stacy will begin reviewing the submissions tomorrow.

Based on our initial survey of the answers and documentation provided, we feel that our case has been significantly strengthened. However, good legal strategy requires that we keep our findings to ourselves until either further motions are filed or the case comes to trial.

72 thoughts on “In Re Discovery for Kimberlin v. Walker, et al.

  1. I hope he tarred and feathered himself and that forensic examination of his proffered documentation reveals even more that he realizes …

  2. Hmmmm…..” we feel that our case has been significantly strengthened” That could also mean he didn’t answer most of it and the charges related to whatever he refused to provide will be thrown out. Just speculating of course…..

  3. Can you post what the questions were in the Interrogatories and what documents TDPK was requested to produce, even if you can’t post the answers yet?

  4. “After Kimberlin responds to Interrogatories, Hoge writes: “…” we feel that our case has been significantly strengthened” #KissofDeath”

    Careful, there, Cousin Bill – if someone posted that about you, you’d already have your granny panties in a knot, and be trumpeting “death threats!” To the HoCo PoPo…

  5. I don’t believe that all of the interrogatories or requests for production were posted for any of the defendants, but typically the defendant would ask “present all evidence that supports your allegations” in discovery.

    If there is no response to that, or it is minimal, or if it looks like the kinds of things that have been presented so far – i.e., exhibits that do not say what plaintiff says they say – that would certainly be the sort of thing that strengthens the case.

    And given that he cannot offer testimony on his behalf, that would severely restrict what he can actually have as evidence.

    All speculation, of course.

      • I would say more realistic than optimistic. I do have to say that I was surprised at the outcome of the last hearing – my prediction was, yes, more pessimistic.

        And yet, this case lives on. That it has gone on for a year is a real travesty.

    • Onlooker posted the link to BKs motion for a protective order – among the things that BK responds to in a request for everything that supports the allegations, he answers, essentially, they know what they did, they have it all.

      If that is what he answered in the latest response, that won’t fly.

  6. Bill, if there was anything that was a #KissofDeath to the defendants, it wouldn’t have taken a direct threat from the judge to get Kimberlin to produce it.


  7. Wait, so Bill really thinks it’s GOOD new for his Master that it took a judicial bitch slap to get him to cough up anything at all? I would think if it was the #KissofDeath he would have dumped all that magnificence on them when they first asked….especially since the judge told him that his objections to it were crap.

    I guess Kimby’s check cleared to Baghdad Blob is back in the seat as PR flack.

  8. I don’t understand. This isn’t at all what Schmalfeldt claimed was about to happen. Bill would never lead me astray. CURSES, you heathen REALITY!!!!


    • Dude, you’re speaking of B.S. Yes, you have to say it. In small words.

      No, smaller.

      Seriously. Maybe a few grunts and monosyllables will get through. Best we can hope for under the circumstances.

  9. “Hogeists come up with novel defense for Daddy Hoge. Insult Schmalfeldt.”

    Nothing novel about that, nor is it part of Hoge’s defense.

    We mock and insult you to provide a valuable service to the entire Internet, identifying a person who should be shunned and loathed…

  10. Hey, Bill’s back! Did you ever hear from that NASA lawyer, Bert Ulrich?

    And how about that apology for saying a few months ago that NASA was coming after John for copyright violations?

    THEN, how about retracting…… oh, never mind, once I start, I may never be able to stop. Let’s just start with the first two.

    • In all of yesterdays mess, I totally forgot about the Hoge v NASA kerfuffle that Bill pulled. That’s too funny. Didn’t he post copies of emails and such?

      • Anybody have copies of Bill’s tattle-tweets when he was reporting John to everybody for copyright infringement?

        Bill, you see, being the coward he is, deleted them. Just like he’ll delete these latest Volokh posts when he realizes they don’t say what he thinks they do.

        • Wasn’t one from NASA. Although I’m looking through them now. I think the NASA one was on his blog and not on twitter. I think Bill figured out that the NASA road was a dead end then?

    • As an aside, I’ve read a few opinions concerning this case, and many don’t agree with our host, Dr. Volokh may very well be one of those. But in his blog post he doesn’t make that clear because he give no opinion on the case.

      • Exactly. He said he wasn’t going to parse the opinion. I thought the opinion was well written and well supported. Hoge, or should I call him “Whiskers,” clearly stated that a preliminary injunction is considered to be extraordinary relief, which it is. You can root for one side, and if they miss a goal, you take your lumps. At least, that’s what adults are supposed to do, instead of being fixated on chickens and photo editors.

        Here’s the thing: the court ruled in BS’s favor on a preliminary motion. That’s it. You win some motions, you lose some. What matters is whether, in the end, you prevail on the merits.

      • Yep, he didn’t even discuss the opinion and made the statement “(which, on a quick glance, strikes me as likely correct)”. Being the LIBERTARIAN that he is, I wouldn’t expect Volokh to think otherwise, at least until all the facts are out.

      • I like him but quit following most of them when they thought the harassment of a young girl to her death by an adult neighbor was protected speech or not actionable

        When you have such a dearth of basic understanding – its difficult to credit anything

        Also, commentary when you admit you didn’t study it is strange and well not credible

      • As I said, he is hardcore libertarian. It would have been out of character for him to agree with an opinion that MAY have infringed on someone’s first amendment rights.

      • “Also, commentary when you admit you didn’t study it is strange and well not credible.” Yes, that was weird. Most lawyers and law profs, while fond of hearing themselves talk, don’t want to look dumb and uninformed so they don’t comment unless well informed. I wonder if someone at the paper asked him to comment because of BK. He mentioned BK at the very end.

      • It wasn’t commentary. He was reporting the result of a legal proceeding, admitting he only skimmed the opinion.

      • I still think it’s weird – if it wasn’t commentary, what was the point of blogging about that? If it was, it was odd – “yeah, it’s probably right, but I just skimmed it.” Overall, it strikes me as a strange post.

  11. These remarks were not researched and disclaimed – weakly – and unnecessary and also were further compounded by the lack of informing that this was for an preliminary injunction which is almost impossible to get, not for a judges opinion, discovery has not been done nor has proof been admitted into court

    Unfortunate, and ill advised.

  12. Oh, and considering how much of a First Amendment fanatic Volokh is, if I were Bill, I wouldn’t be celebrating being on his radar. He doesn’t like shutuppery.

    • I have fired lawyers for doing what he just did – career lawyers – the position that a law professor is that they shouldn’t fire wildly into the air – which IMO is what he did – given the depth of damage an individual like Bill is ought to do – this is the basic principles of what the legal system was fought for on the bloody fields of medieval Europe eons ago

      wiped out by someone who – felt he had to comment on something he admitted he didn’t study?

      • He’s merely pointing out that the opinion had been issued and that it might be of interest to bloggers. It’s a reportage post on a legal blog, not a seminar. While Volokh is certainly a Professor, he’s also JustABlogger™ and that’s the hat he wore when publishing those two whole paragraphs.

        You’re putting a whole lot of weight on a “BTW, this happened.” blog post.

  13. Copyright theft is not a first amendment right – something a seasoned – oh wait its freakin UCLA Law Professor – never mind – bunch of freaky weirdo’s out there……. 🙂

Leave a Reply