Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin haz sad. He says that Aaron Walker and I called him bad names. This is from his letter seeking to file a preliminary injunction in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness.ECF 163 at 1

Terrorist? Here’s what the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals said.

Kimberlin was convicted as the so-called “Speedway Bomber,” who terrorized the city of Speedway, Indiana, by detonating a series of explosives in early September 1978. In the worst incident, Kimberlin placed one of his bombs in a gym bag, and left it in a parking lot outside Speedway High School. Carl Delong was leaving the high school football game with his wife when he attempted to pick up the bag and it exploded. The blast tore off his lower right leg and two fingers, and embedded bomb fragments in his wife’s leg.

Kimberlin v. White, 7 F.3d 527 (6th Cir. 1993)

Forger? Here are his own word from the document docketed as ECF No. 102 in the RICO Madness.ECF 102-3That’s an admission that he forged the summons he sent to Twitchy. Also, he made this admission to Judge Ryon in a Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. hearing on 9 April, 2014, concerning a Certified Mail green card for a piece of mail sent to Ali Akbar.BK v AW 2013 0409 at 22

Perjurer? It’s a matter of public record that TDPK is a convicted perjurer, and he has admitted as much in open court multiple times since May, 2014. Furthermore, he’s been caught lying recently. For example, consider these responses to my requests for admissions in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit.BK v AW 2013 Admission 21Pedophile? I haven’t called Brett Kimberlin a pedophile. However, I have seen evidence that leads me to understand why someone might hold that opinion. I suppose that if he wants to push the issue, those who might have used that word will put that evidence before the court. Some of it has been sealed, but not all of it has. Also, court records can be unsealed.

RaisinetesIf popcorn or Jujubes aren’t your favorites, Hogewash! is also offering a deal on Raisinets through Amazon.

Stock up today, and stay tuned.

42 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. Aaron had a plain and straightforward explanation of reasons people think Brett Kimberlin is a pedophile in his post at (scroll to ECF 170, last paragraph of page 1, through page 2). I am thinking of writing a FAQ-like point-by-point explanation of it on my crappy new blog, but I will just copy+paste Aaron’s reasoning if I can’t write anything that contributes more to the issue.

      • To clarify, it looked to me like you were simply restating events as they appeared in Citizen K, without editorializing. I think there’s a need for something like that, without a bunch of editorializing. Just reading the events in his AUTHORIZED biography is enough.

  2. I swear, the little homegrown terrorist can’t seem to grasp the concept of the Streisand effect. Hey Judge please help, a couple of bloggers called me a phedophile, meanwhile loads of evidence will be submitted to show he is one. This idiot will be shown in court to most likely be a phedophile, which makes it a much bigger story viewed by a much bigger audience, all to try and stop a few people from speculating about it on their blogs. This nut job just refuses to learn from past mistakes.

  3. Breathlessly waiting for the next installment. What will it be… Red Vines? Cracker Jacks?

  4. I almost suggested raisinettes…. they are delicious.

    I read this page daily. You don’t call him a terrorist everyday, you don’t call him a pedophile everyday, you don’t call him a perjurer or forgerer every day. Other commenters to this blog may, but they aren’t you (I am sure there are days when BK goes totally unmentioned). This page comments on BK probably the most of the 4 defendants he has listed. He cant prove the claim as to you, because he grossly overstated his claim. (i.e. mislead the Court). 3 of the 4 names he claims are defamatory probably cannot be defamation as applied to him because they are demonstrably true. The pedophile claim is the only real place where I think he would have even a remote chance at success, but this would have required that Hoge have called him a pedophile, which has not occurred to my knowledge. Hinting at something, stating that based on the information available you suspect something is NOT the same thing as stating something is a fact. As I said before, in the comedic stylings of Gilbert Gottfried, there is no truth to the rumor that BRETT KIMBERLIN IS A CONVICTED PEDOPHILE, because he is not. He is alleged to have married a 16 year old by forging documents to make her appear older, he has openly discussed sex with teenagers as being something he believes all men desire (in an article about a song he wrote), it was strongly suggested in his AUTHORIZED autobiography that he had a strange relationship with a preteen/early teenage girl and that he had referred to her as his girlfriend, but Mr. Kimberlin has never been convicted for his behavior towards young teenage girls. If his actions have caused some to suspect he is a pedophile, I am not sure he has anyone to blame but himself.

    Moreover, I think he is not entitled to the same protection as an ordinary individual. I believe he is a celebrity, based on the notoriety he has found from being a convicted bomber who terrorized a small town, interjecting himself into a national election by making (probably false) claims about his history as a drug dealer, allowing his life story to be published in a book, being in a band and giving interviews to the press about his music, etc. I think these sorts of things make him sufficiently famous to be a person of public interest, and thus the NYT v. Sullivan and its progeny seem to be in play here. He will have to show that he is likely to succeed on showing 1) the statements are actually false and 2) actual malice. Oh, and the judge expects him to provide each instance of being called a terrorist, forger, perjurer, and pedophile by each defendant.

    Mmmmm popcorn.

    • (Or the judge expects all the claims to just go away.) Good post. I think it’s likely Brett Kimberlin is aware of the truth points you make in your second paragraph, but he believes he will somehow reach his true goals (which didn’t necessarily include winning every claim against every defendant) in spite of that. I do have to wonder, since I doubt any of the trials are now going anything like he hoped, has he shifted his goals and strategies to match?

      • I totally forgot to mention, BK is limited in terms of the time period he is allowed to provide instances of the conduct he has alleged. He can only address examples of the conduct he alleges which occurred AFTER the SAC was accepted, because the Judge provided that as a limitation… So he is limited to pointing out daily instances of having been called a pedophile by the named defendants in the last few months only, which is basically the nail in the coffin on this one… THEN he has to prove it the statements aren’t true THEN he has to show actual malice. I think a team of 40 of the best lawyers in america could not win BK’s motion.

    • brett ain’t been convicted of any charge related to pedophilia. And there has been no verdict saying that he is a pedophile…. yet. but all of this will be filed after he loses in state court and… can you say Res Judicata? Actually it is collateral estoppel which is generally considered to be a breed of Res Judicata, but you get my point.

      • The first part would quite the problem if any the defendants had written that he was a “convicted pedophile,” which they haven’t.

  5. I knew about the plaintiff’s perjury conviction, but what were the circumstances that resulted in that conviction?

    • IN Citizen K, his perjury conviction is addressed in greatest detail around p. 50, and then later in even more revealing detail around pages 315-316, the latter in some context of Singer catching Kimberlin in lies to Singer himself.

      The lie under oath was denying he sold LSD or methamphetamine.

    • This is answered fairly definitively in Citizen K pages 46-51 and 314-316. The upshot is that federal narcotics agents descended upon the local drug trade in Kimberlin’s area. It was never exactly established which drugs (probably marijuana, cocaine, LSD, and maybe amphetamines) or how much (probably tens of thousands of hits of LSD but less significant amounts of the others) Kimberlin himself sold. In any case, a jury indicted him when he was still 17. At age 18, he gave a couple of plainly contradictory responses as part of his sworn statements to the grand jury investigation, so whatever he had actually sold, they knew he’d lied about it. From Citizen K page 317:

      At one point, as Miller probed inconsistencies between his testimony and previous sworn statements, he said, “Now you’re trying to get me for perjury.”

      Then 18-year old Kimberlin was right. Needless to say, this did not stop him from lying in court. On page 322, Brett tells his biographer that he also perjured himself in one of his different manufactured stories trying to suggest that someone else might have committed the bombings. Kimberlin had several different such stories, so I’m going to go out on a limb a little and say there was actually tons of perjury from him all the way through that trial.

  6. Pingback: The Jesse Ventura Defamation Case | Batshit Crazy News

  7. Today, in Maryland Brett Kimberlin requested, and, the court subpoenaed the following witnesses,

    Eileen De Cesare
    Ron Desare
    Wayne Kirwin
    Jay Allen Brown
    Daniel Borsuk
    Doug Tallman

    Since this is a suit is now solely about defamation and false light what knowledge would any of these people have about allegedly defamatory statements about Brett Kimberlin?

  8. Last name rang a bell too, and yeah, he’s with the Gazette that published a story on a relative of Kimberlin, in which Kimberlin inserted himself, and made himself part of the story, which drew comment.

    That’s going to be laughable if he attempts to make anything out of that.

  9. Sawed off weasel commits hideous crimes and won’t make amends via a civil judgement ordered by courts, or any other way. Sawed off weasel preys on very young girls, underaged or barely legal, like a bad habit, thinks of such desires as “natural” and authorized a biography that includes several mentions of this habit. His own wife accuses him of preying on her in that way, as well as a friend of hers. Sawed off weasel attempts to capitalize and get his plans and projects noticed, on the back of a relatives minor local success.

    Sawed off weasel’s should stop trying to grab publicity, f he doesn’t want people to publicize his awfulness in a way that upsets the people who can’t get away from him.

Leave a Reply