In Re RICO Madness

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has inflicted yet more paperwork on the Court in his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness.

I’ll have more to say about these later this evening. For now, I’ll just say that it sure is hard to keep from watching a train wreck. The spectacle just draws one in.

74 thoughts on “In Re RICO Madness

    • What is truly amazing is that not only does TDPK misrepresent the contents of the blog post he attaches to his letter, but he is basically forcing the Judge to read what was very clearly something that ANY right minded individual would want to keep as far from the Judge’s review as possible.

      The Judge will not only now read the blog post but will be forced to consider whether it is time, as the blog post suggests, to have TDPK declared a vexatious litigant…

      It is too bad the Federal Courts do not have an easy means of dealing with delusional pro se litigants. At this point, were the an easy means of challenging whether a party could continue to represent themself due to mental incompetence, I think TDPK would clearly lose.

      • One would also have to expect Judge Hazel to conclude that TDPK is better versed in the law than Paul Alan Levy. I guffawed just writing that!

  1. Ha. He’s changed the “certified, restricted delivery” assertion he made in his orginial letter to “certified”. Boy is he afraid of getting busted on that point.

  2. Locally, it’s notoriously easy to conflict out a lawyer. I’ve seen it happen over a single telephone call seeking representation but not resulting in hiring the person. When the other party later hired the same lawyer, he was conflicted out.

    However, the claim was that the current case had been discussed. I highly doubt Mr. Levy would have allowed Brett Kimberlin to discuss the case and then choose to represent an opposing party. More lies is always a safe bet when looking at claims by Brett Kimberlin of Justice Through Music Project (JTMP).

    That Brett Kimberlin has repeatedly lied in this case, has recently lied, and lied in his request for a ruling, may affect not only popcorn futures, but the court’s willingness to take any of his claims on faith.

  3. Hmmmm… I noticed that there were many claims of a single claimed defamatory word supposedly published by Ace. Good think Brett Kimberlin has already proven to the court that he will take things out of context and try to twist them to mean something completely different than they would clearly mean in context.

    What I didn’t see was any exhibit or reference to an exhibit, to prove any of those words were actually published. More specifically, there was nothing to show, nor even a claim made, those claimed statements were published within the statute of limitations.

    I’ll bet a lot the court will notice too.

  4. I can tell the pedobomber lied about consulting with Levy on legal matters, due to the fact that Levy is a SUCCESSFUL attorney and has not been sanctioned or sued for malpractice

  5. Couple of questions…

    ECF 174 – [redacted]

    ECF 176 – Wasn’t BU, Global Pharma, Bill’s old vile hate sites, etc all hosted on Kimberlins servers and hosted in the Netherlands? If so, why was it OK for Brett to host all his sites there but so wrong for Ace to do so? If the only reason is to evade service from US courts, people are gonna wonder why Kimberlin chose to host his prescription drug company website there. Hmmmm

  6. What…was that reply?

    IANAL but some of it was entirely random. He attacked Levy’s use of “her” even though Levy noted in his first motion that his choice of pronoun was not meant to imply gender. (Although Kudos on the apparent PsyOps Levy pulled off there.)

    He attack’s Ace’s appearances, and yet still can’t ID ace, which means that despite these appearances ace has still maintained anonymity. So clearly that’s not as much of a contradiction as he would insist.

    And I’m not even sure what’s going on with his rejection of Levy’s Brodie argument. Again IANAL but wouldn’t that apply to subpoenaing Intermarkets (which he keeps saying he wants to do.) or is that somehow specific to a hosting company?

  7. And also hilarious because Kimberlin and/or his creepforce allies repeatedly accused Michelle Kerr of being Ace.

  8. He really should have put a lot of that information in the 1st letter into his motion to disqualify Levy. Too bad he didn’t, because that could be useful. Now he’s just trying to get an extension of the time to file. My money is on denial.

    The second one actually sounds like a legitimate cause. Of course, he should have thought about the co-pending case before he filed a request to file a motion for a preliminary injunction. I rate this a toss-up.

    I think Levy pretty clearly demolished TDPK’s arguments in his reply brief. TDPK hasn’t argued against the LEGAL arguments Levy raised. Note that TDPK is arguing at cross purposes (as Levy pointed out). He wants to use Levy to serve Ace, but also wants to disqualify Levy from representing Ace. He can’t have it both ways. Regardless, I would wager the court will not allow alternative service, or deem Ace served.

    What makes this especially amusing is that it is not particularly difficult to identify Ace. TDPK just doesn’t want to put in the time to do so.

    • If he was so concerned about “judicial economy” he would have held off on his motion in the first place, being well aware himself of upcoming hearing and trials on the docket.

      • Or more to the point, his motion in this case ought to be irrelevant. If he wins at trial, and he receives the relief for which he asks, the motion is then moot. If doesn’t win, or cannot justify the level of relief he requested, Brett Kimberlin cannot plausibly claim that he is “likely to prevail on the merits.” Either way this court cannot possibly grant him the injunction.

      • Yes. Notice that when TDPK claims to have been “working with attorneys involved with that case” he doesn’t suggest that Levy is one of them, just that Public Citizen has a lawyer among them. Which is like saying that I know someone being represented by Ropes and Gray, therefore they can’t represent anyone against me in any other matter.

        That’s going to fly about as far as Bill Schmalfeldt off a three foot runway.

  9. The delay du jour of “storm” is now replace by “taking a vacation with my family for two weeks.”
    Dragging out the inevitable….

  10. Note that a plaintiff facing “irreparable harm” is asking the court to allow those nefarious forces to slander him for an additional three weeks.

  11. In ECF 174 why is page 7 of 7 a repeat of the last lines of page 6 of 7? Why is it in a different font and spacing? Does this indicate some manipulation, done poorly, of the original data? Inquiring minds want to know!

  12. I’m confused about all this concern about “irreparable harm” that is an !!emergency!! that he is willing to let continue even though all the judge asked for was specific statements made by specific people.

    • And I note that he’s grabbing words out of context from a post of Ace’s. Individual words. Not whole sentences, but single words, in quotation marks. To say nothing of adding the notion of attainder!

      I read Ace every day. Ace may have used the words contained in quotation marks, but probably widely spaced, and not necessarily about BK!

  13. Note, also, how Brett Kimberlin did not say, “A trial in which I am likely to prevail on the merits.”

  14. Don’t want to educate the midget so I won’t say too much, but anyone who knows the first thing about WHOIS, reverse DNS, etc. will be able to point out that paragraph 3 of ECF 176 is complete and utter horse puckey.

  15. I looked it up. Hoo Boy. That is not a way to show the court one has considered ones available options thoroughly.

  16. And he was so indignant, that’s the best part. What do you want to bet a crack researcher settled that question for Mr. BK.

  17. What’s the judge, who just warned BK about lying like a rug or wasting his time with avoidable missteps, going to do when he catches BK’s fabulous big foolish falsehood. (Not this one, the other one)?

    • That is the state case, not the Federal case. As to what happens when a litigant does not pay ordered attorneys fees, typically the attorney can either file a motion to show cause for failing to abide by the order (and get awarded even more fees) or else bring an independent action to enforce the Order. (In some states, if you reduce the Order to a judgment you can garnish wages or have the Sherriff seize assets for public sale).

      • sometimes it’s hard to keep the two cases straight… it can be difficult to comprehend the sheer batshit craziness it takes to file two bullshit cases and the ensuing incompetence to keep dragging them out..

  18. Pingback: In Re RICO Madness | That Mr. G Guy's Blog

  19. Has Brett Kimberlin’s finances become so desperate that he has to resort to sending copies by “regular mail?”

  20. Oh, Mr. Hoge, I am so very, very sorry for the filth. I can’t even imagine what you see every day. One vile comment slipped through to the email subscription to this thread but looks like you caught it before it posted here.

    Wow. smh

    Thanks for putting up with it. I’m sure some days it isn’t easy.

    I gave my word to Ali that I’d pray for y’all every day through the 7th. Adding more prayers and asking others to do the same.

  21. Pingback: So you maybe are thinking, what has Neal Rauhauser been up to? | Batshit Crazy News

Leave a Reply