Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

I finally found a bit of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s second amended complaint for his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness that does not contain any significant errors. It’s paragraph 169.

ECF 135-169

25 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


  1. I’m sure a motion to strike 169 as “irrelevant” would result in Brett Kimberlin filing a motion in opposition.


  2. Another tidbit from the transcript – BK asks Mr. Hoge, I believe, if he has ever written anything positive about him in the TK post of the day. To which he answers that he can’t recall having done so. Well, here you go!

    Also, that follows the model of the Shirley Sherrod suit against Breitbart – that quoting liberals is defamatory even if what you say is true, if you never say anything nice about them.


  3. Also, looking at the docket on the RICO case, it has been said that Levy’s surreply was removed by accident and that actually it was allowed in. The docket does not say that. It says:

    (FILED IN CLERK’S ERROR)QC NOTICE: 182 Response filed by Ace of Spades was filed incorrectly. **Leave of Court is required prior to the filing of a SurReply. It has been noted as FILED IN ERROR, and the document link has been disabled. (aos, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 8/20/2014 (aos, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 08/20/2014)

    That looks a lot like the error was in putting it in.

    I also note this in the docket:

    FILED IN ERROR) MOTION to renew 93 MOTION to Disqualify Counsel Paul Levy; Motion for leave to refile Motion to Disqualify by Brett Kimberlin (Attachments: # 1 Mailing Envelope)(aos, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 9/3/2014 (aos, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 09/03/2014)

    So Levy’s document is “FILED IN ERROR” and removed from the docket. BK’s is “FILED IN ERROR” yet remains.

    Que?


      • That’s what I thought; but I hadn’t gone back to look and just took for granted the clerks error in removing the item had been corrected since I saw the above.

        Levy was granted permission to file a surreply, within some contraints, so what happened?


      • That is why I say Levy has just adopted to the playing field and is making arguments in the letter – a list of disparate rulings is only useful in an appeal – and that is unlikely to happen, as plaintiff will not win this case.

        There are no sanctions that will ever be applied to the judge(s) in this case – they will continue to be paid and serve out their lifetime appointments.

        Our courts are premised on sets of rules – the expectation is that opposing sides abide by those rules. We often hear of “technicalities”: and parsing and interpretations – but all of that is based on the idea that the sides are abiding by the rules.

        This is kind of the same thing when we talk about laws of warfare and Geneva conventions. The system is built on the premise that opposing sides abide by the rules. Unconventional or asymmetric warfare throws that premise out – one side casts aside the rules, and relies on the ruleset to constrain the other side from responding in kind. They use the ruleset itself as a weapon against the good guys ; c,f, conflicts in Israel and Afghanistan.

        Thus is the asymmetric lawfare very much like terrorism. BK simply refuses to be bound by the ruleset. And so long as his opponents do follow the rules, he maintains an advantage. And like the insurgent, he may never have the force to win a decisive battle, but he can wage a war of attrition that erodes the will of his opponents. And by using stalking horses like BS and NR et al., he makes the conflict so sordid and ugly that people really want to avoid engaging in the conflict.

        Extending the metaphor, Levy donned his tiger stripe camo and has adopted an unconventional model. Ali – well, he has picked up his “00” designation.

        Regular legal processes are not going to work – the Federal government, with unlimited resources – got ground down by an opponent who refused to play by the rules. Yes, they put him in jail for four years, but the judgment to the widow DeLong remains unsatisfied.


    • Earl, the (FILED IN CLERK’S ERROR) refers to the erroneous “QC NOTICE” that the surreply was filed incorrectly. When this entry originally appears, the (FILED IN CLERK”S ERROR) didn’t appear, and docket number 182 was disabled. After the (FILED IN CLERK’S ERROR) appeared, 182 was restored. So the “QC NOTICE” was the surreply being pulled, and the (FILED IN CLERK’S ERROR) was the surreply being restored after the clerk realized that permission had been granted.


      • To clarify: the surreply is on the docket. I verified this on PACER just a moment ago. 182 is not currently disabled, as it was temporarily when the “QC NOTICE” notation originally appeared. 182 became available again after the “QC NOTICE” was further tagged with (FILED IN CLERK’S ERROR).


  4. From the decision posted by Earl Scruggs on another thread:

    “…Petitioner first argues that parole revocation was improperly based upon his failure to pay a civil judgment which should be held void and unenforceable. Petitioner bases his claim upon the fact that the judge who presided over the jury trial that resulted in the judgment later was convicted of corruption.

    Preliminarily, the Court notes that the judge in question was convicted not of soliciting bribes from parties in litigation, but of using a kick-back scheme involving judicial appointments and an insurance company.34 Although petitioner claims that Judge Dugan solicited a bribe from him in the DeLong case and that he was instrumental in Dugan’s conviction and sentencing, there is no evidence to support these claims.35”

    In the Transcript Day 2 at page 16, lines 7-25, page 17, lines 1-5, TDPK spends some time repeating the above lies.

    “…His wife filed suit against me for wrongful death. In another twist of my life, the judge in the case, his name was Michael Dugan, III, and it was Marion County Superior Court, Indianapolis, Judge Dugan didn’t let me go to the trial. I was in prison at the time, and Judge Dugan ran into my attorney, my trial attorney, his name was Nile Stanton, he ran into him in a bar in Indianapolis. And he told Nile, he says, “Listen, give me 10 grand, and I’ll let Brett walk.” So Nile came to me, he says, “Gee, you know, I ran into Judge Dugan, he says he wants 10 grand and you can walk.” I said, “Well, Nile, I didn’t do that crime, you know? I can’t pay $10,000, that’s not right.” But what I did do, is I contacted the FBI, and I told them, I said, this guy’s corrupt. What did the FBI do? They wiretapped his chambers. Wiretapped his chambers, started to listen to all his conversations. Guess what? They arrested him. They indicted him. They gave him 18 years in jail. So I had a wrongful conviction, and then I had a judgment against me that was issued by a corrupt judge. I testified at that judge’s sentencing, and the federal judge that sentenced him was pretty pissed off. You know, corrupting the judicial system, and destroying lives like mine. Eventually, that judgment was, for lack of a better word, nullified. It’s not out there anymore. I don’t — I’m not subject to that judgment anymore. So that’s a little bit about my history.”

    I’m not suggesting this is perjury because I don’t see this as a material fact that he lied about, just more proof that the old dog doesn’t learn new tricks. SSDT (Same Stuff Different Trial)


    • I think he perfectly understands he still owes her. But he feels it’s greatly to his benefit if he can trick even just a few people into believing everything. And one sad fact about the world is there are always at least a few people almost eager to be fooled, if the lie is packaged right.

      It’s too bad Brett isn’t understanding how important it is for there to be justice for his victims. If he just set out to atone for how he’s wronged people (sometimes fatally) there wouldn’t be the call for all the effort and expense a lot of us go through. Until then, we’ll all have to be here, working to clean up his messes and help his victims, past present and future.


      • Amen. Rehabilitation doesn’t just happen and consequences do not disappear through fantasy. Debts (both financial and metaphysical) do not disappear through wishes or denial. Consequences must be paid, experienced and atoned for. Redemption as a moral person takes time and effort and honesty. Nothing else works.


  5. If I were to write a news story about Kimberlins Pro Bono career – one of the titles I was considering was “this Page Intentionally Left Blank”

Leave a Reply