In Re RICO Madness


The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin continues to whine. Now, he’s upset about Ace’s lawyer being hypertechnical and insisting that “Defendant Ace Of Spades is a blog …” (as TDPK says in his second amended complaint) actually means that Defendant Ace of Spades is a blog.

41 thoughts on “In Re RICO Madness

  1. ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

  2. “Defendant Ace Of Spades is a blog”

    Hypertechnically speaking, exactly the way Kimberlin defined the defendant in his filings. D’oh!

  3. Ya gotta hate it when he realized how badly he fubar’d everything up in regards to Ace. Words are precise. Words are technical. ESPECIALLY in a legal document. You would think that someone so “experienced” in filing legal documents would actually remember that and realize that slipshod work gets you unintended results. Like this one. I’m loving this and waiting with baited breath for the rest of the week to play out. lolz

  4. So as usual with Team Kimberlin (AKA Team Mangina, Team Crybaby) when they make a glaring error it’s never their fault.

  5. Oooh, oooh! And to further complicate things, the Blog is “Ace of Spades HQ” Wherein one of the bloggers is named….. drumroll….. “Ace.” Not Ace of Spades, but just “Ace.” It seems to me that someone screwed the pooch in more ways than one with this. lolz lolz lolz

  6. Complaint: “New Shimmer is a floor wax!”

    AoS Lawyer: “No, new Shimmer is a dessert topping!”

    BK: New Shimmer is both a floor wax and a dessert topping!

  7. “This argument is both without merit and bizarre.” — TDPK

    The sawed-off, domestic terrorist Brett Kimberlin is undoubtedly very, very familiar with the concepts of “without merit” and “bizarre.”

    And, sheesh. Are a certain Deranged Cyberstalker and his “excellent friend” in some competition for the “Most Self-Unaware ‘Man’ Ever” award?

  8. Well. Once again BK resorts to the using the case management order as an extra-judicial mechanism for arguing his case. I like that he doesn’t even bother with such niceties as formatting.

    As expected, BK is using Hazel’s foray into the unknown outside the FCRP on service as a springboard for his expeditionary lawfare. He has moved to an absolute demand for Ace’s identity as a right simply because he has alleged something. He knows that “hypertechnicalities” such as following form and instruction are not important to Hazel. So now he pushes the envelope, encouraging Hazel to go for broke. Forget FCRP, forget EVERYTHING, let’s go by Hazel/Kimberlin!

    BK knows that Hazel will not reverse himself on the service issue, so, again, I say that this is a condition of Hazel’s own making. By saying the rules don’t matter, I am going to do what I want, he has established a precedent that, umm, the rules don’t matter. Which may not be exactly what he wanted to do, but he has done it nonetheless.

    I am sure that Coleman will continue to argue this point through correspondence, since Hazel accepts this condition, also.

    I don’t know how Hazel will split the baby. He may again remind BK that he is on his side, but he can’t stray too far from the bounds of propriety to help him by simply denying the motion (which has essentially been argued), he could just go straight to denying it without the nicety (hypertechnicality!) of actually having motions. He could allow it, saying, yeah, you are right, enough games for this dirty Teabagger, Ron Coleman, identify Ace or you go to jail. Or, he could try to rescue the case, such as it is, by either a sternly worded letter bring attention back to the CMO that discards the letters, and reminds that the order says that you must request to make a motion, and this correspondence was outside of that, so if you want to make this motion, please submit a request to make a motion PERIOD FULL STOP; or by issuing a new or modified CMO that puts him in the Queen of Hearts seat, saying explicitly that the CMO means precisely what he says it means – neither more nor less. Either choice would allow his prior service judgment to stand, and would kick the can down the road a little further, continuing to draw out the process.

    Guess which way I think it will go?

    • I also expect Coleman to point out – as he did in his previous letter – that at least one of the posts that BK declares as tortious conduct was written by someone other than ace.

      Conveniently BK neglects that.

    • A question. Brett Kimberlin has de facto argued a motion by letter. Ron Coleman has de facto filed an opposition by letter. Brett Kimberlin has de facto argued an opposition to that opposition by letter. Do the Hazel rules of civil procedures allow for additional surreplies?

    • Someone should be mindful that I listened again to the audio of a phone call to my house – a person called me left an eerie gleeful taunting message to coerce and extort me as well as for two days on twitter – a person that has tried to stop me from expressing my opinions about their work and the possible harm it can bring to defenseless children all in the support of a violent felon with ties to pedophiles and now intimidation of defendants and their supporters.

      What does he really think that is going to happen when the authorities here in Tennessee find out about all of this?

      A SMIRK and a cocky hat photo is not going to absolve someone of 4 years of behavior.

  9. I may be misremembering, but didn’t Coleman point out that one of the posts on the blog was actually written by someone other than ace?
    Kinda undercuts the whole argument there. But of course he won’t get to remind anyone of that because he doesn’t get these cool not quite filings that BK has been getting.

  10. Brett Kimberlin’s statement, “The blog and the anonymous blogger Ace of Spades are one and the same,” is going to haunt him. He has just sabotaged his own claims. His previous claims, in essence, were that he intended to sue Ace of Spades the person, and, all of his actions and filings indicated that fact. And, if he made a technical error in describing the plaintiff, that was due to the fact that he was a poor pitiful pro se defendant who should be granted some slack. Intent ought to trump technicalities for a pro se defendant. Now, in the context of this remark, all of his previous statements are ambiguous. When he wrote “he,” Kimberlin was by his own admission referring to Ace the blogger, and the Ace of Spades blog interchangeably. Even when he posted a picture of “Ace of Spades” it was just in the context of questioning the correct pronoun to describe conflation of a blogger and a blog. But, when he quotes bloggers other than Ace as having written defamatory content attributed to the defendant “Ace of Spades” he has made it clear that it is the blog he is suing.

  11. “But your honor, Paul Levy said…!!!” is a hell of an argument for the guy who worked so hard to get Paul Levy kicked off the case to be making.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s