In Re RICO Madness

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has filed yet another lame reply to an opposition to one of his motions in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness, in this case, the motion to identify non-party Ace.

70 thoughts on “In Re RICO Madness

  1. I didn’t know who the person was, so I sued the blog instead.

    Isn’t that why you can name “John Doe” defendants? So you can sue the person, NOT the blog until you can identify them?

    • and a due process right to face those you accuse of tortouous conduct? No, they have a right to face their accuser, not the other way around.
      What an asshat, even misstating the rights of due process for his own benefit.

      • There probably is a due process right to identify defendants in a civil trial. I’m not totally up on that aspect of law, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some case law on the subject.

        Obviously TDPK cites some authorities, but nothing he writes should be trusted, because he is a serial liar and perjurer.

      • I think Mr. Coleman’s assertion that would be something for the discovery phase is correct, given that Ace’s identity is irrelevant to any damages Puny Pedo [very] theoretically suffered.

      • Ace of Spades Blog HQ has been identified, so Brett Kimberlin is fully aware of what the defendant is.

    • He reiterates his own mistake and basically proves Mr. Coleman’s argument that BK was trying to endanger Aaron (SWATting Jihadisting?) by tearing down his anonymity.
      What’s probably most disgusting is that he presupposes that neither Ace nor Aaron have a right to their anonymity; and that the government is obliged to protect it except in cases of egregious malfeasance. Insulting pedophiles (7th Century or 21st) is not malfeasance.

    • a) You forgot the *wink* *wink*
      2) I’m going to have to sue BK for my TMJ surgery; my jaw damn near smashed my keyboard it dropped so hard.
      Fourth and finally; Where is that pony?

  2. He concedes suing the blog and not the person. He gives his reason, and reveals it’s his own fault for not including a John Doe, which he managed in other cases, and it’s too late now.

    Judge needs to squash this little bug.

  3. Aren’t some of those exhibits under seal? Why is he arguing about Aaron in this motion? Oh, I get it. Lawfare. Well, litigation is a two way street.

    • Bingo! I just got around to driving through the whole pity party, “…but judge I wrote down all the mean things they said… let me have Ace’s identity… I can’t promise he won’t get SWAT’d or lose his job, but that’s his problem; he called me names…Oh and here’s some privileged and sealed information that I got when Aaron actually responded to discovery (what a rube)…”
      I might not have spelled those quotations correctly.

      • I lost my temper and stopped reading when he started in about why Aaron was fired.

        Yeah, well that’s not the same story he told Ace, now is it? In an email that Levy that Levy has already included as an exhibit, IIRC.

      • > I lost my temper and stopped reading when he started in about why Aaron was fired.

        He’s pre-rebutted on this point. 1) Coleman said even if all that is true, it was a slow motion SWATting, and he still acted to try to get me fired, and 2) as i pointed out, he is collaterally estopped from denying he got me fired.

    • That’s because you’re a decent person. I think of all the defendants, the one that Team K hates the most is Aaron.

  4. He appears to want to get something out of this entire affair by identifying Ace from the Ace of Spades blog, and if possible, motivate terrorists to go after Aaron, given that he references Everybody Draw Mohamed in pretty much every filing.

    If he wants to identify the Ace of Spades blog, itself, it’s this one:

    That wasn’t hard. I didn’t even need Google.

    The blog isn’t anonymous, it has a name and it is well known. Microsoft isn’t anonymous by not being called Bill Gates. Maybe if they release software written by them into the public without branding it or claiming it theirs, the publisher of the piece would be anonymous, but that isn’t the case here. The particular post that has his panties in a wad did in fact originate from that blog. Some of the people writing for it, including the pseudonymous Ace are anonymous, but Ace isn’t Ace of Spades, and Ace of Spades isn’t Ace, any more than Microsoft is Bill Gates and vise versa.

    • 1) I am not even slightly concerned about Islamofascists coming to kill me. If my car blew up tomorrow, you know Brett had something to do with it.

      2) i think Brett is desperate to get Ace’s ID, because he knows it is just about the only thing he might be able to salvage about this mess. The lameness of his omnibus opposition tells me he knows he is screwed.

      • Even he has to know that’s the absolute most he could possibly salvage from this fiasco, SPQR. And he no doubt wants something for all of the $ the sanctions will almost certainly cost him.

  5. My take on the last bit:

    9. That Brett, such a giver. He doesn’t want Hoge to be handicapped by having an anonymous co-defender, that wouldn’t be FAIR! Such a noble noble man…

    10. Brett’s filings are “well pleaded. So well in fact, that AOS had no trouble whatsoever filing a motion to dismiss.” Well, strictly speaking you have to give him points for accuracy on that one… And yes, he actually wrote that.

    11. Did Ace ever describe Brett as a “one man crime wave?” If so, that is the only accurate representation in the paragraph. It is also not a bad description for a man convicted of setting off a string of bombings in his home town. This would be why Brett Kimberlin is known as the Speedway Bomber.

    It would be interesting to see when the service is mailed; the date seems double-typed so it could be the 20th or could be the 21th, a deliberate FU in light of folks calling him out on falsified service? My money is on it being mailed on the 22nd…

      • Reading. Yeah, I do that sometimes. Well, I do better than Brett, so I got that going for me…

        “Your honor, I’m just a simple, very short, cave man. Your modern calendar confuses and frightens me.”

      • Planet Themis, or he stole Betty’s pony from Kyle and keeps going back to January 12th. I wonder what other stupid thing he did that day that he keeps going back to fix? Maybe another Streisand-effect lawfare suit? Or maybe on January 12th he wrote one of his recent pleadings that blows up in his face soon?

      • For some reason, I can,t reply to Jane’s comment….

        Betty’spony keeps going back to January 12? Shades of Dirk Gently?

      • wpdavidd –

        Comments only nest so deep, we’re at the point of no reply.

        is hard
        to read

      • Jane:

        “There’s a horse in your bathroom.”
        “Yes it is. Wait. Let it be. It won’t be long.”
        “There’s a horse in your bathroom and all you can do is stand there spouting the names of Beatles songs?”
        …or something like that. I loved that book.

    • Yes, paragraph 10 was my favorite. I’d think if one’s complaint was really well pleaded, the defendant would have a hard time preparing a motion to dismiss, not an easy time.

  6. If I were clerk or judge I’d pitch this right back at him and tell him it won’t be accepted it does not have any of the attachments cited in the text and therefore is incomplete, and if he asks for explanation of that simply tell him “you heard the plain English I told you. Now fix before you try to submit it again.” It’d drive him nuts trying to figure out what they mean and I’d pay a dollar to watch that.
    Honestly, “EX C” scrawled on the bottom of the page? That’s not Exhibit C. That could be anything. If you are too damn tired to write out an additional “hibit’, then you need to be at a doctor and not a courthouse. Is it too close to the word “hobbit” and that offends you for some reason? This is a smirking sociopath’s sly little insult to show how superior he is and what he thinks of the court and the defendant. He’s gonna show them that they are not worth doing it right or neatly or anything and he gets to flout the conventions yet one more way.

    “Ex B” bothered the crap out of me since this is the first I had heard of this demand of AW’s former employer for him to announce his departure from them. Announce it yoursleves if you are so damn worried. Strikes me as a cheap attempt to gain advantage in the termination process in the event of suit. And yeah, now I really want to know who was telling them that groups would start protesting the company. Gee, I wonder who? Did AW ever get that info? I imagine not.

    Finally, BK wants to be careful around the moron horde. There’s one hell of a lot of them and they are an experienced and skilled bunch of people , heck I’m one of them sometimes. They really like Ace and the community he has built. He might want to read the quote that makes up the motto sometime. If he causes something bad to happen to Ace, those are lousy odds to be betting on. He could wind up being on the ugly side of more purely legal backlash than he can believe.

    • Kyle, are you suggesting there may be a reason Ace has been able to get not one, but two, well-earned-big-name lawyers to defend him pro bono?

      Well, huh. I thought it was just luck.

    • No, Jim Hodges, who has always been a supreme dick, refused to answer my reasonable questions. Brett keeps saying he never contacted my work before i was fired. Notice what he is not saying.

      I used to work for the guy, and good lord, he was a terrible boss.

      Example one: he would tell me to file something in a particular court for him that i never filed in before.

      So I said, “do we need a filing fee, anything like that?”

      And he replied, “I know what I am doing, don’t question me.” He was very angry that I was checking his work.

      So I dropped it, because he was my boss. And I would go to the courthouse and what do you know? They required a filing fee! To his credit he was good humored about it. But he still never wanted me to question him.

      Example two: after several months of working for him, he asked me to file something for him. I know better than to ask him if it is right. So i get to the courthouse and it turns out he didn’t provide enough copies. I get back to the office and explain what happened and he curses me out for not questioning him.

      Seriously, he was a complete ass. I don’t know if it was everyone, or just me–there is some reason to think a particular fact in my background rubbed him uniquely the wrong way–but I was thanking God when that health care company hired me away from him. I still had to deal with him now and then, but i was no longer his subordinate.

      • Aaron, The ones like you describe are usually the ones who are themselves incompetent and desperately hanging onto their phonetic-baloney jobs, hoping no one notices their flailings.

      • Jim Hodges not only was an idiot, he violated many tenants of the bar and of common sense by publically making the reasons for the termination in writing – after all all they had to do was eliminate the position – but no he went way beyond exposing himself to countless lawsuits – which were not filed and given his poorly crafted termination letter and subsequent behavior afterwords, he would have been easy pickings in court

  7. Incompetent and incoherent have always best described TDPK’s filings but this one is approaching the most incoherent.

    The sputtering incoherent is amusing though.

  8. Interesting article on “Torrent Freak” this morning:


    Bomber Tries Copyright Troll Argument to Unmask Critic

    By Andy
    on January 22, 2015
    C: 6


    A man jailed for 50 years in the United States for multiple bombings, drug smuggling and felony perjury, is attempting to leverage copyright troll cases to his advantage. Brett Kimberlin says that since a court has already revealed the identities of BitTorrent users, it should also unmask his critics.

    brett-kBorn in 1954, Brett Kimberlin has led a colorful criminal life. In 1973 he was convicted of felony perjury after lying about his activities to a grand jury investigation drug trafficking.

    Five years later Kimberlin became a suspect in the murder of Julia Scyphers, a 65-year-old grandmother who strongly disapproved of Kimberlin’s relationship with her 13-year-old granddaughter. Scyphers had been shot once in head.

    However, police in Speedway, Indiana, soon had additional things on their mind. In the first few days of September 1978 a wave of bombings hit Speedway which led to serious injuries including the loss of a Vietnam veteran’s leg.

    Authorities believed that Kimberlin set up the Speedway Bombings as an attempt to distract from the investigation into Scyphers’ murder. While Kimberlin was never tried for this crime (the only witness died) he was convicted of the bombings and sentenced to 51 years in prison.

    Ever since, Kimberlin – the son of a lawyer – has become known for filing lawsuits against his critics – and failing miserably.

    Nevertheless, Kimberlin isn’t giving up. In one ongoing case (Brett Kimberlin vs National Bloggers Club) the convicted bomber is taking action against several bloggers who wrote things about his past he took offense to. It’s a quagmire of a case and one that has just seen Kimberlin reference copyright-trolling aspects for the first time.

    At this point Kimberlin is trying to identify a person who wrote about him on the Ace of Spades blog (AOS) but is not named as a party in the action. So far Kimberlin has been unsuccessful, however he feels that since litigants in copyright cases have previously succeeded in unmasking alleged infringers, he should also be able to.

    “Defendant AOS repeatedly states that since Plaintiff has not identified AOS as a person in the Complaint, he cannot seek the identity of AOS. This circular argument highlights one of the basic reasons why Plaintiff needs to know the identity of AOS,” Kimberlin told a Maryland district court yesterday.

    “As this Court noted in [an earlier Malibu Media case, extract below], a plaintiff cannot effectively litigate a civil case if he does not know the identity of the defendant.”

    Malibu cannot engage in discovery to probe the underlying facts underlying its claim without first naming a defendant. Unless Malibu is permitted, at least at the initial stages of litigation, to proceed against a subscriber, it will be caught in a Catch-22…(link)

    “It should be noted that this Court has granted the issuance of subpoenas in scores of cases brought by Malibu Media to identify anonymous civil defendants who violated copyrights by illegally downloading films,” Kimberlin continues.

    “Many of those defendants made arguments similar to AOS, (e.g.,they would be subjected to harassment or pressured into settlement), yet every Maryland federal judge in each of those cases rejected their arguments.

    “Wherefore, for all the above reasons and the reasons set forth in Plaintiff’s motion, this Court should order the identity of AceofSpades,” Kimberlin concludes.

    Whether or not the Court will be swayed by Kimberlin’s arguments remains to be seen, but Popehat’s assessment of Kimberlin’s current and previous legal efforts is hardly a shining one.


    • And it did a good job of it, too. I just wanted to make sure I read the whole thing; that this wasn’t an excerpt. Shoulda’ figured if there was more you’d have posted the link. Thanks again. 🙂

  9. The terroristic diddler may have bitten off more than he can chew, even for a Chew-wawa. He has ticked off the torrent crowd which may be even more of a problem than he tried to create for AW. Of course, he’ll point out the Big BM or John W. Gacy as the culprit and giggle when the tin can and all that mayo go sky high.


    • GMTA, Tao. (And I’ve become adept at parroting.)

      Posted in another thread about how close to the 30th we are – time is tick, tick ticking – like a bomb. hahahaha

      I heard it’s going to be cold in MD at the end of January. How unusual…. hahahaha

Leave a Reply