Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

In his opposition to Lee Stranahan’s motion to dismiss the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin claims that there has been no final judgment in the state Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit. He writes:

Moreover, there is no final judgment in that state case.

To prove his point he attached a copy of an order from the Court of Special Appeals relating to his appeal of the case. The first sentence of that order reads:

On November 14, 2014, the Circuit Court entered an Order dismissing the case.

res_judicata_mugsThis is another example of one of Kimberlin’s exhibits supporting the defendants’ rather than TDPK’s case. Dismissal is final judgment. Moreover, since dismissal was based on Kimberlin’s failure to present a “scintilla” of evidence to support his claims, it’s a judgment on the merits.

Game over.

29 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. K seems like the kind of man (for lack of a better term) who would cry “assault” if you ducked when he tried to stab you.

    • Something I heard once that applies: “A Communist would step on your toes and then complain that you were kicking the bottom of his foot.”

  2. It must be awful to inhabit his skin. Sometimes, frankly, I think he operates in the realm of delusion – but he has to know he’s scum. What’s it like to be a phony to the bone, and vicious besides?

    • You raise an interesting question that we’ll never know the answer to – Does Brett Kimberlin know how evil he is? Has he made deliberate choices to be depraved, or was he created that way?

      That flagitious letter he wrote about substitution showcases what I can only describe as malevolent psychopathy, in my non-expert opinion. It would be great if the entire left read that letter.

      Even if he truly believed he’d been wronged (instead of his entire case being nothing but shutuppery), going after an indigent, very ill to the point of incompetence, defendant VICTIM and her grief stricken, greatly suffering family, should open the eyes of any of his defenders who aren’t just as evil.

      He can’t expect to collect a dime, nor does this particular victim have the ability to provide anything else to him. Going after her family should be all the court needs to prove his true purpose in filing suit.

      Just like Kimberlin can’t seem to file so much as a notice of unavailability without mentioning Aaron’s involvement with a Free Speech protest blog, I hope none of the current and future lawfare victims will fail to mention that letter regarding Ms. Nagy and her family in any future court-related writings.

    • The subject is a big can of worms and a lot can be said about it. I will try to stick to Kimberlin related aspects but the whole thing is interesting.

      Most times you have a conflict with a bad actor, the bad actor falls into an all-too-human category. He is either willing to start acting in good faith, or already attempting good faith but making errors. In this case you may approach the person as a potential allies who want to help each other. You offer constructive suggestions tactfully to the bad actor and carefully refrain from sharing overly harsh observations with third parties. Many times when someone is being a jerk, it is only unthinkingly or even accidentally. For instance I may have seemed like a jerk for criticizing Ron Coleman’s excellent pro bono work by not wanting to join him in writing as if BK might argue in good faith. But this is more of a miscommunication issue than a being-a-jerk issue.

      A very small percentage of the time, a second category applies. Someone is a major bad actor as part of a conscious, calculated campaign to unfairly mistreat others in bad faith. The point I wholeheartedly accept is that it is quite important to vigorously deter this small percentage of jerks as strongly as feasible – but this is easier said than done. In the very few cases I encounter this personally, I always avoid tipping my hand directly to the bad actor and make sure to make a factual, well documented case to third parties that the bad actor is behaving harmfully. To friendly allies I would clearly point out the bad actor must be strongly opposed and is acting in bad faith. A small minority of bad actors can thoroughly disrupt any community that fails present a strong and effective deterrent to them.

      Brett clearly falls in the second category.

      The people esr complains about are mostly not in the second category, so we probably don’t need to go to war with them. We do need to pressure them to at least get in the first category though. I am unsure that being a jerk back to them is the best way to do it. I guess it depends on the community. Wanting to be jerks to them seems like letting your feelings run wild without full rational control.

      TLDR: there are a few bad actors who must be vigorously opposed to the utmost. Being jerks to them is one option but the option should readily be discarded whenever it isn’t helpful, no matter how fun it is. For not-so-bad actors, I would rather refrain from being a jerk to them even if that works (and it works less frequently than one hopes), but the option is not totally out of the question. But other methods of getting them on right track are great.

  3. The snares are set put they pop of without effect if you know what to look for. I wish the world would internalize this – its from a crummy broadway musical but it happens to be true.

    “I can’t tell you any sure way to happiness. I only know that you’ve gotta go out and find it for yourselves. You can’t lean on the success of your parents. That’s their success. And don’t be held back by their failures.
    Makes no difference what they did or didn’t do. You just stand on your own two feet. The world belongs to you as much as to the next fella, so don’t give it up. And try not to be scared of people not liking you, just you try liking them. And just keep your faith, and your courage, and you’ll turn out all right.

  4. Brett has all the hallmarks of a boy who was sexually and / or emotionally / and or physically abused as a child. I write “and / or” since it is fairly impossible to sexually abuse someone without simultaneous emotional and physical abuse. The literature about psychopaths, which in my opinion, Brett obviously is, finds that they are a product of nature, rather than nurture, which would mean that Brett would behave like he does regardless of any childhood trauma. He was just born fucked up. What bothers me about Brett is that his predilection for under aged females points to the likelihood that he was himself abused, which means that he might behave the way he does to due to nurture, rather than nature. He is a complex specimen.

    For the defendants in this case, if Brett is indeed a psychopath, and in my opinion there is enough evidence to suggest that he may be, then they are battling true evil which may to a degree that is impossible for a normal person to comprehend. I think this is why Brett is has been somewhat successful in his lawfare.

    • Brett Kimberlin has been 100% UN-successful whenever anyone takes the time to examine who they are dealing with and then puts forth an appropriate response. His days of slipping half-assed plots through the legal system are over.

    • I don’t want to get much into the psychological issues, but I think it’s important to point out that most adults who commit sexual abuse against children were NOT abused themselves. And on the other side of the coin, most victims of child sexual abuse do not become abusers as adults (nor do they typically harbor urges to do so). There may be some overrepresentation but it’s far from overwhelming, if so.

      Beyond these remarks, I have little insight into what motivates such people. I do think it’s true that there are some people who harbor a desire for inappropriate relationships with children, but they fully undetstand it’s wrong, so their consciences keep them from ever acting on it. Obviously, Brett has the desire and is not restrained by conscience.

      • “According to a National Institute of Justice study, abused and neglected children were 11 times more likely to be arrested for criminal behavior as a juvenile, 2.7 times more likely to be arrested for violent and criminal behavior as an adult, and 3.1 times more likely to be arrested for one of many forms of violent crime (juvenile or adult).

        Abusive behavior. Abusive parents often have experienced abuse during their own childhoods. It is estimated approximately one-third of abused and neglected children will eventually victimize their own children.”

        More info here:

  5. On the other hand, his behaviors have always struck me as someone who has, his entire life, constructed a false and even grandiose front because reality disappointed him and humiliated him and hindered him getting what he wants out of life, what would make him matter. Because he fell…well, short. Somewhere inside, he knows. The immense satisfaction he takes in getting one over on people, is his only real pleasure in life.

    Wrote this a ways back, in relation to nature or nuture:

    “Crazy runs in the family though, so there may be some heritable traits or susceptibility at work in what I believe is his psychopathic brain. His brother was a diagnosed schizophrenic, and the portrait Singer paints of Kimberlin’s mother is one of …eccentricity. There is at least one person from his Indiana neighborhood who has said in comment forums (a known person with a real identity) that he was creepy even as a child. He was fascinated with fire. When neighbor pets went missing, Brett was suspected by “everyone in the neighborhood but his parents.” Singer wrote of Brett’s preference for snakes and exotic reptiles as pets. Its only my opinion, but I got the impression that he was trying to borrow some cache or power by having intimidating reptilian pets, cold-blooded creatures with fearsome reputations or that cause revulsion in others. I wonder if he was delighted to feed them live creatures.”

Leave a Reply