Electronic Harassment?

@GrouchyOldLib201505211659ZI received a summons from the District Court in Rockville to appear on 2 July so that I can be served with a charging document and be advised of my rights. The summons states that there will be a preliminary inquiry and that I will be advised of a future date for a trial if probable cause is found that I may have committed whatever I’m charged with.

I do not plan to make any further substantive public comment on this matter until after I have seen the actual charging document(s) and reviewed them with counsel.

22 thoughts on “Electronic Harassment?

  1. So Bill Schmalfeldt lied again? Gee, it really makes you wonder if he is just really, really stupid or a really, really bad liar.

  2. Isn’t it against the law to file false criminal charges? Of course, this is The People’s Republic of Maryland so lunatics seem to be immune from consequences….

    • Maryland is one of the states that continues to allow its citizens to make a direct criminal complaint. The state, as John’s summons indicates, is still the entity that prefers the charge/charges based on the complaint if probably cause is found to prosecute. Even if probable cause would be found, there is still prosecutorial discretion her the case is pursued or not.

      Bill Schmalfeldt, for all his yakking about “rights” and “the Constitution,” does not appear to understand the fundamental construct of justice in the United States (even in Maryland). A person accused of a crime is innocent until proved guilty. Bill is treading on very thin ice in a number of the comments about John he has made to date. Very, very thin ice.

      • Not as thin of ice as the person filing the complaint.

        John stands accused of violating “CR.3.805.(b)(2)….” which reads,

        b) A person may not use electronic mail with the intent to harass;…

        (2) by sending lewd, lascivious, or obscene material.

        This is something John has never done. The only specific things John Hoge has ever been alleged to have done is to correct a mistake concerning a birthday, and re-tweeting Lee Stranahan. Someone has grossly lied in the complaint and that someone might very well have to answer for what he did.

  3. And is there any way you can find out what you are charged with before that date? It seems crazy to send you a note that you will be charged with something five or six weeks in advance.

    • Since he hasn’t done anything, he’ll have to figure out a way to do even less of it between now and the hearing. Seems unfair to John. I hope the judge uses the phrase “not a scintilla.” It’s going to sound great in an epic limerick.

    • That’s actually a good thing. John’s lawyer is free to meet with the prosecutor to discuss the case in advance and present Our Gentle Host’s side of the story in advance of that date. The prosecutor does not work for the complainant- there is no right that BK or his wife would have to be present during any such meeting. They can request their own meeting if they want one.

      I’d put money on the charges being dismissed prior to or at the proceeding on July 2nd. That does not mean that it is not a serious situation for John (or Aaron)- “Grace’s Law” is deeply flawed in that it allows, at bottom, any child who claims “emotional distress” as the result of a series of interactions between a third party and a parent on the internet to seek to have the state prefer charges against the third party. Arguably my disabled son could seek, under Grace’s law, to have Bill Schmalfeldt charged based on Schmalfeldt’s Twitter harassment of me a few months ago. The law is plainly overbroad and almost certainly unconstitutional. I think it is only a matter of time before it is tested on appeal, but don’t wish that on John or Aaron.

      • Gee, does that mean that if one of my children suffers “emotional distress” because of my harassment by a certain troll in Elkridge which has included photos of my child and snide comments about that child, that said troll can be charged under Grace’s Law?

  4. It’s way past time for a lawsuit against Kimberlin and Schmalfeldt for malicious prosecution. A clear pattern of abuse of the courts for a vendetta exists, with copious perjury by these two. It is time, John. Sue them for their back teeth.

Leave a Reply