I’m Not Making This Up, You Know

The Dreadful Pro-Se must not have read N.C. R. Civ. P. 5(b1) prior to filing this.

Note: This motion is in the form Bill Schmalfeldt published it himself on the Internet.

UPDATE: This post originally used the Scribd document posted by Bill Schmalfeldt. A new Scribd document which has been redacted to obscure the name of a minor child is now used..

21 thoughts on “I’m Not Making This Up, You Know


  1. Are you serious?

    Dear God, this would be even funnier if this wasn’t such a shame.

    Oh wait, who am I kidding. He has no shame.


  2. PP 13, Plaintiff is aware that Defendant has suffered from Parkinson’s disease for 16 years and cannot walk more than a few yards without assistance.

    I add, See also http://web.archive.org/web/20151026201800/http://dirtyschnitzel.com/2015/10/26/lovely-day-for-a-rolly-stroll/

    Just sayin’. Few yards, half mile, whatevs.

    I am silent on the whole “Bill got the right person” score, but based on past history I would bet on “unlikely.” But if she needs any more evidence in the “Bill’s a liar” pile, well, there ya go.


    • Upon actually taking the time to measure his course carefully, I get 0.53 miles each way, call it a mile round trip (rounding down.) Per Bill’s post, that was October 26 of this year. Just 78 days earlier.

      Back then, by his post, he could walk more than half a mile downhill, then return home feeling good about himself.

      Now he claims, Plaintiff is somehow unaware of this information he posted to the internet 11 weeks ago, and yet is somehow aware that he cannot walk more than a few yards without assistance.

      Just in case the Plaintiff doesn’t want to do math between now and tomorrow. For Bill’s posted statement about a pleasant rolly-stroll to be true, and Bill’s claim that he cannot walk more than a few yards by himself now to be true, Bill has to have lost the ability to travel 73 feet per day, over 24 yards per day. That is how much he must have degenerated over the last 78 days.

      Or Bill is lying to the court.


      • Oh, and this is measuring the course he posted; I’m not stalking him. Bill Schmalfeldt, on Oct 26 2015, described himself as walking, with the assistance of a walker, or as he described it a rolly-walker, a half mile from his residence, then walking back home. 1.06 miles by laying his posted course over Google maps, but let’s round it down to an even mile. Quite impressive, and hardly disabled.

        Source data is http://web.archive.org/web/20151026201800/http://dirtyschnitzel.com/2015/10/26/lovely-day-for-a-rolly-stroll/

        Thanks to whoever archived it, and wasn’t it nice of Bill to provide such proof of his infirmity?


      • But that’s not the point.

        He harasses by email, blog posts, and twitter. He publishes complete strangers’ personal, embarrassing information with the intent to harass his victim. He never goes away when asked.

        So his ability to walk or drive or fly, for all of that, is totally irrelevant to the point of the request for a restraining order.


        • Well, no, but we can’t expect the judge to know that without evidence, right?

          I mean, the judge is assuming he is dealing with a wronged human being. So you see a couple problems right there, right?


  3. I’m going to take a wild guess that the motion will be stricken sua sponte, and the answer taken as submission to the personal jurisdiction of the court. That’s the result that would most thoroughly reinforce what a slow learner the Big BM is.

    I don’t think that the Big BM will be prohibited from emailing or telephoning the baby, though.

    Mostly because I don’t think the baby has his own email account, much less his own phone.


    • Which would be pretty funny, since D.F. just got pwned in the EXACT SAME WAY less than 30 days ago… IT. NEVER. LEARNS.


  4. IANAL, but someone may also want to be a little concerned about what appears to be an admission in regards to § 14-113.20. States do tend to reach across state lines for felonious acts.


      • Between accusing me of sending his ‘forged’ letter and him trying to steal my identity, I’m beginning to wonder if Shakey’s motives concerning me are pure.


  5. If he’s incapable of travelling to North Carolina, and wants to be shut of her, then why would he contest the no-contact order? Seems like it would be no burden on him to meet.

    Except, of course, he’s a compulsive harasser.


    • Actually, he has a good reason. The sheer number of restraining / peace / no contact orders he has accumulated is highly relevant to his LOLsuit.

      “Private person” of no public interest? The man seems to be trying for a place in the Guinness Book of Records for peace orders.

      Damage to his reputation? With all those peace orders?

      I could go on, but, lest I educate any evesdropping simian, I shall refrain from doing so unless and until I need to do so in submissions to a court of competent jurisdiction.


      • We’re on the same page. You, me, and probably everyone else LOLing at D.F.’s latest attempt at shutuppery via lawfare


  6. Purulent.

    Well, you learn something new every day.

    “containing, consisting of, or being pus”

    Nice legal language there.

Leave a Reply