Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

The Kimberlins have filed a motion for a protective order in the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit. They aren’t seeking protection of documents that are turned over as a part of discover. They want to be completely excused from having to provide any discovery.

Their basic argument boil down to: We are special snowflakes and should not have to produce evidence of the allegations we make. The court should trust us, and we should be allowed to blindside the plaintiff with surprise evidence if this case ever makes it to trial.

popcorn4bkOf course, that’s legal rubbish, but I’ll leave it to Aaron Walker to demolish their motion when he files an opposition.

Meanwhile, it looks as if Aaron has asked some probing questions in the discovery he served on the Kimberlins. It will be interesting to see what might come out in a motion for summary judgment—if one is needed. If the court enforces the Kimberlins’ default, …

28 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. Maybe the neighbor’s dog is telepathically telling Kimberlin what legal document to file next.

  2. I don’t see how truthful answers to interrogatories could possibly further a “false narrative.” Presumably, providing truthful answers negates any falsity in the narrative. The bottom line is that Aaron Walker wants to examine the truth or falsity of his “narrative,” while Brett Kimberlin does not.

    I would be an interesting time to publish Brett Kimberlin’s attempt to gain a settlement by noting the costs and complexity he, Kimberlin, would impose on his targets if they did not settle. Brett Kimberlin is aware that discovery can be a time-consuming and burdensome process. His attitude towards that fact seems has changed radically.

    Here’s and interesting way for Brett Kimberlin to reduce the cost and complexity of interrogatories: answer the question as to how many women under age 19 have stayed overnight in the same room as Brett Kimberlin since 2010. He could have answered the interrogatory “none” is a fraction of the time that spent trying to suppress that interrogatory. That is, unless he has something to hide.

    Interesting to examine is Brett Kimberlin’s logic demanding discovery before any motion to dismiss for failing to state a claim should be granted. If Brett Kimberlin believes that it is just and proper that he receive discovery to know whether, or not, his action has any merit, then, he ought to think it just and proper that Aaron Walker receive all requested discovery to determine whether, or not, his requests for discovery had merit.

    Yet again, Brett Kimberlin has tried to argue the interests of his “employer.” He simply doesn’t have standing.

  3. I don’t think claiming “false narrative” without doing one of two things has any meaning.

  4. Not a handwriting expert but did Brett realize he can’t get away with signing anymore for his wife on this one? Did he (and said jokingly) uncuff her from her basement imprisonment (likely imprisoned because too many [redacted] live nearby) tell her to sign a document?

    Regardless with TK signing, we won, because my suspicion is he was going to after a final decision two track the case and extend any default by claiming TK didn’t sign or was aware what was happening.

  5. He says it is “breathtaking” that plaintiff would ask him to go through the the 400 page book about him. Weird choice of word.
    Definition of breathtaking: awe inspiring, very exciting or beautiful
    Synonyms: spectacular, magnificent, wonderful and awesome.

  6. Heh heh…I look forward to reading Aaron’s response. Lawyers don’t submit interrogatories and the like without having specific plans in mind for the eventual trial.

    Of course, default is always an option.

    • OVERVIEW: Appellant attorneys challenged sanctions imposed for discovery misconduct by them and their client, a male defendant in an action by a female plaintiff alleging he spread the herpes virus to her. In the midst of a deposition, one of the appellants made a derogatory remark about the plaintiff when she left the room to retrieve a document, and the remark led to various gender-biased insults directed at appellee, plaintiff’s attorney. Appellee moved for protective orders based on the incident as well the defendant’s alleged attempts to intimidate plaintiff’s expert witness. The plaintiff was ultimately found contributorily negligent, and a judgment was entered for defendant. Appellants contended the sanctions were invalidly imposed after final judgment, their conduct did not warrant a protective order, and that a procedural irregularity invalidated the award.

  7. “They aren’t seeking protection of documents that are turned over as a part of discover. They want to be completely excused from having to provide any discovery.”

    LOL, good luck with THAT!

  8. Brett’s criminal charges: my wife is crazy!

    My complaint: no, she’s not.

    Defendants’ answer: yes, she is!

    My discovery: okay, show me her diagnosis…

    Motion for protective order: OMG, he’s asked us for proof she’s crazy!

    Court (predicted): you did place this fact in contention…

  9. The snot bubbles must have been blowing for awhile now as the wailing crying man of steal realizes not only is his marriage over, but soon his financial and most likely his physical freedom as well.

  10. So the tiny pedo doesn’t want to have to answer any questions about his daughter being bullied or the mental status of the daughter or the wife. But it was exactly those facts that he used to try and have Aaron locked up. I would say they’re relevant but then again I’m not a Maryland judge.

      • Totalitarians (and psychopaths and Narcissists, but I repeat myself) exercise power by forcing people to lie to each other. They arrogate to themselves the power to define reality in the minds of their victims, or at least in any public or private discourse.

        When we say that the Soviet Union “collapsed under its own weight”, that can be understood to mean that there were so many lies floating around that collective decision making fails catastrophically. The senior Soviet zeitgeist of the time was so decoupled from reality that the collapse came as a total surprise.

        Former DCI Stansfield Turner in 1991 wrote in the US Journal Foreign Affairs, “We should not gloss over the enormity of this failure to forecast the magnitude of the Soviet crisis . . . Yet I never heard a suggestion from the CIA, or the intelligence arms of the departments of Defense or State, that numerous Soviets recognized a growing, systemic economic problem.”

        The irony is that Gorbachev probably recognized the problem of too much lying and tried to counteract it with a new policy of openness (glasnost). But too much of the Soviet system’s power and legitimacy was based on lies, so the medicine of glasnost had the fatal side effect of killing Marxist/Leninist Communism altogether.

        My guess is that Kimberlin is honestly terrified of having to review and articulate his own personal factual history. Emotionally and subconsciously he likely fears that doing so will shred his own self image and throw him into narcissistic crisis ( In other words, having to examine and articulate the truth could deal him an overwhelming “blow to the ego or self-esteem”.

  11. “… he asks for … information related to every song ever written by Defendant Brett Kimberlin related to sex with teenagers or persons under 18.”

    How many songs like that has Brett written, anyway? Besides “Waiting to Meet” and “Teen Dream,” does he have a lot of other songs like that?

Leave a Reply