Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

One of the items to be included in a pretrial statement is a list of witnesses who may be called during the upcoming trial with their contact information. Here’s the list of witnesses that the Kimberlin’s included in their pretrial statement for the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit.bk_tk-pretrial-witnessesThe Gentle Reader will notice that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has provided a list of witnesses that the plaintiff Aaron Walker might call but none the he or his wife might call.

However, this list looks more like the sort of people TDPK might call. When discussed this list with Aaron, he said that the only people person on this list that are on the list he submitted to the court are his wife and is me.

The list seems to reflect a very confused idea of what has been alleged against the Kimberlins and how they might defend themselves. For example, does TDPK really think that Judge Creighton could testify to anything that relates to Aaron Walker? Her only connection to Aaron Walker is that he happened to be in the courtroom while she presided at the appeal trial for the bogus peace order petition TDPK filed against me in 2015. Her behavior on the bench was so outrageously biased against me (even though she wound up ruling in my favor) that one of the lawyers (not mine) who witnessed the hearing filed a complaint with the Commission on Judicial Disabilities against her. She resigned because of a more serious problem before that complaint could be considered. I don’t think TDPK would want her to be cross examined.

What admissible testimony relating to the charges filed against Aaron in 2013 and 2015 could be had from Wayne Kirwan (the Howard County State’s Attorney’s Office PR guy), Ken Ashford, George Howell, Patrick Grady, or Patrick Frey? And does TDPK believe that Ashford, Grady, and Frey will come to Maryland at their own expense? Is he ready to pay for travel, meals, and lodging for them?

Of course, those questions are probably moot. Because they answered “none” on the discovery interrogatories asking for their list of witnesses, the court will likely hold them to that. Tetyana shouldn’t be able to testify because she invoked the Fifth Amendment for all questions that Aaron might have asked in a discovery deposition. Brett can’t testify because he said that he has no evidence to offer in his defense in answer to another discovery interrogatory. (After all that work getting a bill through the legislature repealing his disability because of his perjury conviction, he still found away to lose the ability to testify. You can’t make up stuff like that.)

Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.

UPDATE—Aaron has subsequently reminded me that he does not currently intend to call his wife as a witness, but that could change.

UPDATE 2—The Kimberlins did include list of witness as part of one their responses to an interrogatory, a list that is similar to the one above, but given that they answered “none” to the interrogatory: “Identify each person, other than a person intended to be called as an expert witness at trial, having discoverable information that tends to support a position that you have taken or intend to take in this action, and state the subject matter of the information possessed by that person.” Since they have said that there is no one with information to support their defense, they have no one to call as a witness at trial.

26 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

      • Kimberlin could use this bit of advice:

        “One of us is playing offense. That would be the plaintiff. The other has to defend himself. That would be the defendant.”

        — William Smellfart, Twitter Attorney at Law, collector of multiple court orders from multiple states for harassment and stalking.

    • Actually, this makes a very, very small amount of sense.

      The parties were supposed to put together a joint pretrial statement which would, more or less, give the court a roadmap of the upcoming trial. But the defendants didn’t cooperate with Aaron to do so, so Aaron submitted his own pretrial statement, and now the defendants have submitted their own pretrial statement as well.

      These statements ask for the names of the witnesses expected to be called for each side. So Aaron had to identify both his own witnesses and the Kimberlins’ witnesses (he said there would be none, because the Kimberlins were barred from calling any). And now the Kimberlins have to identify both Aaron’s witnesses and their own. They don’t seem to have done a good job at distinguishing the witnesses for each side, though.

    • I imagine his defense will somehow try to invoke the VRWC Alt Right against him.

      Dang, didn’t anyone send you the new handbook? Everything is Alt Right now. VRWC is like so yesterday. Also RWNJ is off the table too. No word yet on whether “Ass fume huffer” is still acceptable or not.

  1. The only one that would be willing to testify and fly for the Pedo Midget would be the Dumbfuck himself, no?

    • Yes. Traveling to Maryland to defend only himself would put his health in mortal peril, but to defend a fellow stalker would be peachy keen. At the risk of educating the manatee, blatant double standards might not reflect well on his credibility as a witness, in either case. The smart move would be to refuse, but bonus lulz for us if TDPK ends up trying to have him subpoenaed in that eventuality… I’m picturing a courtroom where a Sumo/Midget wrestling match ensues. But I guess those are the breaks when your “friends” are unprincipled opportunistic narcissists: eventually they turn on each other.

  2. Name 2: William Schmalfeldt.

    Countdown until his epic rant that Brett is trying to kill him because his magic button won’t work in Maryland? (crickets…)

    Counterstrategy for Aaron – establish Bill’s expertise in the area of child abuse, by having him read the scripts of several of his “comedy” bits, which he has helpfully filed as court documents in one of the failed LOLsuits. Possibly also one of his filings from IIRC a state case where he explained at length how that was art, not porn, and it was defamatory to call it porn.

    At that point, the jury will have a clear idea of Mr. Schmalfeldt’s expertise in this matter.

        • “Dear Mommy Judge Mason,

          Hi again! It’s me, Bill!!!! You might remember me from such ridiculous lulzsuits as Kimberlin v. National Blogger’s Club, et al, when I wrote you immaterial Impertinent insane letters that I had nothing to do with Gilligan’s Brett’s lulzsuit because I’m lonely, my wife wouldn’t pay attention to me he asked me too, and he’s magic, like a leprechaun! JOURNAMILISM!

          Anyhow, <strike<Little Buddy Brett is trying to KILL me. Dead! Because he’s my only Most Excellent Friend Ever! But don’t worry about me. I’ll live because I’m mostly a drama queen lying willing to sacrifice everything in the name of justice. Of course, that doesn’t apply if it’s a lawsuit against me. In those cases, I wave my MedicAlert thingee and giggle all the way to Chicago.”

          Anyhoo, I’ll be there for my Most Excellent Friend with a straitjacket bells on!

          Be well, George!

          William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr.
          St. Francis, Wisconsin.”

  3. Not competent at all. He really should have answered discovery in good faith. And preparing a joint pretrial statement would have at least made this stupidity of his less likely.

  4. If a judge ruling on a case has anything to say, they can say it in the verdict.

    At the outside, you could (I imagine) file the full transcript.

    The fact that Kimberlin thinks he can call her and she’ll provide something not in either of those is just weird. He really has not thought this through.

    • I don’t remember as the result of my concussion [Sorry, wrong scumbag. Ed.] PD Dementia that come and goes. Usually it’s only around when I get asked a question that I don’t want to answer.

  5. The incompetently done witness list, like the frivolous “answer”, signals that Kimberlin has given up trying to defend his fraudulent conduct and will attempt to introduce testimony on irrelevant matters.

    • No biggie, he can just say “Never mind” and walk away. That’s how it works when you’re the defendant, right?

      Oh wait, he’s not the vexatious pro se plaintiff this time. Uh oh.

Leave a Reply