Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

The Cabin Boy™ has been claiming that he sent me a proper response to an interrogatory in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit that the court ordered him to answer. I had no record of receiving his response. Finally, he posted this tweet—fmp201701150549zWhen I checked, there was no such email in my inbox. However, I was able to find it by searching my spam folder. (My server holds emails caught by the spam filter for a few days before purging them.) The search term that worked was the subject line “Here you go, Tuff Stuff!”, something that is not related in anyway to the lawsuit or the interrogatory. Here’s the email that I received, less the pdf attachment.bsemail20170112Note the sender’s address: Given that return address and subject line, I’m not surprised that the email was tagged as spam.

So I now have Bill Schmalfeldt’s answer to the interrogatory. It was made under penalty of perjury. We’ll see if anyone believes him.

25 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

    • Thanks for that information.

      So Bill can prove he sent it, right? I mean, right now he could log on to that account and his email would be in his sent box, right?

      What, it deletes everything after an hour? Oh. Kinda makes it hard for Bill to prove anything, then.

  1. Well, by sending using that service, he destroyed any authentication of it. Basically making his “response” non-responsive.

    And I’d view it as a violation of any agreement to service by email as a result.

  2. Why would an e-mail message that’s being composed be proof of anything in the first place?

    Shouldn’t he have at least sent a screenshot of the message from his Sent folder?

  3. I don’t understand. Why isn’t it from Bill’s Outlook account? Did Microsoft go out of business (not Bill, the other one)?

  4. Now what LEGITIMATE reason could William “Stolen Valor” Schmalfeldt have for trying to hide his email address? Hmmmmmm……

    • Maybe Schmalfeldt doesn’t want to lose ANOTHER email account for “serious violations which can including spreading malware and/or viewing or distributing child porn”…

  5. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 01.16.17 : The Other McCain

  6. Oh, and he actually provided proof he didn’t send the email from his account. Proving once again the first rule of Bill Schmalfeldt:

    All that is required to discredit Bill Schmalfeldt, is to quote Bill Schmalfeldt.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s