Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

The Cabin Boy™ is having a snit because someone called him a sociopath. He imagines that he has been defamed because he hasn’t been formally “diagnosed” as a sociopath.Where to begin? I suppose by pointing out the DSM (the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) is now up to revision 5, and DSM-5 contains no such diagnosis. The DSM-III was superseded in 1987. (I am not a shrink, but looking at the DSM-5 criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder and the Cabin Boy’s™ behavior, …)

So what does the word sociopath mean?

so·cio·path n. \ˈsō-sē-ə-ˌpath, ˈsō-sh(ē-)ə-\ 1. a person who is completely unable or unwilling to behave in a way that is acceptable to society. 2. a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Although I wouldn’t describe Bill Schmalfeldt as a sociopath, I can understand why someone else might. I prefer Ken White’s description for Schmalfeldt—”demented freak.”

UPDATE—After I originally drafted this post, the Cabin Boy™ put up another blog post demonstrating his poor understanding of both psychology and law. I’m not a professional in either of those disciplines, but I do know that the facts of the case he wants to rely on are inapposite to LOLsuit VIII, that the Texas case law Schmalfeldt cites is not binding on a court in South Carolina, and that the case law relating to defamation has evolved quite a bit over the past 40 years. For example, Brett Kimberlin lost his Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. LOLsuit because he could not prove that we defendants had made any false statements about him. We did not have to prove that we had told the truth. We had been truthful, but the burden of proof was on Kimberlin as a plaintiff rather than us as defendants.

Nothing is proceeding as the Cabin Boy™ has hallucinated.

118 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. So the gist of this is that for this to be defamatory, it requires the FailWhale to prove he is not a sociopath, in court, under oath.

    My Sides……………………

    • Well, he has to actually prove that what defendants are saying is a false statement of fact. He sets himself up by saying that because he’s not been diagnosed as a sociopath, that’s what constitutes defamation. That’s not quite how that works.

      The Texas case worked under Texas law at the time and re-litigated, may not have under today’s standards. My reading is that even if it were to apply, Schmalfeldt’s own case would not measure up to the standard applied in that case. So even if he could use it as a precedent, he’s still deficient.

      Either way, he won’t listen to anyone, not even an attorney, so for him this is just another way for Hoge to goad him into doing something stupid he wouldn’t normally do as stupid.. or something..

        • What struck me immediately was that this was a Jury trial decision – jury decisions are all well and good, of course, but they are not precedential in the way that higher court rulings are. And in Texas, as I’m sure is true in most states, when the appeal was considered, the standard would have been “could the jury reasonably have made this decision”, not “was this jury absolutely correct on the law.”

    • Remember when Team Free Speech had to prove that The Diddler is a pedophile? And the judge said that “not a scintilla of evidence” was presented?

      How did that work out again?

  2. Pingback: Total Victory in Civil and Twitter Courts Anticipated | The Artisan Craft Blog — Dave Alexander & Company with David Edgren and Gus Bailey

  3. Sending pics of your dying wife is generally unacceptable to society. Getting a bunch of no contact orders proves your behavior is unacceptable to society.

    If it walks like a duck…

  4. I have read the case cited. As John says, the law in this area has evolved substantially, and the case is old and not binding in South Carolina. Nevertheless, it is far less helpful to Willy than he realizes. The court was very clear that the case did not involve a public personage, but still followed a malice standard. The court was explicit that proving ill will was not sufficient to prove malice. The court finally concluded that it was not error on the part of the jury to find maliice given the fairly complex fact situation involved. The jury clearly had concluded (and the court explicitly found that conclusion reasonable) that the defendants had no factual basis for their defamatory comments and that therefore malice could be inferred. The case is not on point.

      • I urge everyone to please be careful not to educate the monkey regarding his brilliant legal strategy. We don’t want to help him too much nor discourage him. Imagine the months and/or years of PLM content that a case like this could provide.

        OT: Has the Doxxer in Chief figured out how many of his past victims have rolled over, quit the internet and are now hiding under their porch in fear of him? Compared to those victims who decided to start blogs featuring Bill Schmalfeldt content? While I know the first number is 0, I think the second is growing by the months.

        • I’ll be honest; I am no longer certain it’s possible to educate him.

          He’s made so many unforced errors, we could literally spell out to him in detail how to actually WIN and he’d still fall on his face.

    • Braindead Bill is still stuck on the belief that he defendants must prove themselves innocent of his allegations instead of the actual fact that the Plaintiff must prove their allegations true.
      Too bad for Bill! His belief in things that aren’t true will bite his ample ass!

  5. I don’t mind going on record saying that Biwwy Schmallballz is not a sociopath. That would be an upgrade he has no chance of achieving.

  6. I don’t personally know that Bill Schmalfeldt is a sociopath, but the fact that he took a photograph of his emaciated wife on her deathbed, then emailed it to a bunch of strangers in an attempt to entrap them in some stupid scheme of his… that seems pretty sociopathic.

    I don’t personally know that Bill Schmalfeldt is a sociopath, but the fact that he threatened a woman with the loss of her children if she didn’t tell him what he wanted to know… that seems pretty sociopathic.

    I don’t personally know that Bill Schmalfeldt is a sociopath, but the fact that he videotaped a detailed analysis of his own turd that he plucked out of his toilet, and then blogged about it … that seems pretty sociopathic.

    Then there’s this tweet of his: “I don’t know where you work, and you better pray to God I never find out”. Yeah, that seems sociopathic.

    Then there’s his collection of multiple court orders from multiple states for stalking and harassment. That just might be a literal definition of a sociopath.

    Of course, the instance where he pissed down his leg when served with a legal document by law enforcement officer, then tweeted about it… not sociopathic. That’s just pathetic.

    • Or the time he tweeted a picture of my home, threatened to tweet out my address and phone number and then referred to me as the most famous rape, torture mutilation and murder victim in US history…

      I don’t know what everyone else calls that, but I know what my lawyer called it.

  7. “I think that is child pornography.” OK, that’s a protected opinion.”

    Schmalfeldt admits

    1. that reasonable people can find his work to be child pornography
    2. that is the end of his case
    3. he’s the world’s dumbest pro se

    • with provenance

      side note, he had no problem claiming for months, years this of stranahan, despite the fact that Lee, unlike Bilo, never used, or depicted kids having sex.

      • Now, now, Eric. It’s “rules for thee but not for me.” That’s the Schmalfeldt way. You should know this by now, silly!

    • Quoting BusPassOffice:

      “I think that is child pornography.” OK, that’s a protected opinion.”

      Something is wrong on teh Internet! The number of double quotes is unbalanced!
      And I am balanced (on a knife-edge, between [ELIDED-Doctor”s Orders] and
      [ELIDED-Doctor”s orders]).

      And anyway, look up all the contoversy surrounding the formation of DSM-5, which
      almost certainly includes “sociopath” — they tried to play around with just about
      everything (at least, that’s what my brain tells me).

      Sociopath? Who, me? Not at the moment (I think):

      Phone, train.

      • I feel uniquely qualified to comment on this thread in particular in no small part because (a) I live in Texas, (b) I’m a psychiatric clinician, and (c) I’ve given court testimony on related matters before.

        It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) Versions 3, 3-R, 4, or 5 — the clinical distinctiveness of being a “sociopath” (which is a Legal term, not a psych term) is a blatant disregard for the feelings, welfare, and/or safety of other people.

        Is that Bill? You be the judge.I don’t think it’s a hard decision.

        And I hope Bill does, indeed, move to Texas next. Texas has a precedent of using deadly force against people who violates protective orders.

  8. The only way 99% of the Lickspittles and Zombies have been able to develop an opinion on the Cabin Boy comes DIRECTLY from the Bill Schmalfeldt. Only a handful of us have interacted with Bill in person, so they are a bit more qualified on this question. The rest of us have learned about Bill from the things he has posted online via Tweets, blog posts, blog comments, message boards, videos, podcasts, court records and many more. Bill has admitted in multiple Courts that he has various mental and physical ailments he suffers. He can huff and puff all he wants about the lawsuits he plans to bring to any and all of his critics. The reality is that Bill Schmalfeldt will never successfully bring any suit, against anyone for describing his behavior as “sociopathic, psychotic or weird” because it will take two things Bill Schmalfeldt will never have, an attorney and money. When you boil the whole thing down to the basic reality, you must have those two elements to win a case like the one Bill is dreaming about.

    • Having read the FRCP, I can almost guarantee they don’t mean what he thinks they mean. And even if they did, I’m not sure that… Well, I’ll let Nettles take care of monkey education.

  9. “a person who is completely unable or unwilling to behave in a way that is acceptable to society.”

    I think just about everyone could reasonably be accused of being a sociopath by that definition, so long as you assume the accuser is capable of an irrational viewpoint on what socially acceptable is. Of course, there would be degrees. Someone who doesn’t sort their trash may be a sociopath by definition, but not really to the extent of bothering with.

    From the perspective of a gun grabber, “gun owners are all sociopaths” would be correct, even though gun ownership is socially acceptable, so long as they perceive it as being socially unacceptable. To prove they were making the claim in bad faith, you’d have to be able to demonstrate that in their minds that gun ownership was socially acceptable, which would be a difficult task to say the least. Well. Unless they owned a gun.

    Or, I suppose it could mean the other extreme, where a person must actively seek to know if an act is socially acceptable or not, and then ONLY do what isn’t acceptable. By that definition precisely no one would be.. so it seems unlikely.

  10. Well, he may not have been formally diagnosed as a sociopath but who has time for medical treatment when you spend all your time filing idiotic lawsuits and dodging service? I mean, one doesn’t earn a dozen peace orders without putting on one’s “a-game” and that takes time.

    Maybe he can soon settle in for a long term somewhere, say 5 to 8 years, at a suitable state residence inn.

    • He says he has advanced PD, but he also drove many thousands of miles over several months, until it was no longer convenient for him. Who but a sociopath would casually put everyone else on the road, and sidewalks, and nearby storefronts in such peril?

  11. Just for a moment, let’s accept Fail Whale’s definition of “defamation.”

    Just how many times have Fail Whale and The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber referred to someone as a “vexatious litigant” without any supporting adjudication? Wouldn’t that fit their definition of “defamation?”

  12. Oh.
    Like continuing to violate a settlement agreement over a hundred times, when one is being sued for violating the settlement agreement? I wouldn’t be surprised to see WJJH present a comprehensive list of such violations to prove [I redact myself.]

    It’s nice to see that BS understands that such actions were not “helping his defense.”

    “Either way, they’re not helping their defense by continuing to commit the acts for which they are being sued.” – Bill Schmalfeldt

    • Isn’t that screed missing a dozen or so “methinks” to prove how carefully he’s considered what he wrote? Isn’t it about time everyone forgot about educating a monkey that’s demonstrated an inability to be educated? And is there a psych term for being uneducable?

    • A Reader #1, you are right on point. If The Blob wasn’t so very stooopid he would realize it. I don’t see a down twinkle on your comment, so he doesn’t.

    • If Bill Schmalfeldt wishes to be technical, I would have to note that Bill Schmalfledt hasn’t merely claimed that he has Parkinson’s Disease, but, rather he claimed to be entering stage four Parkinson’s Disease years ago. Following his own logic, he has no more right to diagnose himself than anyone since he lacks a medical degree. Obviously, he does not suffer from stage four Parkinson’s Disease since he can still walk.

      Normally, I would put such mistaken acts of self-diagnosis as mere opinion, but, his own understanding of the law denies such a defense. Thus, in Bill Schmalfeldt’s twitter court of law he is faking (stage four) Parkinson’s Disease.

    • “The Lickspittles wonder why I would cite this case, and it makes me wonder if they can read and comprehend words in English.”

      No. We don’t wonder why… we KNOW why.

      Because… mentally-challenged, vexatious, butthurt, clueless asshat. And, that’s keeping it short.

  13. Oh, look, that person has a broken leg. I can tell by the way the bone has come through the skin.
    Objection! Defamation! Person has not been formally diagnosed with a broken leg!

  14. So is calling someone as abjectly stupid as Bill a “Moron” defamation? Trick question. It can’t be because it’s provable true.

  15. I am grateful for Bill’s admission that my calling his work child porn is a protected opinion and ergo that he admits it and the fact that anyone who produces child porn is a what?

    so, if someone writes that reasonable people can come to a protected opinion that the multiple works are child pornography

    , what does that make the producer of such material ?

  16. it’s game over bill, time to drop the suit, you admitted to producing child porn, people who make child porn are called what?

  17. the Scat in the Hat
    made some nasty audio

    I’ll pick on some scouts
    lets make a new show

    I’ll show them in sex
    against their permission

    I’ll show them being raped
    and scared to mention

    the things I will describe
    are points of contention

    I’ll show all those
    who cherish their kids

    that I can exploit
    the greatest of sins

    children are ourjoy
    our hopes, love, grins

    but I will strip away
    those scouts so young

    by showing the filth
    that can be done

    but call it porn
    I really don’t care

    but don’t dis the Scat
    or hell will be paid

    • Cousin, you haven’t been convicted of rape, but, on information and belief, you are still a rapist.

      William “Bill” M. Schmalfeldt, Sr., is who were are discussing, Google. Please index…

    • If this nonsense were true, I can just imagine every courtroom ever:
      Prosecutor: “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant is a thief/murderer/rapist”
      Defendant: “How dare you publicly slander me when I haven’t been convicted yet! I demand a mistrial! I’m suing the prosecutor!”

  18. I don’t think this discussion has gone quite the way Bill thought it would.

    But then again, things seldom do.

  19. Bill says he had a GREAT reputation before HOOOohjustfillintherestGE and others ruined it. Really? I’d love to see him defend telling a minor boy that he wanted to ram his penis into his swollen anal tissue on a public internet forum. I’d love to see him defend trying to dox a lesbian because she refused to cooperate on a story he wanted to write. I’d love to see him defend his thrice banning from Daily Kos due to his anal rape parodies and overall asshole attitude. I’d love to see him defend his firing from every job. I’d love to see him defend his Stolen Valor. I’d love to see him defend the other 8,378 things he himself put on the Internet that shows him in a very bad light. Reputation ruined? We didn’t build that Bill, you did that all by yourself. Over years.

  20. Bill needs to fave the fact that he is what he always been thoughout his life, a pathetic failure.

    Being called a sociopath would probably be a step up from what he really is.

    He is so freaking dense he doesn’t realize just how pathetic we all think he is. No one fears a corpulent wind bag that has never accomplshed anything of value in his life.

    He is something most of us scrape off our shoes.

  21. As a retired psych nurse I don’t do internet DX but NO one has said Bill has a formal DX of sociopathy all a layman can do is give an opinion. He just wants to be offended

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