Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

A motion in limine is a motion filed before a trial starts which asks the court to limit or preclude certain testimony or evidence. I received this in the mail on Monday.

I will be filing an opposition to this motion and my own motion in limine later this week. I don’t intend to make any other public comment on this motion until after the trial.

115 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. How amusing that The Dread Pedo misrepresents the Maryland rule.
    “(b) Time Limit. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible under this Rule if a period of more than 15 years has elapsed since the date of the conviction, except as to a conviction for perjury for which no time limit applies.

    • I congratulate the Defendant Brett for having not been convicted of a crime since 1980. I’m sure the poster at Justice Through Music Project Titled “Years Since the Boss Has Been Convicted of a Crime” has been updated regularly.

      But since Brett Kimberlin built bombs, one of which took off a man’s leg and injured others…and later sued that man’s widow (unsuccessfully) and has not made payments on a court ordered award north of a million dollars….we’ll keep mentioning this, okee dokee?

      • Not being *convicted* of a crime isn’t the same thing as not *committing* a crime either. And we’ve had ample evidence that he’s done that (just because MD courts don’t care to enforce the law doesn’t mean he hasn’t broken it, as we all are aware).

        So I don’t care when his last conviction was. He’s a habitual offender and it’s proof he’s ALWAYS been an evil sack of sh!t.

  2. If he calls a witness to the stand then the opposing party has the right–not only the right but the duty to do all he or she can–to discredit or impeach that witness.

  3. Wow, surely Brett Kimberlin is fully aware of the fact that to the extent Res Judicata applies it would only apply to introducing evidence of ownership prior to May 17th, 2013. [Reminds me of the movie were a woman falsely tried for the presumed murder of her husband is acquitted after he shows up alive. She then tries subsequently to murder him with impunity citing the double jeopardy clause in the Constitution.] It isn’t a serious position. He is simply raising spurious objections so that he can later raise spurious appeals based on having his spurious demands rejected. This isn’t a legal argument, Brett Kimberlin is trying to game the appeals process.

    • ‘Double Jeopardy’ starring Morgan Freeman and, IIRC, Ashley Judd. Based on a Grisham (?) novel.

      Brett should probably show up if he intends to appeal. Shakey also.

    • Re “He is simply raising spurious … trying to game the appeals process.”

      “…a “definitive ruling” on a motion in limine is sufficient to preserve an issue for appeal and a party need not renew an objection during trial….” (and no free citations of sources for monkey education)

      Yup, he is.

    • Regarding the “Double Jeopardy” movie, IANAL but it is my understanding that that scenario is precisely why the charges include the date and other identifiers like that. In other words, they can say, “You were acquitted of the charge of murdering John Smith on or about April 7, 2015. You are hereby charged with the crime of murdering John Smith on or about June 15, 2016.” Different crime being charged, so no double jeopardy.

      • I see.

        So if John Doe is acquitted of burglarizing the house Mary Roe in the ealy hours of New Years morning 2017 while Mary was reveling in Times Square, the district attorney can take a second bite of the apple by re-charging John Doe with a new crime with a new theory, namely, that John Doe had both entered and exited the Roe home before midnight, thus making it a different crime on a different date in a different year.


  4. “I tried to blow up innocent people at a high school football game…. but I don’t want it mentioned in court.”

    I would say that the midget has big brass cajones… but I know that they are “allegedly” very small (him being an evil hobbit and all).

  5. It’s easily introduced.

    Pro Bono -“Mr Hoge, why exactly do you believe Mr Kimberlin launched this malicious prosecution against you”?

    WJJH – “Due to the fact that I was writing about his activities and his past history as a convicted bomber and perjurer”

    No way to keep it out, but nice try little man.

  6. Wouldn’t he have had to before ? And since he failed to in a isn’t he barred from ? (Redacted so as to not educate the midget)

    • But (oopsie poopsie) there is no jury in this case.


      I foresee an untimely request [demand] for a jury.

      I foresee a request [demand] from Brett that Judge Hecker recuse himself as having been irrevocably prejudiced by the reading of this Motion in Limine and thus being made aware of the content of evidence to be excluded.

    • I think the littlest pirate already knows this is a bench trial.

      I read the motion carefully again this morning, and while it seeks to prevent certain statements from being made and the reasons for preventing those statements are thoroughly specious, there is not one mention of the idea that such statements would prejudice the jury.

      I don’t believe the jury is mentioned even once.

  7. Damn, the Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber is getting too predictable. I immediately looked for two of his usual tricks, and was right on both.

    As soon as I saw a specific Rule quoted, I looked it up, because I expected to see that he had in some way somehow misquoted or selectively quoted it. The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber quotes Rule 5-609 as saying “Evidence of a conviction is not admissible under this Rule if a period of more than 15 years has elapsed since the date of the conviction.”

    But that period isn’t in the original. Here’s the full line from the rule: “Evidence of a conviction is not admissible under this Rule if a period of more than 15 years has elapsed since the date of the conviction, except as to a conviction for perjury for which no time limit applies.” (Emphasis added) Isn’t that a really, really convenient omission?

    Further, the rule’s actual title is “IMPEACHMENT BY EVIDENCE OF CONVICTION OF CRIME,” and the actual purpose of the Rule, as spelled out in the opening: “For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record during examination of the witness, but only if (1) the crime was an infamous crime or other crime relevant to the witness’s credibility and (2) the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice to the witness or the objecting party.” So it only applies if Our Gracious Host is trying to impeach The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber’s credibility as a witness.

    In such circumstances, all Our Gracious Host has to cite is The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber’s conviction for perjury, which is specifically excluded from the 15-year deadline. For all other purposes (such as, say, demonstrating that Our Gracious Host has a legitimate reason to fear for his physical safety from The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber or that, generally speaking, The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber is a wretched scumbag of a human being), those other convictions are fair game.

    Next, I looked at the “CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.” No “certify under penalty of perjury,” and he says he “hand delivered a copy” to Our Gracious Host. However, Our Gracious Host says he “received this in the mail.” Gosh, is the Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber dickign around with service yet again?

    Also, on a less-blatant note, it’s interesting that The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber wants his authorized biography, that he cooperated in the creation, off limits as well, If it is “hearsay, unreliable, confusing, and prejudiced,” why hasn’t the Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber sued the author?

    If this comes a bit too close to Educating the Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber, I welcome Our Gracious Host choosing to (redact) any and all of my remarks. But if someone like ME can see these flaws in a document that The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber has already filed with the Court, no takesy-backsies, then I personally doubt that my observations here would have much effect on Educating The Sawed-Off Pedo Bomber.

    He really is getting desperate, isn’t he?

    • Well, there was the case of the royalties from Citizen K.

      Look up the case “Kimberlin v. Dewalt, 12 F. Supp. 2d 487 (D. Md. 1998)” for some details:

      The following text is from the section entitled “Petitioner’s Activities During Parole”:


      As of February 10, 1997 BKE, Inc. had received $339,000 in proceeds from that book, with another $225,000 in “guaranteed income” from the contract expected later that year. (See Paper No. 12, Exhibit H).

      Despite a healthy income, petitioner continued to resist paying the DeLong judgment, which had been reinstated on June 13, 1994. In a July 12, 1994 letter to Probation Officer Koehler, he threatened to go into bankruptcy if enforcement of the judgment was to occur, and claimed that he was personally judgment-proof, with his assets and income protected under “corporate veil.” (See Paper No. 12, Exhibit E and Exhibits I and J). Petitioner then proceeded with further unsuccessful appellate litigation attempting to set aside the judgment.[15] Following the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari, petitioner continued to ignore the outstanding judgment. On May 16, 1996 he submitted a mortgage loan application denying that he had any “outstanding judgments” against him.[16] A $308,000 mortgage loan was approved for the purchase of a house in Bethesda, Maryland.[17]

      During this time, publicity connected to the release of petitioner’s book, Citizen K, generated the attention of staff of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee. On October 11, 1996 the Committee’s chief investigator informed the Commission’s general counsel that certiorari in the DeLong matter had been denied by Supreme Court the previous year. The Commission in turn requested the United States Probation Office in Baltimore to review petitioner’s financial circumstances and to provide the Commission with an opinion as to the probable enforceability of a special condition of parole requiring petitioner to satisfy the judgment.[18] In a January 8, 1997 interim report, Probation reported petitioner’s statements that the bulk of his income had been derived from the book proceeds, and that a $100,000 payment from Knopf was imminent. Petitioner’s January 28, 1997 letter detailing his financial position also was forwarded to the Commission.[19]

      On February 10, 1997 the Commission imposed a special condition of parole ordering petitioner to “immediately undertake, in good faith and with all diligent effort, to pay the final civil judgment …” in Kimberlin v. DeLong. Petitioner was further ordered to submit a payment plan for Commission approval and to take no measures to transfer or otherwise dispose of any assets owned or controlled by him without the permission of his probation officer. Because the Knopf payment was the only immediately available source of income or wealth, it was specifically identified, and petitioner was told to direct *492 all future payments from Knopf, Inc. to Sandra DeLong. Petitioner additionally was prohibited from taking any action “that has the effect of delaying or otherwise frustrating the prompt satisfaction by you of any part of this special condition.”[20]

      Petitioner submitted objections and appealed the decision. On April 28, 1997 the Commission’s National Appeal Board affirmed the decision to impose a special condition that petitioner pay the Indiana civil judgment.[21]

      Rather than comply with the special condition, petitioner submitted a directive permitting Knopf to “deposit any monies which would otherwise be due me personally from Knopf (Random House) with Sandra DeLong.”[22] On February 17, 1997 petitioner, who previously had claimed 100% ownership of BKE, Inc. on previous tax returns and appeared to control the corporation’s accounts which he used for personal expenses, first claimed that BKE, Inc. was wholly owned by his sister.[23] Notwithstanding petitioner’s January 25, 1997 claim that $225,000 in “guaranteed income” was due from Knopf, once the special condition was in place, nearly-concluded settlement agreements between Knopf and nine of petitioner’s associates fell apart.[24]

      Despite these maneuvers, Mrs. DeLong on April 18, 1997 obtained an order from the Marion County, Indiana Superior Court garnishing the Knopf book money in order to satisfy a judgment which by then amounted to $1,610,000 plus interest and costs.[25] The next day, petitioner notified Mrs. DeLong’s counsel that he would go into bankruptcy unless she settled with him on his terms.[26] One week later Cynthia Kimberlin and her fiancé filed an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against petitioner in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland.[27]


      So: “On December 30, 1981 petitioner received a 50-year concurrent sentence from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana […]”

      1981 + 50 = 2031. Add another 15 years, as requested, to that, = 2046.

      Alternately, Copyright in the book lasts until 70 years after the death of the author, Mark Singer, who is not dead yet (at least, according to Wikipedia, Which Is The Fount Of All Non-Fake News/Knowledge/Wisdom/Etc.). Supposing, due to some absurd coincidence, Singer died this year, then royalties could still be flowing from the book’s activity into 2087. Add another 15 years onto that, takes us to 2102.


      Fender Stratocaster, double-insulated bathtub

      • There is no doubt he is a weasel. Still can’t believe that William “Stolen Valor” Schmalfeldt thought it would be a good idea to become his bitch and do his every bidding. Bill keeps pushing the lie that he has “paid his debt to society” when clearly he has done everything in his power, up to and including going back to prison, to keep the widow of the man he killed from getting what he owes her.
        To recap, Bill “I want to pee on children” Schmalfeldt, currently of some flophouse in South Carolina, thinks that a man who is an adjudicated pedophile, domestic terrorist who set a bomb at a high school football game that ended up killing a man, convicted perjurer, convicted drug and weapons dealer is a good choice of man to defend against people actually discussing his crimes. Tells you all you need to know about William “I have 12 restraining orders” Schmalfeldt.

        • …a size 7-1/4 Smoky Bear hat that was originally purchased in 1971 (+/- 1 year) at Sunny’s Surplus in Towson, Maryland by [redacted] from a rack labeled (likely falsely) “Marine Drill Sergeant Hat”, and given as a gift in 1972 to [redacted] to replace the trademark hat [redacted] had lost.

          Which makes its famous appearance on someone else’s head six years later quite curious.

          • Ok, S.F., I confess, the room number ploy was a WAG to scare the manatee. (I still wonder how many panicked phone calls were made to Florence authorities asking for the room number of the fire.) Which is why I did NOT say “allegedly, because no one had alleged it until…

            The hat, on the other hand, (like several other things which some have “joined in the guessing” upon, as if it were guessing) is based on [redacted for a very good reason] which is why the monkey should fold his cards and settle before he finds out the hard way just how much inside information his opponents possess.

            The Ghost of Thanksgiving Past should not be taken lightly.

  8. Interesting….he filed this motion only on behalf of himself. Nothing on Tetyana’s behalf except his beg of “please don’t let that big meanie Hoge ask anything about my wife’s alleged infidelity.”

    Wonder what that means….

    • It means exactly what it means: (since his wife will stay out of the country to avoid prosecution) he only cares about shielding himself since his patsy is more than willing to take the fall to “obey” his pedo master. Plain and simple.

      Don’t say you weren’t warned , Shakes, both about being his patsy ANd how he will sweet talk his way into convincing you he really isn’t. The ship is sinking fast and its every rat for himself.

      • Renfield Bill is a sycophant, among other failings. Brett, it seems, is some kind of cult of personality. The whole thing has a pathetic cult vibe. I guess that’s why Renfield Bill calls the Lickspittle/Zombie ad hoc consortium a cult: he is, after all, a master projectionist.

        On an aside, has anyone found a female virgin to sacrifice; it’s kinda pathetic listening to these leftist pajamaboys whimper. Reminder, RED robes with GOLD sashes for the sacrifice this Saturday. Ash, are you bringing the potato salad?

      • “since his wife will stay out of the country”…

        her spirit, mercifully, but I have a feeling her remains are still quite close to home.

        • I agree. The man is a convicted bomber who was found responsible for the death of an individual, which is why he had the financial judgment against him. Until I see proof that TK is alive, I am forced to assume he’s disposed of her.

          • Unless a denial is posted on the home page of the New York Times by 7:00 PM Eastern Time.

            Deal? Deal. Okay.

            Be Well.

    • It means that Brett Kimberlin really wanted to put into the court documents a statement about his wife’s infidelity. How likely was it that John Hoge would introduce that tidbit?

      No, Brett really wanted to type that. He wanted to embarrass her. Vexatious, vindictive, perjurious serial bomber.

      • Taken all together, the inclusions and omissions in this filing certainly appear to be the announcement of the end of the Kimberlin marriage.

        The open question is whether such end was or was not in accordance with the traditional vows.

      • Yep, I didn’t even think Hoge was going to argue that because the midget being cuckolded is completely irrelevant to Hoge’s case. Only the commentators as far as I’ve seen were able to piece together the timeline without Hoge’s input. So with that, the midget likely knew that he was cuckolded for a long time.

  9. Dear mommy,

    Even though Hoge followed the rules, he’s a big meanie so don’t let him admit anything.

    If anyone asks, just use “because Maryland”

    Thanks most mommy!


    Brett William Shmalfeldt-Kimberlin

  10. Newbie question here. This document closes with “I certify that I have hand delivered a copy of this motion to Plaintiff…”
    Is that accurate? Does sending through the mail constitute hand delivery?
    God bless you in your fight against evil, Mr. Hoge.

    • Since you are a newbie…

      “Does sending…?” IANAL, but the considered opinion here is “No”.

      “Is that accurate?” You expected accuracy from the little convicted perjurer? (Please, everyone, don’t laugh; he’s a newbie.) There are years of history here at Team Free Speech of many failures and forgeries of proper service of documents by Team Shutuppery, and especially by the midget.

      • I’m a newbie in asking questions. That was my first.

        I’ve been watching (lurking?) the plights of R.S. McCain, Jeff Goldstein, and Hogewash! for years. My wife and I will become empty nesters in 10 or so days, so perhaps I can participate more in the future.

        And God Bless you, kagsundaram, for your mercy to a newbie.

    • Kimberlin thinks that by sending it in the mail, but fraudulently claiming hand delivery, he is getting an advantage in that the response deadline changes. Just as he lied about the evidence rule he is citing.

  11. “…courts not to allow ‘motions in limine’ to be used as unwritten and unnoticed motions for partial summary judgment or motions to dismiss”… When a motion in limine disposes of an element of a party’s claim or defense, granting the motion constitutes harmful error unless the timing provision of the rule governing summary judgment is complied with and the standards for such a judgment are satisfied…..”

    “… require motions in limine to be filed in a manner sufficient to be heard at the final status conference…”

    Tut, tut, tut.

  12. Breitbit News @breitbitnews
    Let’s see proof of my saying I am 5’10”. You do realize spreading false medical information about a person is libel, right?

    Libel? To say you are shorter then you claim? Bwhahahahahahaha. You really suck at this Bill. Get a lawyer, you really need one.

  13. The Maryland time limit of 15 years from conviction (except as to perjury) when it comes to attacking the credibility of a witness strikes me as strange.

    If somebody wanted to bring in Charles Manson as a witness for them in a Maryland court, it sounds as though it would be off limits to mention all the murders Manson was convicted of, because those convictions took place over 15 years ago, notwithstanding that Manson is still serving time for them.

  14. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 08.09.17 : The Other McCain

  15. So I see Bill Schmalfledt, using his Pubic Varnish (or something like that) username at BillyBoy Unread, has displayed his racist tendencies again, and displayed his unabashed hatred of A. Walker.

    He also posted a supposed filing by Brett Kimberlin, asking for subpoenas for “witnesses”, when Brett listed no witnesses in his earlier filings. If this isn’t denied by the court, it will be automatic grounds for appeal if John Hoge doesn’t win. Way to go, Brett. This move is something only a Schmalfeldt would pull.

    • Now he decided to shift his focus on you trying to mock you over your videos. It’s hilarious at what he’s trying to do in regards to you. And Dumbfuck likes to pretend he’s an adult.

  16. LOL, he lives in a roach motel. I guess the closet in his room is the trophy room that has rolled shit in it.

    • “Good looking, decent human beings don’t waste their time being dicks on the internet.”

      1. How would zhe know?
      2 Extraordinary self-awareness failure.

    • Ohh the overweight Dumbfuck is mocking agiledog who actually can run alongside his dog. Especially when Dumbfuck has a inflatible fatfuck with missing teeth for a partner and talks to her over Twitter rather than in the same room.

    • OR…………. He doesn’t have to do a goddamn thing the Dumbfuck wants. It’s so pathetic to see that the Dumbfuck really thinks the Dumbfuck can boss people around.

      It’s nice to see the Dumbfuck revealing what the Dumbfuck will be writing in his reply.

      • He better hurry up with that lawsuit, before Nettles gets him declared a vexatious litigant.

        And his threats didn’t work before – they won’t work now.

        • Isn’t he special thinking his itty bitty threats do anything but make a point and laugh.

          And for a guy who had a picture posted of him where his tits still touched the bed while lying on his back, he shouldn’t call anyone fat .

        • Unless he moves his fat ass out of South Carolina, he’ll either have to pony up the filing fee himself, or have a magistrate OK any lawsuit he files. And butthurt isn’t a tort.

          I wonder where he’ll move next? Obviously he’s not going to move to MA or CT or MD or NC or TN or CA or WV or IL since some of his regular targets live in those states and we wouldn’t want to destroy diversity now, would we? *snerk* I’d bet that FL is right out too since he’s scared of being anywhere near “Kyle the Felon”, and presumably he wants to stay in a state which went deep blue (or at least somewhat purple) last election so he doesn’t piss off someone accidentally and have to deal with the consequences.

          He’s running out of options.

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